Feargus Urquhart developer profile

Mr. Teatime · Post by **Mr. Teatime** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 5:42 pm

[ -> Interview]

Feargus Urquhart has filled in <a href="http://www.nma-fallout.com/article.php?id=9549">NMA's Fallout Developer Profile</a>. Because Odin asks the exact same generic questions as he did every single other developer, regardless of who they are and what their area of expertise is, the grilling that Feargus could have got is replaced by something more akin to a light frappe.<blockquote>How does the fan base hinder/help the projects that you've worked on?
 
 They help by being enthusiastic about the Fallout world and keeping it alive. I think they hinder it by making developers question whether they even want to deal with them.
 
 ...
 
 Any last word to the Fallout fan base?
 
 Chill OUT! What I mean by that is that you guys might get more of what you want by accepting that Fallout 3 might never be made and to help the developers and publishers make the Fallout games they are working on successful. With a part of that success being that they follow the fell of the Fallout world. If you guys just tell them how dumb Fallout Morrowind will be than it might turn out be less of a Fallout game because people tend to ignore those that call them stupid every third word. If the Fallout games that are being made are successful then that can only increase the chance of Fallout 3 actually being made.</blockquote>Well, there you go...
 Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.nma-fallout.com">NMA</A>

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 5:46 pm

Why is it that Fergie takes every chance in every interview to talk about the fanbase in a negative light? I know I've pointed this out before, but it almost seems like he has some sort of vendetta against us. Last I checked, we didn't send dead rabbits to him or anything (Did we?)

Mr. Teatime · Post by **Mr. Teatime** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:01 pm

I couldn't be bothered to point out in the news post that a lot (the majority?) or us don't WANT another fallout game to be made if it's going to fuck around with the franchise. The whole 'support BOS and you'll get the game you want' argument is old and inaccurate.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:06 pm

Not only is it old and innacurate, we know it doesn't work. The theory was that we'd get Fallout 3 if we supported BOS and FO 3 was canned in favor of BOS, which most people didn't even support to begin with. Ontop of that, Interplay lost big on BOS and has thus resorted to selling the license to highest bidder instead of someone who really cared about the project. There should be like some sort of Godwin law for people who use BOS in a pro-argument.

Sovy Kurosei · Post by **Sovy Kurosei** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:20 pm

If you guys just tell them how dumb Fallout Morrowind will be than it might turn out be less of a Fallout game because people tend to ignore those that call them stupid every third word.

Saying Fallout Morrowind is dumb != calling the developers stupid every third word.

I can disagree with someone on an idea, but that doesn't mean that I am calling them an idiot. Also, if an idea has merit behind it, I don't think Bethesda will not implement said good idea just out of spite since they were called a bad name. They are out to make a successful, profitible game.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:11 pm

He's always being negative when telling us not to be negative.

That's like, the FU-paradox.

Briosafreak · Post by **Briosafreak** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:14 pm

S4ur0n27 wrote:He's always being negative when telling us not to be negative.

That's like, the FU-paradox.

It`s exactly that, very well put.

fallout ranger · Post by **fallout ranger** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 11:03 pm

dumbass wrote:you guys might get more of what you want by accepting that Fallout 3 might never be made

I'd rather see it not made than be a discrace to the old fallouts.

Burnov · Post by **Burnov** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 2:16 am

In spite of his hypocrisy, he does at least acknowledge to a capacity that the enthusiasm for fallout by it's fanbase is what's keeping it alive.

Only he said it more or less that they're helping keep it alive. Yeah... I suppose whilst developers threaten to inadvertantly destroy it.

Ranger · Post by **Ranger** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 1:06 am

It's all well and good to get upset about our "esteemed" games developers possibly destroying a game (which they have). But theres no reason to hem and haw over how the atmosphere will be "Irrevocably changed" by additions of things like a 3-d interface, the OPTION of real time combat and other changes to the engine which could seriously streamline gameplay and bring fallout to the next centry. What made fallout great was the story, the music and the interesting characters. Not the isometric prospective. Not the turn based combat. Not anything else. What the developer is trying to say is that most of the complaints seen on these forums tend to be whining about "I just want the old fallout with a new story". That's what modding is for, not something you pay $50 for. Open your mind to changes, but DO bitch about the things that trully made fallout a great game.

Briosafreak · Post by **Briosafreak** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 1:12 am

I believe you don`t dictate what made Fallout good, it`s just your opinion, so it`s a moot point. And you`re wrong, of course.

Araanor · Post by **Araanor** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 8:20 am

I wonder why "streamlining" and "updating" always seems to mean making it like all the other crap out there.

If you don't care about perspective or combat, let's just keep Fallout like it is, okay? It's fairly unique considering today's games, so changing it to be more like other games would make it less unique.

Ranger · Post by **Ranger** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 11:41 pm

You are of course correct and I do appoligize for doing what so many others do, and that is forcing my oppinion upon others. But please do not say that I'm wrong, because one's oppinion is never wrong, and it's YOUR oppinion that I'm wrong. But I still think I'm correct in saying that the game developers would be ripping us all off if they used the same engine used on fallout, put in a new story, and still charged us $50 for it. I wouldn't be opposed if they did that and only charged $10 or less or put it up as a free download. Also the assumption that "Modernizing" a game will make it just like everything else is wrong. I do have faith that someone somewhere will manage to make a fallout game that is "updated" and still be original. I agree that a lot of the crap out there all looks the same. It may take a while but they'll make a new engine that's like nothing else out there, and all the new games that come after that fallout will be called clones. I guess all I'm trying to say is offer some helpful suggestions instead of "Keep it the same, or I'll kill you" or something to that effect.

Briosafreak · Post by **Briosafreak** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:41 am

But I still think I'm correct in saying that the game developers would be ripping us all off if they used the same engine used on fallout, put in a new story, and still charged us $50 for it.

That`s not on the table is it?

Franz Schubert · Post by **Franz Schubert** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 6:25 am

Feargie wrote:I think they hinder it by making developers question whether they even want to deal with them.

I think Feargie should question whether he should go out and purchase a pair of testicles and a spine. We try to hold the developers accountable for their actions and their words, and Feargie thinks we're the immature ones because of it.

Ranger wrote:But I still think I'm correct in saying that the game developers would be ripping us all off if they used the same engine used on fallout, put in a new story, and still charged us $50 for it.

Are you joking? That would be the best news I've heard about FO3, ever.

fallout ranger · Post by **fallout ranger** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:48 am

Can someone change "Ranger" 's name? He doesn't deserve it.

Araanor · Post by **Araanor** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 8:55 pm

Ranger wrote:But I still think I'm correct in saying that the game developers would be ripping us all off if they used the same engine used on fallout, put in a new story, and still charged us $50 for it.

That's not going to happen and I'm not even asking for it. They can use any engine they want, as long as the gameplay is what you'd expect of a sequel to Fallout. Turn-based combat, top-down perspective and dialogue trees works just as fine in shiny 3D packages as they do without.

Also the assumption that "Modernizing" a game will make it just like everything else is wrong.

Talking about the "option" of real-time combat, "streamlining gameplay" and "bring fallout to the next centry" betrays a certain ignorance on the subject. To put it short for you: including another combat mode compromises design and the combat of both modes. Streamlining gameplay and bringing the game up-to-date is common marketing-speak for dumbing down and picking features from big sellers in the vain hope of gaining more sales. This is what people may see when you express yourself like that, so take care.

Update Fallout, sure, as long as it stays Fallout. I threw out a few ideas in this thread.

Ranger · Post by **Ranger** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:59 pm

I agree, keep fallout fallout. And why do I not deserve the name Ranger? You don't know why I have it, you will never know, and all I am trying to do is express a different view point than what's normally expressed. I am a fallout fan, I've played all the games, I still have all the ones on the PC, still play them over and over, and I thought BOS would have been a decent Action game if it were cheaper, and didn't carry the fallout name. Note that I said didn't carry, and decent so there can be no mistaking my words, I liked it as a game, I hated it as a fallout game. The reason Fergus always talks about us in a negative light is that we tend to portray ourselves in a negative light. IT IS A GAME PEOPLE! While our oppinions are still important to developers IT IS THEIR GAME WORLD. They created it, and we love it, but it is still theirs to do with what they wish. If they want a good game, and want lots of free positive advertisement, they will listen to us, but we need to stop complaining. Maybe we should all write down what we want in the game, send it to DAC, NMA, or some other site, they could then make a list of the most prevelent things on our lists, send it to the developers, and put forth a CLEAR message about what we want. All this fighting does is make us seem like a bunch of game freaks with no lives, and not worth the attention of a knat.

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 11:09 pm

Don't listen to fallout ranger.

As a rule of thumb.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 11:27 pm

People make games because they want to sell them, not because they love making games. As such, "its not what you want, its the consumer." We're the consumer and as such they should listen to what the consumer wants.