IPLY loves your feedback!

[Saint_Proverbius]

Hey! Here's an idea. You people are so smart...take this Project Phoenix of yours and see if you can make it and sell more copies than F:BOS does. Show us how much you know and why anyone should bother listening to you. Because after reading a lot of the posts on this board, I'm not even mad at you anymore....just amused you people make this your life.

I remember when making a good game was the goal and selling lots of copies was second to that goal, not the other way around. I could care less if a game sells ten gizillion copies and still stinks. If it stinks, it stinks. The amount of boxes in people's houses doesn't matter diddly to me.

But like Killzig said, Phoenix is being done by a company based in Chicago, not by anyone here at DAC. We're supporting it because it looks like a good game, not because we think it's the CompUSA Monty Hauler of the Month for March 2004. That's what matters, is it good. Does it have appeal.

That's also why we're not thrilled with Fallout Enforcer. It doesn't look good, and it certainly doesn't look anything like Fallout. If Fallout Enforcer sells, it's definitely not going to sell on it's merits, because there hardly are any. Another console shooter? Hooray! Furthermore, most people who've expressed interest in buying it have said they'd buy it, not because it's a good game, but because they think they'll end up seeing Fallout 3 in production. So, the appeal of the game isn't the game itself, it's wanting Fallout 3. Interesting, that one.

Remember the days when you'd criticise people for thinking heavy metal music blended well with Fallout's retro-future theme? Well, apparently you've had a stroke and forgotten that, because that's what fun boy Chuck is doing with Fallout Enforcer.

Remember the stupid plot ideas you used to criticise for Fallout 3 or even Fallout Tactics 2? I think Vault-Tec being the uber-illuminati, stealing FEV from the U.S. govermnent and making superFEV counts in that category as well, considering they were a government contracted company that made post holocost survival equipment like the Vaults and the GECK. It's even more silly when you compound the fact a supermutant wants to use Vault-Tec's FEV when Mariposa still has it. Why go hunting around when you can go directly to the source?

Remember criticising Fallout Tactics for screwing up the Fallout canon weapons and armor? Notice the SMG in Fallout Enforcer is a 9MM job, instead of 10MM. What's the deal with having riot armor, when it clearly states that's what Combat Armor was used for? What's the deal with having a plasma saw, when the Fallout universe has that lovely little thing called a Ripper?

However, and this one steals the show, remember criticising Fallout Enforcer for exploiting women because of the thong shots? Seen the trailer, have you? Bring on the BOS Pantied Paladins!

Enjoy the questions.

[388]

You know, the problem isn't just the bashing of F:BOS. It's the fucking rudeness.

Fuck you up the twat with a fucking shiv.

and of course, I suddenly have no reason to complain if you attack me back.

You have a bulbous parade float of an ego, you retarded fuck. None of the asshats here have ever been personaly affronted with the great flair and drama of you, because they'd pop their veins trying. When you call me stupid, the sun doesn't stop shining. I don't care. But if I call you stupid, because FUCK YOU, then it's like I gut-punched the Pope. You have every right with the hollier-than-though righteousness, your majesty, but don't pretend to be surprised when I call you a palsied cunt over it.

On the other hand, if some posters on this board say I'm "screwing Chuck or I got a sextoy for my participation" that's somehow justified to you people.

This may be justified, and bare with me because you're a vapid tit, you attached your face to Chuck's dick at the mention of design documents, and when it became apparent Chuck was listening to you like he listens to his own shits, you decided to keep your stance ONLY because the bad mean people said bad mean things about you SO YOU'LL NEVER BE FRIENDS WITH THEM AGAIN. Dumb bitch, don't try to squeek out "my motivations are sincere" through the semen. You're only doing this out of spite.

EVERYONE who liked Fallout Tactics must be a fanboy idiot because it broke canon and didn't keep the right feel.

I guess Section8 must be having some internal conflict. How about, idiot, we try reality, and say FO:BoS' adherence to Fallout is indictive of an adherence to being shovelware. Your shit has no basis even before it slides out your mouth and hits the ground. I'd say stop wasting your time and get home to blow Chuck, but you don't care about him, or FO:BoS.

Unfortunately, while you can feel that all you want to it isn't going to change the facts of the matter: Interplay is selling this title

You can try to speak like people, but it isn't going to stop anyone from feeling how they do about FO:BoS, you stupid coddling t'aint. Interplay may be panicing enough to send you off their lap, you may be their paramount hope, but that doesn't mean it's going to work.

When the game comes out, do you REALLY think a lot of kids are gonna stop to search the boards? No. They MIGHT go to Interplay's forums , MAYBE..but they won't come here right away.
All the bad press about FOT didn't stop them from achieving the largest number of pre-orders but it DID kill off a lot of any further purchases....

YOUR EFFORTS ARE USELESS. COMPLETELY FUTILE, I SWEAR. THEY DO NOTHING. IT DOESN'T MATTER. SO FOR THE LOVE OF JESUS, WHATEVER YOU DO, STOP THEM RIGHT NOW. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE. You're tactful like public masturbation, but through that, you give away that Interplay is desperately worried about the world that exists outside of their controll.

As for me, it really doesn't matter, does it? If you people really think I'm that shallow as to change how I feel over a fucking graphics tag

You didn't spread over the moderator tag, you spread over the design information, and after the idea that Chuck cared didn't pan out, your great holiness was too unsulted to close her legs. Hey, I have some design documents you can make recommendations on which will be ignored. Can I put my dick in you?

Why is it that hysterical theatrics you people pull are always so justified

How about, anyone who opposes "us" is fine, as long as they aren't great goddesses that frown on "our" lowly opinion, who shit solid gold BMWs? Or, "we" aren't selling a product so badly, "we" have to consider pulling "our" own platform for public communications because we excecuted it so badly? Or, you're a dumb, transparent yes-girl cunt, and because you're a gleaming messiah in your head, doesn't mean people outside of it aren't going to be wise to the fact that you're an inarticulate, arrogant, bad liar?

Oh, and 388 is as eloquent and cultured as always.

Goddamnit, your sarcasm is both a cutting and witty anecdote. Let me forthwith locate my gentleman's monocle and annunciate a proper responce. Get raped to death by a dildo machine.

You should really read his post to figure out why this community isn't even taken half-assed seriously.

The idea that this isn't Interplay's fault only caught on within Interplay, appologist tit. It isn't a great concept swaying on the edge of being a grand epiphony, it was tossed away like you off Chuck the first time you were retarded enough to field it. Maybe try a new angle.

Hey! Here's an idea. You people are so smart...take this Project Phoenix of yours and see if you can make it and sell more copies than F:BOS does. Show us how much you know and why anyone should bother listening to you.

Hey! Here's a fact, consumers are in no way responsible for the conduct of the companies who provide for them, nor do their personal abbilities grant them a right to point out the provider's fault. Show Interplay, you dumb goddamn fuck? I will when that's my job.

Because after reading a lot of the posts on this board, I'm not even mad at you anymore....just amused you people make this your life.

I will dwell on the implications of this, and deeply consider a halt to my distate of Fallout. It...It's coming to me... YOWZAH JESUS THE ENLIGHTENMENT. I think the best choice is to mock your transparent stabs at halting "worthless" public malice, and call you an incapable, stupid fuck.

[Elara]

Ignoring the crap from everyone else for a moment, Clayton...

I remember when making a good game was the goal and selling lots of copies was second to that goal, not the other way around. I could care less if a game sells ten gizillion copies and still stinks. If it stinks, it stinks. The amount of boxes in people's houses doesn't matter diddly to me.

That's not a point I think I ever argued against...but I did say that Interplay doesn't particularly care about that. Sure, it would be nice if more game companies followed that rubric. But there are too many gaming companies out there, and you have to nearly fucking bribe your way into the market to get any sales. Interplay is looking for the most cash, and they seem to think the most cash is in consoles, not PC games. I don't think they have what it takes to do either in some cases, but I don't see what real alternatives they have to trying this method. Note I said real alternatives. Everyone seems to think that FO3 would solve IP's problems but I don't think they're in any sort of shape to MAKE FO3....nor do I think that it would sell well.

The problem is that people want quality and consistancy from a company that is moving into a new market -- whether that's a good idea or not. And the company is merely looking for cash in the short term so they can hopefully return to quality and consistancy. Whether they do or merely go broke remains to be seen.

But like Killzig said, Phoenix is being done by a company based in Chicago, not by anyone here at DAC. We're supporting it because it looks like a good game, not because we think it's the CompUSA Monty Hauler of the Month for March 2004. That's what matters, is it good. Does it have appeal.

Hey, that's great. Wonderful. You missed my point entirely, I think. What you see as good and great may not be seen as others as good and great. We live in a world where money talks louder than quality, and I'm sorry but that's reality. No game company survives long concentrating on quality more than sales. A lot of game companies that made GOOD games are out of the market while the trash programmers are still around just for that reason. If you think that what EvoG is doing is a good game, then support THAT. Don't waste your time on a company or a game that isn't what you want, because IP isn't listening to you.

That's also why we're not thrilled with Fallout Enforcer. It doesn't look good, and it certainly doesn't look anything like Fallout. If Fallout Enforcer sells, it's definitely not going to sell on it's merits, because there hardly are any. Another console shooter? Hooray! Furthermore, most people who've expressed interest in buying it have said they'd buy it, not because it's a good game, but because they think they'll end up seeing Fallout 3 in production. So, the appeal of the game isn't the game itself, it's wanting Fallout 3. Interesting, that one.

I think that some people are going to buy it because they like shooters, some will buy it for the trashy sex appeal, some will buy it because it has the Fallout name on it , some will buy it because they think it will help out IP....there are lots of reasons. The reason you don't like it is just fine...but again, that's not the real point behind all the flaming on the boards. The real gripe is that you're sick of NOT seeing Fallout 3, and Interplay doesn't seem to be making it. There are people who bought BG:DA. It made money for the company. If Interplay thinks that this game will bring in more than another venture, and keep them afloat, would it be BETTER to then make something that WOULDN'T keep them from going bankrupt?

*sigh*

As for your 'remember' posts, FOT taught me something. It taught me that going head-up against these people isn't going to do a single bit of good in terms of what actually comes about. I can't say what I like or dislike about this game, because anytime I do that people jump on the fact that I dislike PART of what's being done to say that I'm talking out my ass. Appearantly, people see things in shades of black and white.

FO2 screwed up weaposn. FOT screwed up weapons. Fuck, am I really supposed to expect F:BOS to get them all right? NO, I don't agree with everything in F:BOS...but hey, I don't like everything in FALLOUT 1 either. Do I have to bash the game senseless for that?

However, and this one steals the show, remember criticising Fallout Enforcer for exploiting women because of the thong shots? Seen the trailer, have you? Bring on the BOS Pantied Paladins!

I dislike it. I disagree with it. I've been told the trailer is 4 months old and they were told to put it up anyway. I've been told the content is not indicative of the game. Unfortunately, the fact remains that sex sells to some people. It's unpleasant and ugly. There's no way around it and there's enough else that I've seen that I might play the game anyway.

As to the posts issue, I'll say it again: there's nothing anyone was saying on that board that hadn't already been said, and it's IP's board. Banning people because they bad-mouthed the game is certainly extreme....but so was alot of the crap on the board. It works both ways, Rosh...the posts are gone, so you can say they were all 'relevant'. They locked shit and then finally shut the board because it was hurting the company more than helping.

And you're absolutely right...this has gone down to the level of personal vendettas. My only question is that do you think yours will actually change anything?

[Spazmo]

As for another glaring point of your idiocy, it doesn't matter how many are registered on the forums. There's many more that read the news on the main page.

And on that note, Killzig, Kreegle, Saint, or one of you network monkeys, might we get a figure for a rough average of daily unique hits on the DAC front page?

[Rosh]

The reason you don't like it is just fine...but again, that's not the real point behind all the flaming on the boards. The real gripe is that you're sick of NOT seeing Fallout 3, and Interplay doesn't seem to be making it. There are people who bought BG:DA. It made money for the company. If Interplay thinks that this game will bring in more than another venture, and keep them afloat, would it be BETTER to then make something that WOULDN'T keep them from going bankrupt?

They're pretty much at bankrupt as it is, Elara. Throwing out crappy games on a console isn't any better than throwing out crappy games on PC. In fact, I'd have to say the console market can be even more fickle in what it wants, but more blissfully naive about it, however ironic as that sounds.

To clarify yet again, some people are upset that it isn't Fo3. Those of us who know the situation of Interplay understand that already, don't try to pan that one on us. We're more upset because this game really screws with the Fallout setting in many more ways that FOT ever thought to, and it has a good potential to make Fallout 3 turn out to be really bad. For someone who was into fanfics, I would have thought that would have been a primary concern.

The new targeted market, small as it potentially is, also makes for a nightmare being introduced into the base designs and perceived "wants" of the market. Yes, that means that Fo3 in any form might very well be pressured into being similar in many ways to F:POS. The suits will see that people bought a number of sales (and with Interplay's consoles as of late, a pitiful number), it will tend to have them steer the developers into doing something that will appeal to them as well.

As for your 'remember' posts, FOT taught me something. It taught me that going head-up against these people isn't going to do a single bit of good in terms of what actually comes about. I can't say what I like or dislike about this game, because anytime I do that people jump on the fact that I dislike PART of what's being done to say that I'm talking out my ass. Appearantly, people see things in shades of black and white.

That's because points of the design are in black and white as well. As for FOT, the game was improved how it could be, because they saw that the fans weren't too amused about it. Instead of taking that route, Interplay is trying to sweep this under the rug and pretend it doesn't exist, while blaming it on the Fallout fansite followers. The real fact is that people widespread don't like this idea, mainly those who like the Fallout setting and see what is really wrong about the game.

FO2 screwed up weaposn. FOT screwed up weapons. Fuck, am I really supposed to expect F:BOS to get them all right? NO, I don't agree with everything in F:BOS...but hey, I don't like everything in FALLOUT 1 either. Do I have to bash the game senseless for that?

There's a difference between creating a setting that is established in the game and then trying to make a cheap knock-off product and ship it under false pretenses.

I dislike it. I disagree with it. I've been told the trailer is 4 months old and they were told to put it up anyway. I've been told the content is not indicative of the game.

And do you believe everything you hear from them? They've already proved themselves to be liars a few times already. Check out the FAQ now about the music selection. Sounds pretty much like the trailer is indicative to the game in that regard. With other points of the FAQ and dev diary, it still points to the trailer being quite close to representing the game.

As to the posts issue, I'll say it again: there's nothing anyone was saying on that board that hadn't already been said, and it's IP's board. Banning people because they bad-mouthed the game is certainly extreme....but so was alot of the crap on the board. It works both ways, Rosh...the posts are gone, so you can say they were all 'relevant'. They locked shit and then finally shut the board because it was hurting the company more than helping.

Locking it is just ticking of people even more and makes it more noticable. Making posts vanish without explanation is even more noticable when people watch it vanish. Romero has tried this same tactic and it really didn't work for him, either. It still doesn't excuse the fact that they also made quite rational and observant posts about the game vanish and then lied about them. There's a reason why 2 or more mods have stepped down from their forums.

And you're absolutely right...this has gone down to the level of personal vendettas. My only question is that do you think yours will actually change anything?

Perhaps, if it gets Fallout's license to the point where it's seen as a title they can sell to some other developer. They aren't interested in doing good work, which is pretty much an attitude that will make any real developer dislike them and has made the consumers dislike them. I'm also not going to take someone's spin-doctoring when I have the facts there to see what they are doing and can see how they are trying like mad to obfuscate the real details behind this pig in a poke.

And on that note, Killzig, Kreegle, Saint, or one of you network monkeys, might we get a figure for a rough average of daily unique hits on the DAC front page?

NMA usually gets around and over 3k unique a day, and I know several other sites look around for news and 3k is also more than enough for word of mouth to spread. One of the news posters and forum posters at PCGR.com looks at NMA to relay info to that site and PCGR's sister sites.

[Silver]

Peace yo yo yo!

[Rosh]

Old hat, Silver.

My personal favorite is this one:

[388]

you have to nearly fucking bribe your way into the market to get any sales.

Hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah.

Interplay is looking for the most cash

In ways that will bring them the least cash. Quick, quick, fight for them!

Everyone seems to think that FO3 would solve IP's problems but I don't think they're in any sort of shape to MAKE FO3....nor do I think that it would sell well.

They're in every condition to produce Fallout 3, you failing twat, and whether or not you think the deal would sell for purposes of corporate fellatio, it would sell, very much so.

No game company survives long concentrating on quality more than sales.

Hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah hah

Don't waste your time on a company or a game that isn't what you want, because IP isn't listening to you.

I don't care if Interplay listens to me, you stupid cunt. People aren't doing what they've been doing because they hope Interplay will listen to them.

I think that some people are going to buy it because they like shooters, some will buy it for the trashy sex appeal, some will buy it because it has the Fallout name on it , some will buy it because they think it will help out IP

I like shooters, Fallout, and trashy sex apeal, you fucking retarded fuck. I'm not buying it, because it looks like a bad game. There are people who like shooters, and sex, and Fallout that's great that you can point that out, and if you didn't think everyone realized that, I should be telling you that food goes in your mouth, not your anus. I imply you're retarded. But those aren't crutches for FO:BoS, they're damning, because it does the above very, very badly. There are people who buy games that execute those aspects well, but how many are there that buy games that execute them badly?

The real gripe is that you're sick of NOT seeing Fallout 3

No, it isn't.

If Interplay thinks that this game will bring in more than another venture

They're marginaly more retarded than you are.

As for your 'remember' posts, FOT taught me something. It taught me that going head-up against these people isn't going to do a single bit of good in terms of what actually comes about.

It destroyed Tactics 2, and sunk Tactics 1. You know how good going spread-ass agains't them works, too.

I can't say what I like or dislike about this game

You don't like anything about FO:BoS, and it isn't about FO:BoS in the first place. It's about your ego, your holy fucking majesty.

My only question is that do you think yours will actually change anything?

I don't think anyone has a person vendetta agains't FO:BoS, but bitch, I'll say out loud and shiny.

NO ONE FUCKING EXPECTS THEIR OPINION TO CHANGE ANYTHING, YOU RETAREDED FUCK.

Thus, this is not a revelation, thus, the public malice will not stop, thus, you are a weepy ineffective idiot.

[Killzig]

Hmm... quantity over quality = a winning business strategy. Elara, if that were true IPLY wouldn't be in their current state. Obviously you'll have to slum it every now and then to make ends meet but when you're consistently making bad decisions (Lithtech, Descent To Undermountain, TORN, and it looks like Jefferson is shaping up to be the next in a long line of white elephants) no amount of mediocre titles is going to save your hide. You want a nice business model? How about what Valve's doing? Put a ton of effort and produce a quality product, SUPPORT IT AFTER RELEASE AND NURTURE IT'S SALES. Then proceed to produce yet another quality product. Seems to be working out just fine for Valve. How's Interplay's method going?

How about Blizzard? They just recently released another patch for Diablo 2, how's that for post release support? How's Blizzard doing? Very well, thanks. For their genre of games they put in an ungodly amount of polish and product the quality product that THEIR FANBASE WANTS. When Interplay hears their fanbase, the people who go out of their way to follow what IPLY has in the works, and then promptly ignores them or goes out of their way to infuriate them. Point Blizzard.

Now we have Troika, put a ton of effort into Arcanum and now they're in a position to be able to have two full teams working on two quality products. Your argument is completely baseless. You're in essence supporting IPLY in their quest in continuing the same course they've taken over the last 3-4 years. The last 3-4 having been an absolute fiscal disaster for this company. Yet you seem to think they're doing the right thing by continuing it. I understand that Chuck is just doing his job but his job doesn't entail getting every bit of Fallout wrong.

You can keep saying you've got some insider info about what's going on with FOBOS but we've got a very public website up that's saying the exact opposite. You mean to tell us that the website is 4 months old too? So when the game's released and all the reviews are lousy you're going to e-mail the editor and say "THAT'S NOT A FAIR REVIEW, THAT BUILD IS 4 MONTHS OLD!" ... Get real.

[Saint_Proverbius]

That's not a point I think I ever argued against...but I did say that Interplay doesn't particularly care about that. Sure, it would be nice if more game companies followed that rubric. But there are too many gaming companies out there, and you have to nearly fucking bribe your way into the market to get any sales.

With the notable exceptions of games published by the likes of Matrix Games, or perhaps Shrapnel Games, or Garage Games. Even independents like Spider Web Software and Malfador make money. Oh, and let's not forget Ambrosia Software who mainly make Mac titles, but are branching out to Windows PCs with Escape Velocity Nova.

Some of these independents actually wind up with publishing contracts, like MindRover and TreadMarks. Sure, they didn't rack up sales like Diablo or Doom or even Deer Hunter, but they were crafted games, labors of love, and a lot of them are quite good.

Interplay is looking for the most cash, and they seem to think the most cash is in consoles, not PC games. I don't think they have what it takes to do either in some cases, but I don't see what real alternatives they have to trying this method. Note I said real alternatives. Everyone seems to think that FO3 would solve IP's problems but I don't think they're in any sort of shape to MAKE FO3....nor do I think that it would sell well.

Imagine how much money Interplay wasted licensing Exalted recently. How much money they lost trading NWN for the BG and IWD licenses, plus a little pocket change. Of course, they skipped out on making one of those payments for the BG for the PC license, so the initial deal is wasted venture capital, isn't it? Losing that BG for the PC license also seriously disrupted the process of making Jefferson, so they'll most likely take some losses on that development as well, either cancelling it or retooling it to fit something they do have a license to make, like IWD3. Of course, they lost a lot of sales on IWD2 as well by totally botching the release of that game. Right now, they're losing a lot of money developing Galleon. They lost a shitload spending four years on Run Like Hell.

If Interplay wasn't such a leaky bucket, they'd be well equiped to make Fallout 3, don't you think? The only reason they're not well equiped is because they have absolute morons for execs. It's not that they can't raise the money either, after all they extended the BG for the console license to 2008 while at the same time not paying for the BG for the PC license. Like I said, piss poor management.

The problem is that people want quality and consistancy from a company that is moving into a new market -- whether that's a good idea or not. And the company is merely looking for cash in the short term so they can hopefully return to quality and consistancy. Whether they do or merely go broke remains to be seen.

So far, it looks like they're dying to go broke. Interplay lost a bundle back in 2001 converting to consoles, and now that they've made that transistion, they're still losing money by the fistful. They're going to continue this trend because they're run by the guys who are currently in heaps of debt at Titus as well.

After all, Titus follows the license, exploit, dump model of business as well. It hasn't worked for them, despite having some big licenses like Superman, Hercules and Xena, and so on. Why? Because they take those licenses and make utter crap with them. Crap that people don't buy because they look like crap.

Hey, that's great. Wonderful. You missed my point entirely, I think. What you see as good and great may not be seen as others as good and great. We live in a world where money talks louder than quality, and I'm sorry but that's reality. No game company survives long concentrating on quality more than sales. A lot of game companies that made GOOD games are out of the market while the trash programmers are still around just for that reason. If you think that what EvoG is doing is a good game, then support THAT. Don't waste your time on a company or a game that isn't what you want, because IP isn't listening to you.

Money talks louder than quality, yet here we are.. Nearly six years later.. On a Fallout fan site which is quite active. Discussing a game being made with the Fallout license. Fallout didn't sell very well, what with all the warezing of it, but the name means quality. That's why Interplay slapped that name on this mediocre product called Fallout Enforcer. People think it means quality, not because it sold outrageous volumes. Quality.

I think that some people are going to buy it because they like shooters,

Those people probably won't like the whole auto-aim stuff. Why buy Fallout Enforcer when you can play Halo 2? Or any number of other quality products from people who still have respectable names?

some will buy it for the trashy sex appeal,

Which worked great for BMX XXX.

some will buy it because it has the Fallout name on it ,

Which is Interplay's big hope.

some will buy it because they think it will help out IP

Of course, people are going to care less and less about that once Interplay torpedoes their forum for them.

The reason you don't like it is just fine...but again, that's not the real point behind all the flaming on the boards. The real gripe is that you're sick of NOT seeing Fallout 3, and Interplay doesn't seem to be making it.

Wrongo. I actually don't want to see Fallout 3. I'd rather see them make a new CRPG, with a new system and a new setting. I want a sci-fi planet hopper, truth be known.

There are people who bought BG:DA. It made money for the company. If Interplay thinks that this game will bring in more than another venture, and keep them afloat, would it be BETTER to then make something that WOULDN'T keep them from going bankrupt?

BG: DA made money, sure.. But the question is, why? BG is an action CRPG. As such, it translates much better to a console action title. BG: DA also had a good chunk of the fan base behind it. BG: DA also had that D&D sticker on it to drive sales.

If they think BG: DA sold just because it's a console action game based on a CRPG license they owned, then this trend doesn't translate well towards doing the same thing with Fallout. Interplay's Caesar's Palace game sold fantastic, but I seriously doubt Planescape Torment SlotMachine Royale would foster much wealth.

As for your 'remember' posts, FOT taught me something. It taught me that going head-up against these people isn't going to do a single bit of good in terms of what actually comes about. I can't say what I like or dislike about this game, because anytime I do that people jump on the fact that I dislike PART of what's being done to say that I'm talking out my ass. Appearantly, people see things in shades of black and white.

That's only because we didn't know Fallout Tactics was going to be as bad as it was. Fallout Enforcer has this game sucks rocks written all over it with bright, zany colors and big neon arrows with sequentially strobing markers directing you to read the caption. For the blind people, there's even a screaming air horn followed by a billowing, 100dB this game sucks rocks with three part harmony and a brass band.

FO2 screwed up weaposn. FOT screwed up weapons. Fuck, am I really supposed to expect F:BOS to get them all right? NO, I don't agree with everything in F:BOS...but hey, I don't like everything in FALLOUT 1 either. Do I have to bash the game senseless for that?

Yes. Actually, that's the point of feedback. "Hey, look, this isn't right. Refer to [insert Fallout information here] for more information." I thought that's what you've supposedly been doing, Elara. Making sure Fallout Enforcer stays canon and all. Didn't you tell us they're going to change the game to make it canon and that's why we should get behind it and love us some Chuck?

I dislike it. I disagree with it. I've been told the trailer is 4 months old and they were told to put it up anyway. I've been told the content is not indicative of the game. Unfortunately, the fact remains that sex sells to some people. It's unpleasant and ugly. There's no way around it and there's enough else that I've seen that I might play the game anyway.

The trailer is four months old, but the web site and recent screenshots blatantly spell out that what we see in the trailer is still in the game. Check the FAQ section of it, the part about thongs.

Also, for someone that doesn't like it, you're doing a bang up job at making it look like you don't mind it.

As to the posts issue, I'll say it again: there's nothing anyone was saying on that board that hadn't already been said, and it's IP's board. Banning people because they bad-mouthed the game is certainly extreme....but so was alot of the crap on the board. It works both ways, Rosh...the posts are gone, so you can say they were all 'relevant'. They locked shit and then finally shut the board because it was hurting the company more than helping.

What's they're doing is riding a powder keg and lighting firecrackers. Everything they're doing on the forum is escalating tensions for them, and the only loser out of that will be them.

[Red]

Wrongo. I actually don't want to see Fallout 3. I'd rather see them make a new CRPG, with a new system and a new setting. I want a sci-fi planet hopper, truth be known.

Might I suggest you head to www.stardock.com and look at their gaming section, more precisly the GalCiv section of the site. It's an amazing game developped in their weird but funky (optional - you can still buy it on the shelves as anything else...) "registration" pattern. I really like their business model for distribution even though it means much less profit then stacking everything on shelves - so check that out too on the way there.

[DarkUnderlord]

The other really funny shit is that none of these people gave a shit when it was happening to others, like the Fallout fans outraged by Fallout Enforcer.. Then it gets applied to them, and they toss a hissy. Don't you just love it? I do.

I'm having sweet, sweet dreams about it tonight. Ohhh... They're all going to hell. How nice.

So, when are we having the big happy Death of Interplay dance?

Oh, hi Elara!

[MetalWyrm]

hahaah nice pic DU =D

I'm don't type much (or at all) but I just wanted to say it pissed me off how Chucky is whoring Fallout,

if he was making this game under, say a title such as
Apocalypse: Thongs of Tomorrow!
or some other crap, I wouldn't care
but maligning Fallout and probably making other people who have yet to discover Fallout, see this shit, is just a plain stupid

if a person picks up a fobos copy, and plays it, say they don't like it, they'll think other the rest of the Fallout series will suck

now obviously not everyone liked Fallout
but for people that liked *that* type of game, it would go well

while Fobos *is* a different category (and true, some people may like it for it being a shooter), it's still wrong to be titled "Fallout" because it just doesn't deal with the Fallout universe

[Finch]

You know, just to piss you guys off, I think I'm gonna become an active poster here.

Go ahead, 388...see if you can prove that I'm a DL

Your welcome for starting this flamewar

[Rosh]

You know, just to piss you guys off, I think I'm gonna become an active poster here.

Why bother? You haven't broght anything to the discussion through the two posts you already made, both of which are nearly identical and the second one makes it painfully obvious that you didn't read most of the replies to the first post.

Your welcome for starting this flamewar

With grammar like that, who could refuse?

[POOPERSCOOPER]

LOl, nice picture DarkUnderlord.

[388]

Go ahead, 388...see if you can prove that I'm a DL

Okay, but if it looks like I don't care about indulging your majesty, that's because I'm actually putting so much energy in, it doubles back on itself.

Your welcome for starting this flamewar :D

That would mean you started this. Are you retarded?

[Sammael]

I was going to try and contribute to this thread in a meaningful way, but I'm not going to. Inetrplay's forums are probably going down soon, which will be the best solution for Chuck & Co. FO:POS will come out and be a total failure like most of the other fucked-up IPLY console titles (150k sales for a console game? Ho. Ho. Ho.).

At any rate, goodbye IPLY.

[Silver]

I doubt she is replying to this one... I could say It was nice knowing you Elara, but I dont know you .

Vaya Con Dios!

[Jiles]

I was going to try and contribute to this thread in a meaningful way, but I'm not going to. Inetrplay's forums are probably going down soon, which will be the best solution for Chuck & Co. FO:POS will come out and be a total failure like most of the other fucked-up IPLY console titles (150k sales for a console game? Ho. Ho. Ho.).

At any rate, goodbye IPLY.

Indeed.

Then, after Enforcer does as well as RLH does (RLH was so fantastic, it hasn't seen a PAL release), IPLY can blame the fans!!11 Wheee!

It is all our fault afterall. *cough*.