Fallout Fans Are Big Meanies

wyatt · Post by **wyatt** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:25 pm

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 whoel 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................

Ozrat · Post by **Ozrat** » Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:06 am

I'm sure that we didn't mean to hurt any feelings over at Interplay...

4too · Post by **4too** » Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:02 pm

Reality Roulette

As the world spins,
As the revolver spins,
Round and round we go, chamber loaded, we don't know.
Trigger pull, hammer click, chamber empty or reality hit.

If C.C. was listening before he pulled the plug on negative feedback, he might have retained 5 or more standard critiques. Maybe the 6th memory chamber blessed with "the moment of truth", will some day line up with his triggered synapses. Until then, we will see variants on the I'play party line, on how a minority of malcontents are obscuring their marketing brilliance. The fact that,..... facts, (Dare I imply, Quality Assurance and Interplay are oxymoron's?) facts are the base for many of these negative opinions. Opinions and discussions of aesthetic content and franchise 'intellectual content' continuity are blown away by typecasting a minority as fan-atics.

Gang-sta' profilin'... stylin.. we all smilin'... shoe shufflin' to da bank, we all cryin'...

Can expect a "man of action" to do something, right or wrong. I trust that C.C. and crew have been focused on the quality of the action game, FO:BOS. And may it be more BOS as C.C. implied, because the design intent was never "FO" the RPG. May it be all it can be. (Dancing duality intended.)

The discussion of how the BGDA Engine was adapted to their vision of entertainment may be the best part of this interview. In a cacoon of positive space, inflating a bubble of creativity, and generally being,......'' happy in your work'', let us trust C.C. and Crew are weaving
together the 200,00 PLUS unit sale, M rated, ""balls out"" shooter that INTERPLAY SAYS they have ready for the ""Action Boys"" this Q4.

Yes, the local 11 year olds will rent this at Block Buster 'cause they found FO loaded on a PC, and stayed long enough to kill rats and radscorpians.
11 year olds that are sophisticated enough to know what a "chain" looks like and how to pull it, hinting that they "might" have read a preview that mentioned purple tentacle alien content in FO:BOS. 11 year old's will ignore the porn hooks, they've seen betta', and gush scholarly comparisons to the console action games they know too well. That's a tougher audience than the FO fans. They try before they buy. Unless it's
got MATRIX in the title, to each their own "chain"... Are we all like Marley's Ghost?

This "casual" discourse on FO fans. The short laundry list of irrelevant impossible demands, I see in this Gamespy interview, could have come right out of the discussions of VB/FO3. JE, et al... the VB dev's, managed to meet, acknowledge, the challenges and move on to the next topic. Here RPG guys have taken on the fan-atical FO minority and are still out here, LIVIN' LARGE, all over the web forums, running interference for our "'man of action'". I trust that JE, et al, are on C.C.'s christmas card list.......

The example of turn based seems out of context; the advocates for turn based in PC RPG's are in every PC RPG genre. C.C. can't be spending his free time lurking on RPG forums, because a "man of action' is out doing manily action, like producing "'balls out"' shooters. So all the negative stuff was too, .... too, not important enough to document, or
validate with reality. The ""man of action'" is focused on his line of attack, quailing ''off topic'' details fade from memory, as it should be.
"'....Wouldn't want it any other way.""

4too

Franz Schubert · Post by **Franz Schubert** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 10:45 am

I think the thing that pisses me off, after years of Interplay bull shit, is their complete utter lack of honesty. I mean, at this point it's pretty obvious that they've completely forsaken the traditional fans, and are aiming their stuff at what they view to be a wider, more easilly accessible, more easilly pleasable audience. It's obvious, and yet they constantly spew bs on how they're still targeting the main FO demographic, they're just simply "bringing in new fans".

Grimnar wrote:SIT DOWN AND PLAY THE ORIGINAL FUCKING GAMES YOU WANKER

He won't play the original games, because he has no interest in them. Interplay hired him because they know he will work towards their current marketing strategy, which is targeting the action-oriented console audience. If Interplay had been interested in preserving the "spirit" of the original games, they would have hired someone with a view that corresponds to that.

Personally I think Interplay would have been more successful over the last few years if they had simply come out and said "Look, we no longer are interested in the original Fallouts, so if you don't like what we're doing now, go away."

If they had said that, then proceeded to make a generic action-adventure game, it would be more successful because they could focus on marketing it as such, rather than a hybrid/combination of two completely incompatible styles. There would also be no rabid FO fans to get in the way of IPLY trying to build hype.

Franz Schubert · Post by **Franz Schubert** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 11:26 am

4too wrote:facts are the base for many of these negative opinions. Opinions and discussions of aesthetic content and franchise 'intellectual content' continuity are blown away by typecasting a minority as fan-atics.

I guarantee you that when this game crashes and burns (and I'm pretty sure it will) that IPLY is going to act like quite the martyr, and point to the rabid demonic fans who "sabotaged" their best efforts to make a quality game.

4too wrote:Yes, the local 11 year olds will rent this at Block Buster 'cause they found FO loaded on a PC, and stayed long enough to kill rats and radscorpians. 11 year olds that are sophisticated enough to know what a "chain" looks like and how to pull it, hinting that they "might" have read a preview that mentioned purple tentacle alien content in FO:BOS.

I disagree. I think the standard "action-adventure" genre survives on looks alone, and by that I mean the general premise of a game, not just graphics. The people who would rent an action-adventure mostly aren't concerned with reviews or franchises, just if the game appeals to them from what they can see on the cover.

Here is yet another reason I think IPLY is stupid: I don't think that the PA setting is translated very well to the action genre because PA is mostly enjoyed psychologically, whereas the appeal of the action genre has little to do with psychological-ness.

Think about this hypothetical situation: a kid who likes to rent a video game each friday with his allowance sees an action-adventure game entitled FO:BOS on the shelf. He goes over to it, and picks it up to look at the back of the box. He thinks to himself, "Hmm, this is sorta familiar, but I don't quite understand it. It's not the type of game I'm used to." He then puts it down, and ends up renting the next sequel in some established franchise THAT HE'S HEARD OF, because he knows exactly what he's going to get, and is not at risk of wasting his hard earned money on something new and different.

I'm not a marketing or business expert of course, but I imagine that successful franchise games like Splinter Cell, Red Faction, Gauntlet, etc sell because of 3 things:

Genre: It pretty much has to be an established genre, such as FPS, action-adventure, sports, you name it.

Graphics: Obviously the importance of graphics depends on the genre, but it always provides a huge boost to a games success, especially in FPS/action-adventure.

Setting/theme: A game like Gauntlet is successful partly because it is so easilly recognised as part of the fantasy genre. People look at the back and see magic, arrows, swords, and many people are sold right then and there. Spy/infiltration games like Splinter Cell also have an obvious appeal.

FO:BOS is part of an established genre, so they're all set there. However, from the trailer/screen shots it appears that they were a bit lazy in the graphics department. In terms of setting, who ever heard of a post apocalyptic console game? IPLY seems to be gambling that a lot of people are going to give it a try.

Killzig · Post by **Killzig** » Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:52 am

Can we sue him for slander?

Post by **DarkUnderlord** » Fri Oct 24, 2003 5:16 am

Franz_Schubert wrote:I disagree. I think the standard "action-adventure" genre survives on looks alone, and by that I mean the general premise of a game, not just graphics. The people who would rent an action-adventure mostly aren't concerned with reviews or franchises, just if the game appeals to them from what they can see on the cover.

... and when Mum & Dad see that cover with the thong girl. OUCH!

Franz_Schubert wrote:Here is yet another reason I think IPLY is stupid: I don't think that the PA setting is translated very well to the action genre because PA is mostly enjoyed psychologically, whereas the appeal of the action genre has little to do with psychological-ness.

I disagree. I picked up Alien vs Predator 2 in the bargain bin recently and was pleasantly surprised to find a solid FPS with great atmosphere. The first two levels of the marine missions don't even have any aliens, but I was running around madly, checking every nook and cranny just in case. You'd hear a noise and wonder what it was. The game set you up so that you eventually dropped your guard.

... and then they came.

It was great stuff. So I think atmosphere does translate well. The thing that's missing from FO:BOS though, is a good slathering of the 50's. Tell me the name of the opening song in Fallout 1. Now tell me the name of the opening song in Fallout 2. Now tell me the name of the opening song in another game you've played. Can you? Do you know? Did they stay in your mind? Did the openings generate that same "feeling"? That undescribable feeling? Hell, I've seen some great intro's (from Blizzard mostly

) but none of them stick in my mind as much as the two from Fallout. FO:BOS is missing that. Instead, it's replaced with "SEX!!", "RAPE ME!", "YOU MOFO'S GONNA DIE BITCH!", "YEAH!".

Sorry, that just ain't Fallout.

Franz_Schubert wrote:FO:BOS is part of an established genre, so they're all set there. However, from the trailer/screen shots it appears that they were a bit lazy in the graphics department. In terms of setting, who ever heard of a post apocalyptic console game? IPLY seems to be gambling that a lot of people are going to give it a try.

I personally think most people will be turned off by the sex. They say sex sells. However, they disregard the obvious. SEX WITH REAL PEOPLE SELLS. Would you buy a pair of shoes if the woman in the poster was pixellated? Would you take that great holiday if the women wearing bikinis and walking along the beach were pixellated? I don't think so.

Sex in computer games has a disgusting feel to it. If I want sex, I know where to get real sex. If I want pictures of naked women, I know ehere to get real pictures of real women. If I want any of those things, I don't play a computer game.

To those that think sex sells in computer games, I ask you this:

WHERE'S BMX XXX NOW, HUH?

Paladin359 · Post by **Paladin359** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 3:59 am

Man is it hot in here or is it the flaming!?

Uh Oh... the forums on fire. Quickly put it out with some common sense. No common sense eh? Ah well let it burn. :roll:

atoga · Post by **atoga** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 4:12 am

Guess you don't have any common sense either? So shut up.

Paladin359 · Post by **Paladin359** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 4:15 am

atoga wrote:Guess you don't have any common sense either? So shut up.

well all this complaining is not gonna help, maybe you guys should purchase the rights to the game. Then you guys can decide how you'd like it built. all i see here is a lot of complaining an no action.

SuperH · Post by **SuperH** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 5:27 am

Lawl all I see is another newbie who's about to get massively pwned after post two. Bad move, unless you're like soldier or something, in which case even worse.

Insane-Lark · Post by **Insane-Lark** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 6:26 am

Paladin359 wrote:Man is it hot in here or is it the flaming!?

Time to pull out the asbestos thong & don your flaming gloves +1?

If you wish to discuss your view, feel free to do so but don't expect a positive reception. We have taken a look at the press, screens & interviews on FO:BoS, I'm not sure what is says to you but it does not say Fallout to me or to most of the folk here. Good luck.

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 10:10 am

Paladin359 wrote:
atoga wrote:Guess you don't have any common sense either? So shut up.
well all this complaining is not gonna help, maybe you guys should purchase the rights to the game. Then you guys can decide how you'd like it built. all i see here is a lot of complaining an no action.

Action? When we've taken action (ring chuck up) people just whine about us being too extreme anyway.

What'll be your next post? Asking us all to change our ways D:

Post by **DarkUnderlord** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:58 pm

PaladinSOMENUMBERHERE is right! We need more action! It's riot time!!

Paladin359 · Post by **Paladin359** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 12:24 am

DarkUnderlord wrote:PaladinSOMENUMBERHERE is right! We need more action! It's riot time!!

lol, i have no grevinces with you folks just trying to see if you guys can run under one banner. The purchasing of intellectual rights to games has occured before, so the users can make the choices. It turned out good as everyone got to see what they had opinioned on see in action in one way or another. Consider how good the game would be if we had the folks who wrote the storys in the fan fiction page an the good programmers out there work together. Would that not be a game worth playing or what?

Post by **DarkUnderlord** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 1:12 am

Except Interplay aren't selling the Fallout license anytime soon. Even Tim Cain from Troika couldn't get it and he's like a God with super powers and everything!

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:37 am

Paladin359 wrote:The purchasing of intellectual rights to games has occured before, so the users can make the choices.

Name them.

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 4:27 am

Slave_Master wrote:
Chris Paseto wrote:Especially the PC fans. Way back we were like "Well, let's see what they have to say." And some of the biggest detractors were like "There's no way you can do this without making it turn-based, there's no Fallout without being turn-based!"
Don't you just love bald-faced lies?

Delusional, lying, or hopelessluy retarded. Take your pick. The dumb shit uses laughable hyperbole like that when there's a number of Fallout fan sites that have why the setting and story are botched, in length. TB was a minor point and those shitheads know it.

But it is convenient for the lying twats to say that, as they have since deleted the posts off their own forums and GameSpy interviewers are usually complete whores for any kind of interview so they probably swallowed the load.

Hell, compared to those two morons, Derek Smart is starting to look forthright and rational.

Paladin359 · Post by **Paladin359** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 6:38 am

Saint_Proverbius wrote:
Paladin359 wrote:The purchasing of intellectual rights to games has occured before, so the users can make the choices.
Name them.

Hey im not doing your homework for you, but one example is wulfram. Originally from imagine entertainment about 4 yrs ago, now under new management an with a good fan base from which it started. There are other examples, find them.

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:07 am

Paladin359 wrote: Hey im not doing your homework for you, but one example is wulfram. Originally from imagine entertainment about 4 yrs ago, now under new management an with a good fan base from which it started. There are other examples, find them.

Okay, chuckles, you fund the cash to purchase the rights. Wait, your "recommendation" means jack shit because IPLY won't sell the rights, as has been pointed out to you before. Which you neglected to address.

Too bad you didn't have a clue about what you were trying to talk about before you raped your keyboard. Your example of Wulfram is moot because it frankly isn't a high profile title, which Fallout is. It isn't in any relation to what Saint wanted. Context, learn what it means. Name where some fans out of the blue bought the rights to a high profile title. No, I don't mean doing some mod or unofficial remake of it a la Ultima.

The amusing thing is that I find absolutely no connection to Imagine Entertainment and Wulfram. Care to explain? It's really further amusing since Wulfram was out over 5 years ago (almost 6) and was on TEN. It looks like after TEN died, someone bought the rights for chump change, if that, since Wulfram 2 uses damn near the same technology as Wulfram.

This should be amusing to read the ensuing waffling backpedals. It is one thing to buy an antiquidated title from a dead company than it is from a live company that is too busy skullfucking it, and combine in the fact that they aren't licensing it out anymore after the stellar job MicroFortÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â© and Dan "Shit for Brains" Levin did.

Duck and Cover

Fallout Fans Are Big Meanies

Reality Roulette

Re: Reality Roulette

Re: Reality Roulette