GameSpy readers are still idiots.

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 5:08 pm

[Game -> Update]

In a follow up to some fluff piece on <a href="http://www.gamespy.com/">GameSpy</a>, one reader <A href="http://www.gamespy.com/articles/septemb ... ers/">sent this in</a> about <A href="http://www.interplay.com/falloutbos">Fallout Tactics</a>.
 
 <blockquote> Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel has to go down in history as one of the only times having a beloved brand name attached to a good game was a mistake. It seemed like a no-brainer for Interplay -- create a squad-level tactical combat game set in the incredibly beloved post-apocalyptic universe popularized by the Fallout 1 and 2 RPGs. The game itself, while quite good and garnering a lot of critical praise, was torpedoed from the get-go by most unlikely of people -- Fallout fans. A hardcore contingent of Fallout fans (angry that Tactics wasn't the long-awaited Fallout 3) proceeded to flame the heck out of Fallout Tactics almost from the minute it was announced, savaging every feature of the game on message boards all across the Internet before they'd even had a chance to play it. In the end, a solid strategy game was killed by the very people it was created for. If you can find Fallout: Tactics in a bargain bin, it's worth picking up. </blockquote>
 
 Of course, it wouldn't have anything at all to do with the fact that it was buggy as hell, would it? Even the demo versions of <a href="http://www.interplay.com/falloutbos">Fallout Tactics</a> were bug ridden, crash-fests. It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that it was far more linear with less options than <A href="http://www.jaggedaliance2.com">Jagged Alliance 2</a>, a game that proceded it by several years and did nearly everything better.
 
 It wasn't attacked because it wasn't Fallout 3, it was attacked because it was a mediocre, flakey piece of crap that couldn't even get the setting right ranging from the artwork to the setting history - including why the nuclear war was fought in the first place.
 
 It's rather amusing this is on <A href="http://www.gamespy.com">GameSpy</a>, where the <A href="http://www.gamespy.com/reviews/march01/ ... >review</a> of the title gave it an 89% and said this:
 
 <blockquote>In the end, Fallout: Tactics is an absolute masterpiece -- it's hard to express my enjoyment of this game in words. Unfortunately, it's equally hard to express the frustration of seeing my roommate not being able to get his copy to work. </blockquote>
 
 I'd call an 89% overrated, all things considered.
 
 Thanks for the tip, Odin of <a href="http://www.nma-fallout.com">No Mutants Allowed</a>.

T-900 · Post by **T-900** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 7:04 pm

Fallout tactics was a reasonably entertaining strategic squad combat game.

During the levels where you fight against realistic humans.

The end.

Damn gamespy people just like to sound interesting by going against the true RPG fans, because it makes the braindead FPS fans and dungeon siege player (The ones who beat it in half an hour, and think that makes them RPG players) happy.

First Force · Post by **First Force** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 7:18 pm

gamespy are idiots, i finished the game( i bought it just for fallout collecters sake) and found out that it was linear, no real story, and i couldnt really get the feel of the world.
it was for lack of better words, sterile.

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 7:43 pm

GameSpy Counter Post wrote:In the end, Fallout: Tactics is an absolute masterpiece -- it's hard to express my enjoyment of this game in words.

Then somebody please explain to me why most of the FoT modders are sitting around puzzling out different ways of putting the "Fallout" back in "Fallout: Tactics". While they're at it, please also explain why I recently spent nearly two weeks putting together a FoT sprite pack for all of the original FO/FO2 sprites...

OTB

atoga · Post by **atoga** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 8:20 pm

Up yours, Gamespy. Way to get the story wrong. I'm not even going to rant about how dumb the people who run that site are.

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 8:41 pm

why is it always referred to as 'beloved fallout' ?

Sarge · Post by **Sarge** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 9:50 pm

If you don't know why it's refered to as beloved, you need to play Fallout/Fallout2. 'casue then you'd know why.

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:01 pm

wow thanks for the tip kind sir, any good fan sites for it?

Soldier87 · Post by **Soldier87** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:21 pm

Megatron wrote:wow thanks for the tip kind sir, any good fan sites for it?

LOL

Briosafreak · Post by **Briosafreak** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:53 pm

This is what i posted on the Iplay boards, to people defending the creep that wrote that:

That is the Reader`s choice, any crackhead could go there and say that Daikatana was a master piece of gaming craftsmanship.

But it does have an interesting point, wich is "don`t believe everything you read on the net".

When the game was first announced people complained it wasn`t fallout3 and so on. People from Interplay went to NMA and discussed the issue with Roshambo and others, saying that it would be a spin off, let`s not worry, it wouldn`t be in the way of Fallout3, and it would be good, Jagged Alliance style.

Ok, everyone bought it, the Vault13 site was created aroung Tactics, by people from the old Interplay boards, DAC went to the Gamespy network, becoming PlanetFalloutTactics as a side name and url, to help to support the Multiplayer scene Iplay was telling us would be enourmous, NMA started to follow the game, dev chats were made, they were lots of fun, we still have the logs, new sites showed up, everything was going nifty.

The Interplay boards were very different, they had heated discussions, with insults and attacks between the people on the boards that had conflicts over who was tyhe best fan site or between the newly formed tactics clans, Krazikatt and Chris Taylor had to keep an eye on all times because of that, but there wasnÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´t any hostility towards the devs.

Than the demos came out, and a few doubts starting to appear, although that didn`t stoped the game from beeing at that time the all time best seller on pre orders on the Interplay store.

JC from Vault13 calls on Miroslav from NMA and Kreegle from DAC and starts creating a mega portal with maps, tools, tiles and everything else to future tactics modders, so the spirits were high, but still Saint Proverbius and Roshambo start saying it louder that something is wrong...

...and it was, the game goes out unfinished, buggy as hell, unbalanced, with the network code still not working properly, and with repeated crashes.

After the first not very exciting reviews, with the exception of the Gamespy one, since Gamespy had beed a partner 14 degrees east and Microforte, and all the multiplayer was going on using their client, wich lead them to cheat the readers into believing the game was playable, one of the worst examples of dishonest gaming sites attitudes towards their readers i ever saw, the fallout fan sites were full of people complaining.

So definitely instead of Rosh ans Saint and a couple of others complaining, everyone got hangry. By that time word of mouth on the problems were rampant all over the internet (what is now called the "ToEE effect...") and the sales of the game plummeted...

Fallout fans in general gave a chance to the game, the game simply didn`t reach the levels in gameplay of JA2, and the multiplayer did get fixed with a few late patches, but the best content for it was made by the fans, and it wasn`t much.

The fan sites kept the forums running, and the maps online to be downloaded, but in time we saw the clans disapearing or moving on to other games, Chris Taylor was fired, most of our friends at Microforte were fired too, and we found out that instead of helping Fallout3 all that Tactics had made was convincing that instead Tactics2 was preferable and plans were made to start production, wich of course didn`t happen, since unfinished work that screws a setting normally doesn`t sell well.

While all this was happening FO3 was canceled twice by the way, and the Fallout fans kept waiting and hoping for better days.

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 1:32 am

Actually, I wasn't opposed to Fallout Tactics until the first demo came out. That's when the cloud of hype vanished and we were left with seeing what we were really going to get. Rosh was opposed to it since the beginning, and he was right to be opposed to it. The idea of making a squad tactical game in Fallout's setting isn't that bad an idea, but how Fallout Tactics was done is what really made it bad.

Most weren't opposed to the game until after the demos and/or after the release - and I'd be willing to bet that of all the sales that game got, it was from the Fallout fans who bought it as opposed to others. The Fallout fan base, in otherwords, didn't decrease sales, because for the most part - they were the sales.

4too · Post by **4too** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 8:58 am

Agreement.

It was the fans of Fallout that made FOT a credible product for all you market'eering sales mavens out there. Sales-wise. For the rest that were FOT game players, we know the product's fatal faults.

The corporate "party line" perpetuates "The Big Lie'' of the 'back stab'
by ungrateful seekers of FO3. It's the type of vaporous damage control that guarantees more bad, low sales products. It does not address the real problem of 'kiss of death' manipulation by market bean wranglers, and the consistent failure of Quality Control to provide at least Windows compatibility, pre patch....., and post patch.

4too

EN. · Post by **EN.** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 10:34 am

What about the combat though? Was FO:T in terms of tactical combat good?

I've never played FO:T myself. I never picked it up because of all the bugs, but I've spotted a copy in my local bargain bin and I'm wondering whether or not to purchase it, now that the patch is out. Just to see how it's like and how badly it deviates from the Fallout setting and how linear it is. However, I wouldn't want to completely waste my money and since I've heard good things about it's combat, I'd just like to ask here. If even the combat isn't good then I don't think I'll be wasting my money on it.

Odin · Post by **Odin** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 11:56 am

Actually that's one of the let downs in FOT, the combat really sucked compared to JA2. Which is a game that came out long before FOT.

Actually I've played through the game and had some fun, but the "RT" combat system was awful, the TB was plain pain in the ass..

T-900 · Post by **T-900** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 12:24 pm

I enjoyed fighting the raiders, and even some of the beast lords, but the mutants were just too much...

The tactics were good when they were kept more like SWAT 2 than *"All sit in a semi-circle around this door while we entice the heavily armed mutant out, maybe one of the squad will arrive if we shoot it fast enough"*

I played the Jagged Alliance 2 demo, the graphics were so horrible I could barely see what I was doing (I still enjoy playing monkey island one, and my graphics card is 4 years old, so It's a fair complaint), but it seemed fun.. But I did like the semi-realistic human fights of FOT more than the JA2 combat.

Ooe · Post by **Ooe** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 6:16 pm

Allright, im going to get flamed for this, but....
I actually enjoyed Fallout Tactics! Hey, i know some of you dont share this liking, but im ABSOLUTELY sure thats its one heck-uva-lot better than FO:BOS will ever be, right?

avenger69ie · Post by **avenger69ie** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 6:30 pm

i agree Ooe, i enjoyed FOT too, but not as an rpg.

taltiren · Post by **taltiren** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 9:08 pm

I did a few missions, but it was pretty boring...

Zetura Dracos · Post by **Zetura Dracos** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 11:53 pm

It wasnt great and it sure wasnt Fallout but at least it was playable and it was tolerable enough that I actually finished it. I would never ever consider it an under rated game however, if anything it was extremely over-rated.

atoga · Post by **atoga** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 12:08 am

It would help if Fallout Tactics was, you know, actually Fallout instead of Fallouty graphics and monsters populating random scenarios which included excuses to kill things.

Duck and Cover

GameSpy readers are still idiots.

GameSpy readers are still idiots.

Re: GameSpy readers are still idiots.

Agreement