Oh, no, kiddies! IPLY clamps down!

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:18 am

[Game -> Update]

Apparently there's just too gosh darned much negativity surrounding <A href="http://www.interplay.com/games/product. ... 3">Fallout Enforcer</a>, and <A href="http://www.interplay.com">Interplay</a> can't have that! So, don't post anything bad on <a href="http://feedback.interplay.com/viewforum.php?f=55">The Fallout Enforcer forum</a>, because they'll up and ban ya' for it - even if you don't flame anyone! Criticism is no longer desired there!
 
 Here's what TechWiz, the great goony in charge of the forum has to say:
 
 <blockquote>Keep posting relentless crap & you'll find your post deleted. Voice your opinion, be professional about it if need be. Being ignorant doesn't get anything accomplished.
 
 If a post or thread you started is deleted, you can bet your money it is me.</blockquote>
 
 Translation:
 
 <blockquote>Okay, guys. This game's going down in flames and the forum is filled with people who don't like it one bit. So, if you don't like it, I'm going to ban you.
 
 After that, I'm going to delete your posts so it looks like everything is going smoothly.</blockquote>
 
 Well, that's the warning here, kids! Apparently they didn't like my <A href="http://feedback.interplay.com/viewtopic ... 28">rather long winded reply</a> to Rosh of <a href="http://www.nma-fallout.com">No Mutants Allowed</a>, questioning why they're even bothering to make this game in the first place, 'cause I was banned shortly afterwards. So, remember, no negativity allowed on <A href="http://feedback.interplay.com/viewforum.php?f=55">this forum, never, ever</a>.

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:19 am

For those curious, this is my reply:

Rosh is pretty much dead on the money here. I used my pool analogy already, but I'll go further on it.

Basically, Interplay is about dead. It's doing a few throws, a bit of kicking, and much gasping. It's times like those that you look to your assets, your franchises.

The problem is, they don't seem to be looking at why those franchises are assets. They're basically hoping there's enough people out there foolish enough to buy a game that bares the name of a sequel to a game they actually want. Judging by a few posts on here, there are people that foolish already. So yeah, they'll get a few sales off that right there.

However, consider this. This tactic, pardon the pun, has already been done with this franchise. You can't expect everyone who's picked up Fallout Tactics or the original Fallout games to keep coming back for more, because of some long shot that you'll eventually make Fallout 3.

Most people who've been following Fallout over the years already know this is a bogus notion, because Fallout Tactics 2 was in production, while Fallout 3 wasn't right after Fallout Tactics was released. We know it's a fool's gambit hoping Interplay will go ahead and do the right thing at this point.

As many have pointed out, both on this forum and on various news sites, this game looks like second rate trash. The graphics are subpar, the interface looks goofy, and so on. There's been absolutely no care taken with the setting either. Like Slamak said, it looks like the theme of this game is 80s style dominatrix porn rather than the 50s post nuclear sci-fi which made Fallout what it is today.

So, who are you guys even trying to sell this game to? Fallout Fans? Doesn't look like it, so why use the name?

Console action gamers? Not enough eye candy, obviously.

Women? I think we can rule that out judging by the outfits.

Sexually frustrated teen males? Probably, but consider the sales for BMX XXX. It didn't do so hot. Hell, the press killed that game, and the press already isn't thrilled with Fallout Enforcer here either.

So, what do you have in the end? You have an action shooter with the Fallout name that most likely won't appeal to any Fallout fans other than the deluded few who are buying this because they think it'll lead to Fallout 3. You have action gamers who don't give much of a flip about Fallout since it's an old school CRPG but who aren't going to like it because it's hideously ugly, and most likely tossed together to sell on the Fallout name in the first place. You have cheap gimmicks like chicks running around in their scivvies which might appeal to a few, but not many.

Six months before release, and this title has LAME DUCK written all over it.

Now, back to franchise talk. The big problem is, you're using an established, but now tarnished because of Fallout Tactics, brand to peddle this swill. You might pick up some new people on that, but that's short term thinking at best because if this game isn't canon at all, they're going to wonder what the hell is going on with any future Fallout product you make that is canon. Furthermore, if it's a game made to sell solely on the name that's slapped on it, and it's lackluster at best, you're crippling the future of that franchise. Those new people will link the name "Fallout" with crappy shovelware.

It seems like Interplay is basically taking a page from 3D0's book here. You're taking Fallout, a respected name, and turning in it to Army Men, or Might and Magic, big jokes of the industry.

If you ruin this franchise like this, it's not going to be there when you guys actually want to make a good game with it.

That'll earn you a BIG BAD BAN!

Mad Max RW · Post by **Mad Max RW** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:21 am

Haha, didn't I call it, Kreegle? :P

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:25 am

Given that forum is pretty much nothing more than people bitching about this game existing, I'm not shocked they're doing it. However, it's funnier than shit they have to do things like this to "avoid" bad PR in the first place.

If you make a game no one wants using a license a lot of people love, you're asking for this kind of situation. So, basically, they have someone that's a few months shy of being replaced by a temp service, because the company is on the skids, scrambling to do damage control. It's astoundingly funny.

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:29 am

Hey, I'm having Derek !Smart flashbacks!

Mad Max RW · Post by **Mad Max RW** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:42 am

You guys are all beating a dead horse in there. Interplay, Feargus, JE, and everyone else is getting a huge laugh. Complaining in forums, emailing staff, and creating crazy art galleries isn't gonna amount to jack shit. I used to do the same thing against Fox Interactive a few years ago. Maybe I'm just tired of being pissed off at people who aren't going to listen anyway.

Right now I feel more like being kicked in the ribs while still down. I saw it coming, but getting out of the way was impossible. And it still hurts like hell.

Red · Post by **Red** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:46 am

I think we all know it's useless to do all these things...

Well I hope we all do.

Thing is we still love Fallout, so we might as well go down screaming and kicking then just sit there and cry.

At the very least it's more fun...

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:54 am

Red wrote:Thing is we still love Fallout, so we might as well go down screaming and kicking then just sit there and cry.

At the very least it's more fun...

Yeah I'm bored :(

Spam I'play = solution.

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 3:20 am

Red wrote:I think we all know it's useless to do all these things...

Well I hope we all do.

Thing is we still love Fallout, so we might as well go down screaming and kicking then just sit there and cry.

At the very least it's more fun...

Fun is what it's all about! If you're not having fun, you might as well be Chuck Cuevas!

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 3:23 am

Saint_Proverbius wrote:Fun is what it's all about! If you're not having fun, you might as well be Chuck Cuevas!

It's a very good time for siggiable quotes.

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 3:48 am

Mad Max RW wrote:You guys are all beating a dead horse in there. Interplay, Feargus, JE, and everyone else is getting a huge laugh. Complaining in forums, emailing staff, and creating crazy art galleries isn't gonna amount to jack shit. I used to do the same thing against Fox Interactive a few years ago. Maybe I'm just tired of being pissed off at people who aren't going to listen anyway.

Right now I feel more like being kicked in the ribs while still down. I saw it coming, but getting out of the way was impossible. And it still hurts like hell.

I know that this is useless. The anti-thingy pictures, forums, phone-calls is just for shits and giggles. We know they won't listen to normal complaints, but at least we can punch them in the ear and scream at them.

Besides, it's better than more devastation news.

Red · Post by **Red** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 3:57 am

Pyro wrote:Besides, it's better than more devastation news.

Word to that...

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 4:02 am

Red wrote:
Pyro wrote:Besides, it's better than more devastation news.
Word to that...

I seem to have forgotten... why should I care about Devastation again?

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 4:10 am

paynetothemax wrote:I seem to have forgotten... why should I care about Devastation again?

Because it has a cool name?

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 4:13 am

Saint_Proverbius wrote:Because it has a cool name?

ooohh yeeeeaaahh.

Kinda like Fallout: Enforcer... it's so badass it just screams "BUY ME NOW!!"

Red · Post by **Red** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 4:15 am

Actually that whole "devastation" name tars my whole image of Land of Devastation (the BBS door) which was a great post-apocalyptic game (though it has nothing to do with Fallout, duh).

BlackDog · Post by **BlackDog** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 5:19 am

two words.

FUCK INTERPLAY.

Sol Invictus · Post by **Sol Invictus** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 6:47 am

BlackDog wrote:two words.

FUCK INTERPLAY.

Enough people have said "FUCK INTERPLAY" for it to be one word.

DJ SlamÃƒÂ¡k · Post by **DJ SlamÃƒÂ¡k** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 12:52 pm

A good time for sig quotes, indeed...

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:53 pm

DJ SlamÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¡k wrote:A good time for sig quotes, indeed...

Rex is always quotable, though.