More JE lubbin

[Red]

The problem with that whole 961 people on the forums actually doing work is that most (if not all) have jobs/families/school taking most of their time and can't exactly dedicate the necessary time to develop such a thing. Heck, look at my viewer, the damn thing's two years in the making and I wouldn't exactly call it "grand programming"...

[ApTyp]

By dividing all/most of the work into small, manageable chunks (aiming for 1-2 weeks' load for people willing to sacrifice at least 4 hours a week), each one with a clear and precise definition of end results, and, say, creating a database of unfinished chunks, or just distributing them among forum visitors, we could accomplish a lot, I think.

Then again, this still requires a core team of programmers/designers to actually manage these chunks, which may take a very long time, considering how full of surprises and sudden course changes game development seems to be. And by setting smaller, less ambitious goals we might drive away some quite capable, yet unfortunately impatient individuals who would otherwise prove a great addition to the group. Which will greatly slow down gradual "brick by brick" kind of development, not to mention that members of the core team must maintain their integrity, sense of purpose, and the grand vision of their work, while keeping in mind that most of the results will not be seen after months and months of development.

I'd still say that at least trying to do something is better than wasting another five years.

[Ausir]

Wasn't Fallout Bible originally Chris Taylor's idea?

[Briosafreak]

The sales argument is making me sick by now!... If you take the first quarter sales in the USA for FO2 yep, it wasn`t brilliant, it was Half-Life time, remember?

If one takes european and american sales in the next three quarters they weren`t bad, they needed about 80000 copies to get even with the expenses (given the fact of the poor marketing they would probably need less...) and the last time we did projections on actual numbers it had sold above 300000, less than IWD, but fair enough. If we pick the OEM figures, marginal to IP but that were more important than console sales for most of that time, the number rises (i had a FO2 copy that came for free on a magazine). Then, in my country there were THREE, i repeat,THREE rereleases on budget, the last one in October. Now, all those releases were also made in the most important markets, with germany getting one bonus. So, the two games ARE STILL SELLING after all those years. How many games ,beside Half-life and a couple of others, released on that time,can say the same??

We`re talking HUNDREDS OT THOUSANDS of copies beeing sold in all these years. This is a brand with longevity, what else would IP want more?

fergus fucked up when he set the team to do FO3 and then chicken out because he`s ideas for the game would be butchered by many of us. He did. Nothing JE can say will excuse this.

The good stuff Saint is reassuring us he said is only to soften us up, he knows that not making an 18-20 month production time FO3 earlier was a mistake, that all the computer magazines journalists still find incredible.

But no, the lateness of FO3 is to ensure quality, wich is really an irony, because that way he`s implying that IWD2 could be made because it was crap (wich indeed it was...)

I`m betting they`re waiting to make a CRAP FO3, in the lines of what was thought by that great visionary of CRAP, Fergus.

And to be honest, i`m getting tired of this...

[Spazmo]

Wasn't Fallout Bible originally Chris Taylor's idea?

I think the FOB was originally to be an internal universal Fallout reference (Fallout Tactics made it look like all sorts of developers would come and make spinoffs of Fallout), then a commercial release as a book or a PDF, and then was finally made as MCA does it now. And yes, I do think it was Chris Taylor's idea.

[Kreegle]

It was actually Dan Wood's idea.

[Spazmo]

Well, shit.

[Rosh]

Good point, Prov, but what I was mainly point out was about this:

I think Fallout 3 could be hugely successful if we made it contrary to (or at least regardless of) the desires of the hardcore fans. Fortunately, I don't believe ANYONE at Black Isle wants to make Fallout 3 in that manner.

Hugely successful != trendy shit that everyone else has done before. Diablo clones, there's been one that I've noticed do halfway decent, DarkStone, and most of the rest have been abyssmal. Dungeon Siege did good for a while, and like Sacrifice, went down in popularity due to banal gameplay. Of course, that doesn't stop idiots like those at VoodooExtreme from calling it innovative because it's the best-looking RTS they've seen. Cattle like that are just bad press and hype.

Back to the topic, Bishop also needs to get a fucking clue (as usual). The pap that he was posting about if they made Fallout contrary to what it was originally like would hardly make Fallout 3 incredibly successful. What he's saying is nothing more than marketing bullshit about trends. Most trend-chasers do poorly, and as for changing the basis of the game, a lot of people consider the second X-Com to be the last. Or the amount of fan-base cheesed off by real-time combat in MOO3. Or the amount of people who are watching Starfleet Command being turned into a name-whore with the third installment being nothing what they bought the first two for. I know of at least a dozen people who used to follow the series and have just dropped their "loyalty" because the game isn't what they played for.

By Bishop's flawed logic, U9 should have been a world class hit like U7 was, but U7 is still regarded as being better for numerous reasons. And it's 2d, and without a lot of trendy stuff in it. U9 was what resulted in chasing trends, and if I wanted to go look for more, I could name a number of other series that have become dwindled down into nothing or whatever due to the number of trendy material and crappy implementations that arose due to chasing such trends.

By Bishops "logic", SimVault would be a best seller. Oh, wait...that would have to ignore that knock-off sim games aren't too popular unless they've had a lot of experience working with that material. Since BIS had to use jumping puzzles and other crap designs, and haven't really done anything original aside from 1' thick tables and screenshots that look like a colonostomy slide (Torn), I'd say that their ability to take a trend ahead of others is acutely limited. That puts a rather dismal view upon their ability to set trends, too, or work outside of trends. Making something like everything else at the cost of series integrity is a rather foolish move that greater development houses have failed at.

"Nobody wants to make Fallout 3 in that manner"?

It appears like the sounds of Bishop's lips chapping on Fear-Gut's ass (or his ears are muffled by the press of his own colon) are drowning out what Fear-Gut's been saying for quite some time now or selective memory might be his problem.

Hey, even PC Cattle rated Fallout as the 4th best game of all time, without flashy effects, multiplayer, or trendy material. Could that be a hint, too? I swear, these shit "gaming colleges" that are sprouting up everywhere love to brainwash people into chasing trends, and style + integrity are no longer involved. It also seems that these "schools" are mixing up trend with innovation, which is where I believe the root of the problem lies.

Well, as long as BIS/Interplay/Shittus the Fox are concerned more about nickel-and-domeing their last while in the industry with cloned and hastily thrown together stuff, I could care less about them. I've seen where rampant "success" has killed off a developer/publisher, and I've seen other development houses on their dwindling decline until someone bought them as spare parts. BIS is now at the nickel-and-dime phase, and any more "slam dunks" are going to cheese more people away from them.

Of course, it wasn't too much of a surprise that they made Lionheart RT+pause, they needed to try and pull in the Inbred Engine cattle.

[Saint_Proverbius]

It was actually Dan Wood's idea.

It was Dan's idea, true. However, what Dan's idea was and what we've gotten so far are apples to oranges.

Dan wanted a unified document about the Fallout universe for future endevours with the Fallout license to not have all the plot holes, contradictions, and so on, that Fallout Tactics had.

Like MF said, it's largely become a walk through followed by MCA's (lack of) vision for the Fallout license.

[DarkUnderlord]

By dividing all/most of the work into small, manageable chunks (aiming for 1-2 weeks' load for people willing to sacrifice at least 4 hours a week), each one with a clear and precise definition of end results, and, say, creating a database of unfinished chunks, or just distributing them among forum visitors, we could accomplish a lot, I think.

Then again, this still requires a core team of programmers/designers to actually manage these chunks, which may take a very long time, considering how full of surprises and sudden course changes game development seems to be. And by setting smaller, less ambitious goals we might drive away some quite capable, yet unfortunately impatient individuals who would otherwise prove a great addition to the group. Which will greatly slow down gradual "brick by brick" kind of development, not to mention that members of the core team must maintain their integrity, sense of purpose, and the grand vision of their work, while keeping in mind that most of the results will not be seen after months and months of development.

I'd still say that at least trying to do something is better than wasting another five years.

OR, you could just use the Fallout editors to make a bunch of maps, whack 'em together, play with the scripting and wallah, your own Fallout. Good graphics, nice engine, great turn-based play for little or no effort (well, actually, mapping at the moment is a bit of a bitch, but I won't get into that). You just have to be a little careful of legal issues.

The rumuour is there's actually a bunch of people around here working on something like that. I'd say some of them even posted in this thread. Woudn't know who they are though, no sirree, I'm just going on rumours

[Saint_Proverbius]

The rumuour is there's actually a bunch of people around here working on something like that. I'd say some of them even posted in this thread. Woudn't know who they are though, no sirree, I'm just going on rumours

There's also a rumor that they're all a bunch of morons.

[DarkUnderlord]

There's also a rumor that they're all a bunch of morons.

True, but that's only being spread by the big grumpy guy who didn't want to join.

[ApTyp]

OR, you could just use the Fallout editors to make a bunch of maps, whack 'em together, play with the scripting and wallah, your own Fallout. Good graphics, nice engine, great turn-based play for little or no effort (well, actually, mapping at the moment is a bit of a bitch, but I won't get into that). You just have to be a little careful of legal issues.

Cool. Did you accomplish anything worthy of note since we talked last time on NMA forums? Or are you still waiting for simplified script compiler w/nice documentation and a functional map editor?

[DarkUnderlord]

Cool. Did you accomplish anything worthy of note since we talked last time on NMA forums? Or are you still waiting for simplified script compiler w/nice documentation and a functional map editor?

Well, a few of us... Sorry, a few of the people who are rumoured to be working on this, are apparently working on maps. Allegedly, they have their own forums now, all setup in their own little place in cyber-space. They've also apparently chosen a setting and are working on background stories for locations in the setting. The main plot-line/story has been sorted out to an extent, sorry, there should be an allegedly in there, and things are going along well. Slowly, but well.

Private Message me if you want a few more completely unsubstantiated rumours. Including the location of their rumoured forums.

[Insane-Lark]

Mr Carrot:
I wasn't joking. Our vision of Fallout universe is much bigger than that of the original designers.

My appologies, I read your post completely in the wrong tone. :oops: I think I'll shut up & just follow this thread now as I have nothing of use to add in either background or programming. Good luck on that.

[Saint_Proverbius]

As an off-topic side note : I don't think copy-protection can stop piracy. As soon as there is a decent cracked ISO, that is what spreads, not copies of legal discs. Then again, in 1997 piracy was more than now primarily a ripjob. You missed out on movies and/or sound/talking heads , but that takes away the fun of the game.

I don't think the effects of copy protection will be noticed that much. It works with games like the Sims that sell to total computer nitwits and have no clue that piracy even exists, but with Fallout, I'm not sure. The only thing that really really hurt sales was a lack of marketing, and the popularity of the game despite that is a testament to its quality.

Well, most anyone can get a cracked copy of a game if they know where to look. However, you don't really have to even look anywhere with Fallout or Fallout 2 because there's no protection at all. If you know a guy that has the CD, you can just pass that CD around and everyone gets a copy.

Back in 1997, most people were on 33.6k and 56k modems, so downloading 660MB wasn't exactly "fun". We're talking 3-4 days of nonstop downloading there for the full game. Even for a rip, we're talking two days straight downloading.

But like I said, with no protection at all, anyone can just borrow the CD, copy it or install the game, and they're good to go. No need to find a crack, no need to download an ISO or a rip on that slow ass modem.

[Mr Carrot]

Same thing killed System Shock 2.

[Guest]

Yay, for once I agree with what Saint Proverbius said. It's funny how you people manage to take any news article and rip it apart, completely ignoring anything positive said in it. Just fucking amazing. (no, this is not a compliment, although you often seem to make it your business to take insults like "obsessed, angry nerds" as such.)

[Rosh]

Yay, for once I agree with what Saint Proverbius said.

I can't put much credit in that, coming from "Guest".

It's funny how you people manage to take any news article and rip it apart, completely ignoring anything positive said in it. Just fucking amazing. (no, this is not a compliment, although you often seem to make it your business to take insults like "obsessed, angry nerds" as such.)

Hello? Someone get this twit a clue. No wonder they didn't bother registering. Now, for the benefit of the clueless newbie, whenever there is some "good" points given, it's usually moot given the rest or other points.

Okay, so Biship might like for BIS to be in a position to develop what he perceives to be a mediocre game in terms of sales (and, given his erronious belief that "chasing trends = $", I can't really put much faith in the rest of what he says).

You know what that means? Jack shit. Obviously you've not been listening to what Feargus and others have been saying. Even IF they managed to get to that point, I seriously doubt they have the talent to pull it off. Take a look at Torn, and the hatchet job of Fallout 2, where the basics being laid down by departing Troika were perhaps te defining point where it didn't turn into a complete easter-egg crapfest. Unless Bishop is put into a position to do something and is given full reign to do whatever (which is unlikely, since everything is being put into IE clones), his wants and cares mean basically nothing aside from finding potential employment across the street.

[Saint_Proverbius]

Okay, so Biship might like for BIS to be in a position to develop what he perceives to be a mediocre game in terms of sales (and, given his erronious belief that "chasing trends = $", I can't really put much faith in the rest of what he says).

I agree with Rosh here. I see the point he's trying to make.

Basically, he's saying that just because you follow the same design as something that makes money, doesn't mean you're going to make money with it. The opposite is also true, if not more true. Just because you don't follow the same design as something that did make money, doesn't mean you're not going to make money.

In a nut shell, this idea is the very bane of the PC market. It's what brought us such games as Throne of Darkness, Gorasul, and all the other Diablo clones and BG clones that have flopped. Now, if you're the company that made the game that sells well, or are associated with it, you stand a decent chance of making decent money with it. I'm pretty sure that IWD and IWD2 were riding the coat tails of Baldur's Gate and BG2's successes in the market, for example.

Most clones that are made by totally different companies just totally bomb on the arrival to shelves. How many successful Diablo or Diablo 2 clones have there been? None? How many successful Infinity Engine clones have there been? None? See, even though those games that are being cloned made vast fortunes, the developers and publishers that have followed that trend have bombed.

You know what that means? Jack shit. Obviously you've not been listening to what Feargus and others have been saying. Even IF they managed to get to that point, I seriously doubt they have the talent to pull it off. Take a look at Torn, and the hatchet job of Fallout 2, where the basics being laid down by departing Troika were perhaps te defining point where it didn't turn into a complete easter-egg crapfest. Unless Bishop is put into a position to do something and is given full reign to do whatever (which is unlikely, since everything is being put into IE clones), his wants and cares mean basically nothing aside from finding potential employment across the street.

This is why I'd like to see the details of Jefferson. However, if it's BG3 or IWD3 or a spin off of either.. Ugh. Disappointment.