Page 1 of 1
Look at this crap
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 9:01 am
by Radoteur
http://www.gamespy.com/interviews/octob ... ndex.shtml
Just browsing around the internet and I find this interview. Looks like it's fairly new, but you guys probably already caught it. I'd hate to work at Gamespy, I'd have to buttkiss to some spin doctors.
Check out the second page. They talk about anal retentive hardcore fans. This is almost looking like partisan politics.
If PC gamers are as whiny and hard to please as these guys make them out to be, then these guys will love console gamers who don't care about stupid little things like plot and continuity.
I'm not sure if console gamers are going to be as complacent as these guys hope, though.
It looks like there's a ray of hope though, check this out:
Chuck Cuevas: Internally to Interplay, that game was always called Tactics -- Fallout Tactics -- and not Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel. But to the public, after we announced this game, we got some responses asking if this was the same game and there was a bit of confusion. In retrospect we understand that. But "Brotherhood of Steel" still fits the theme of the game better than any other title. And like you're seeing in Dark Alliance ... it's less and less being called Baldur's Gate, and more and more being called Dark Alliance II. So we hope to do the same thing, build the brand off of Fallout and call it Brotherhood of Steel 2, 3, 5, 10, however many we end up doing. And the name "Fallout" will stay with the PC versions. We're only splitting off part of it for us, and bringing that world to console.
That means the Fallout name will probably only be raped once.
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 9:44 pm
by atoga
Trying to break it off while you still can, eh Chucky? Of course, that all depends on FOBOS, you know, selling.
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:14 pm
by wyatt
GameSpy: Are there any members of the original Fallout or Fallout 2 teams working on this project?
Chuck Cuevas: No.
Well, that says it all right there folks.....what crap. The whole interview, they just bitched about how much it sucks for them to have a dedicated group of fans that loves fallout, and how hard that has made their job. WTF? I don't get it...
They made it seem like we would hate it no matter what, cause it was action on a console....but the truth is, we hate it cause its such a retarded offspring, that the had set in their mind how they wanted to do things, and they were not going to change it anyway.
Don't open the fourms, ask what people think...people who buy the game......and then cry when they don't like it.....work with us some.....
GAHHHHHH!
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2003 10:05 pm
by Menno
I feel sorry for my Xbox console, with Chuck "blessing" us with his rendition of Fallout. Hell, even Sports games have longer development cycles then F:POS.
FO: BoS
Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:45 am
by Bert
Why does everyone keep referring to it as FOBOS? In capitalizing titles, one ignores small, common words like "the" "a" or "of" : the abbreviated title should therefore be more like "F:BS", which is also a rather more accurate portrayal of the game's apparent quality and attitude, in my own humble opinion.
Also, those responsible for making this game should probably be burned alive with the (hopefully many) unsold copies. If only capitalism allowed more pro-active methods to save our beloved franchise from those evil dogs.
Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:56 pm
by Ozrat
Actually, I prefer FO:PoS...
Re: FO: BoS
Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 5:51 pm
by DJ Slamák
Bert wrote:Why does everyone keep referring to it as FOBOS? In capitalizing titles, one ignores small, common words like "the" "a" or "of" : the abbreviated title should therefore be more like "F:BS", which is also a rather more accurate portrayal of the game's apparent quality and attitude, in my own humble opinion.
Probably (at least I do) because "fobos" is Greek for "horror" (though in English you'd probably spell it with a "ph") and FOBOS looks much better than FO:BoS, or even FO:BS.
Radoteur wrote:It looks like there's a ray of hope though, check this out:
(...) and call it Brotherhood of Steel 2, 3, 5, 10, however many we end up doing.
That means the Fallout name will probably only be raped once.
Yes, but is it really worth a sequel to this FOBOS, let alone 9 sequels?!
Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2003 1:10 am
by T51b
Just goes to show you how dellusional Chuck is, hahahaa!!
9 sequals to FOBOS?? :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin:
I'll give the game a try but I'm nearly 100% positive the game won't catch enough sales to warrant ONE sequal, let alone NINE.
Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 3:32 am
by Rosh
Poor General Maxson...raped in the Interplay locker room yet again...
I still don't understand why IPLY seems to have this thing for the BoS when they keep fucking it up at every turn. "Sure, let's take the most documented group in the game and...change it for absolutely no other reason than because we can; or, we don't care about doing any research, let's just take these guys in metal armor and come up with some funky story for them." Shit, the Gunrunners, the Followers, etc. could all be used and fleshed out. It would almost get more sales by merit of exploration into the setting rather than generate more disgust at how the BoS are being hosed again.
Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:28 am
by T51b
Gunrunners!
What ever happened to those guys? Did the Fallout Bible ever tell what they ended up doing with themselves?
Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 8:49 am
by Rosh
No idea, but I have pointed out this shit in the past. The Gunrunners would have been perfect for Fallout Tactics, to expand the horizons of it. There would have to be design docs specifically written so others would keep it in the same history. However, in the eyes of a writer, the Gunrunners would have been a book just itching to be written.
Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:13 am
by Doyle
Rosh wrote:No idea, but I have pointed out this shit in the past. The Gunrunners would have been perfect for Fallout Tactics, to expand the horizons of it. There would have to be design docs specifically written so others would keep it in the same history. However, in the eyes of a writer, the Gunrunners would have been a book just itching to be written.
That is a really good idea. They claimed they were "just machinists", but how long is that gonna last? When you're supplying guns and ammo in the wastes, you'll learn to defend yourself fast or you'll be dead.
Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:31 am
by Rosh
Or they could have been inexorably drawn into something, like a deal gone bad or finding out about a larger scheme of things through some other plot device.
Re: Look at this crap
Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 2:37 am
by Pialojo
Radoteur wrote:
That means the Fallout name will probably only be raped once.
I hate to try and put a positive spin on F:BOS but maybe the creators of Fallout 3 can learn from the mistakes of it. For example after playing the game the F3 developers might notice that having slutty girls everywhere is just lame. Then again I'm assuming that software developers can learn; apparently Max Payne 2 has all the fucking annoying dream sequences (the ones where you have to go along these really skinny beams for no reason) and the repetitive need to jump of the first game. Also the plot is supposed to be really lame despite how much they've talked it up, but that's another story. Anyways, I hope that this anal raping and pillaging that Fallout has received can at least be learned from so that F3 is a better game.
Re: Look at this crap
Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 4:21 am
by Wolfman Walt
Pialojo wrote:Then again I'm assuming that software developers can learn; apparently Max Payne 2 has all the fucking annoying dream sequences (the ones where you have to go along these really skinny beams for no reason) and the repetitive need to jump of the first game. Also the plot is supposed to be really lame despite how much they've talked it up, but that's another story.
Don't believe the anti-hype. Max went to a dream pyschoanalyst in his off time and his habit of dreaming about skinny brain stem looking thingy beams are gone! Actually the dream sequences are pretty good this time around, they help flesh out the story which I enjoyed.
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2003 5:26 am
by Aegeri
When we told them we were making an action game, some people cringed.
To me, this particular tidbit says it all. They should of realised this was a bad idea straight away, but didn't.
Sigh
Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:27 am
by Crackzilla
The Gunrunners probably aren't as origional as we think, because of the area in which Fallout 1 took place in is relatively small compared to the area in which the bombs fell, many gunsmithing guilds and buisinesses were probably established, and because of the Gunrunner's shitty location and few prospect they were probably disbanded or were swallowed by the wasteland(as is a common fate of many people of the wastes), and larger more prospectful gun-making establishements maybe employed most or all of the gunrunners, or could've viewed them as a nuisence or threat to be eliminated.
Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:58 am
by airsoft guy
No, see the Gun Runners were the gunsmiths, they were the Springfield Armory to my basement, if I had a basement. The point is they most likely gobbled up other smaller gunsmith operations. This is a good reason why they would have been a better choice for a game, or even better still, as I think someone else pointed out, the Union of Atomic Workers or whatever it was that guy in The HUB was a member of, there's next to no information on them so they could have easly been used, and you could have tossed in all the racial bullshit because for all we know they could have been like the Klan, except what's his face was black.
I think the real point is, don't bring up old topics.