Enlighten me...

[DarkUnderlord]

What good will bitching do?

So far? It's done a whole lot.

And how much of that was productive?

Hey, don't forget that Elara helped out with some non-bitching feedback! That did a lot of good too! Like the removal of the thong girls. Oh wait, no, that's wrong. Maybe they changed the logo? No, that wasn't it... Perhaps it was the story? No... wasn't that either... Oh I know, perhaps they added in another special character based on Elara?

Quite simply, bitching makes us feel all good inside. Just like you posting here. Same feeling, different method. In a way, it's positive reinforcement. You get your happy from whining about us, we get our happy from whining about FO:BOS. All in all, it works out quite nicely.

[Jimbo san]

Jimbo san did you come up with this CONJECTURE on your own, or did you read this on some forum? At DAC? Or did you have a pleasent lunch with the heads of ViVendi and Interplay? Do they "tip" well?

I wish. Nope, I'm just another Fallout fan, just (presumably) like you. I was just wondering why you're all slating this game before it's even released. It's a bit like a man demanding that his wife have an abortion because his child might be ugly. A lot of fans have been petitioning for this game to be terminated because it might be crap. Give it a chance...

Quite simply, bitching makes us feel all good inside. Just like you posting here. Same feeling, different method. In a way, it's positive reinforcement. You get your happy from whining about us, we get our happy from whining about FO:BOS. All in all, it works out quite nicely.

The circle of life... except I'm not bitching. I was asking why you're all bitching. If somebody gave me a more convincing answer I might be forced to concede, but no, not yet...

[Saint_Proverbius]

The circle of life... except I'm not bitching. I was asking why you're all bitching. If somebody gave me a more convincing answer I might be forced to concede, but no, not yet...

Except in this case, we've seen pictures of the child, so we already know it's ugly. We have interviews and previews that show that the child is also retarded. We have a nice movie that shows us that the child is both ugly, retarded, and also a rapist - all in advance.

[Jimbo san]

Touche. Except...

Except in this case, we've seen pictures of the child, so we already know it's ugly.

That's subjective.

We have interviews and previews that show that the child is also retarded.

Also subjective.

We have a nice movie that shows us that the child is both ugly, retarded, and also a rapist - all in advance.

I think you can see where I'm going with this.

Fallout 3, which is what most people want.

And I do want to raise an issue again that I raised earlier. If a new, proper Fallout game was made, say Fallout 3, would it be able to please the fans? I don't think so. Some will want to see it in 3D, some will want it to be absolutely traditional. Some might want it to have the freefrom gameplay of Morrowind, some might want a more 50's retro feel. They won't be able to please everyone.

The point is - Fallout is, at least as far as the videogame industry is concerned, an old game. So, when you bring out the shiny new sequel, will what is left of the hardcore audience really be your target, or will you try and adapt the game to concentrate on a new market and garnering new fans to the series? I'd place my bet on the latter. It looks like they have too.

[Mutateman]

Touche. Except...

Except in this case, we've seen pictures of the child, so we already know it's ugly.

That's subjective.

We have interviews and previews that show that the child is also retarded.

Also subjective.

We have a nice movie that shows us that the child is both ugly, retarded, and also a rapist - all in advance.

I think you can see where I'm going with this.

Fallout 3, which is what most people want.

And I do want to raise an issue again that I raised earlier. If a new, proper Fallout game was made, say Fallout 3, would it be able to please the fans? I don't think so. Some will want to see it in 3D, some will want it to be absolutely traditional. Some might want it to have the freefrom gameplay of Morrowind, some might want a more 50's retro feel. They won't be able to please everyone.

First of all, FO:BOS isn't a 'proper' Fallout. It is a spinoff. From what I have seen, to date, of the game, and read in several reviews, it seems to have none of the elements that made Fallout and Fallout 2 great (not just good, but great) games.

You can tell me, "Wait, and play it first, before you judge it.", but would you buy a car based only on what the salesman told you? Would you go to see a movie based only on its title? I should hope not.

I don't consider myself a hardcore fan. I'm simply a consumer who has spent some time researching a product that I might purchase in the near future. Nothing I have seen or read has given me any reason to purchase this product.

Fallout's feel IS 50's retro (actually 50's pulp, which is based on an even older feel, but I digress), so I WOULDN'T be happy with a game that eleminated this. The freeform gameplay of FALLOUT is what I am after, not of Morrowind. Graphically, the game can be 3D and still look 'traditional', so I don't see that as a major complaint, for me personally.

The 50's feel, the isometric, suedo-3D view, the open-ended gameplay, the interesting plot and storyline are all part of what made Fallout a great game. If these things are gone, then, no, I cannot see any Fallout fan buying/enjoying a game that deviated so far from the core of what Fallout is and was.

The point is - Fallout is, at least as far as the videogame industry is concerned, an old game. So, when you bring out the shiny new sequel, will what is left of the hardcore audience really be your target, or will you try and adapt the game to concentrate on a new market and garnering new fans to the series? I'd place my bet on the latter. It looks like they have too.

It seems incredibly stupid for anyone to try and bring in a new audience by pushing away the old. It's like throwing away almost guaranteed sales. That isn't a profitable way to do business.


Of course, this is all subjective.

[Dark Sorrow]

I really have to laugh at this "Don't bite the hand that feeds you" nonsense, as if playing Interplay games is some kind of privilage.

Since we support interplay by given them OUR money it's more of a case of INTERPLAY BITING the hands that feed IT.

And I also want to reassure people not to worry about the struggling pc, since the personal computer install base is larger then all three current consoles combined. And unlike developing games on a console you don't have to pay licencing fees to make a game for the PC.

[Mad Max RW]

I really have to laugh at this "Don't bite the hand that feeds you" nonsense, as if playing Interplay games is some kind of privilage.

That's what happens when you start putting game developers on fucking pedestals. They're regular working jerks just like everybody else. To me the people at Black Isle are no different than the people cooking burgers at Mcdonalds. If your order comes half frozen and full of maggots you don't say "Well, they tried hard and that's what counts." You yell at those sons of bitches for selling you garbage and keep yelling and breaking things then attack with your secret dinosaur army equipped with mobile nuke launchers and really big spike things. I think that about sums up the Fallout community. Maybe 4too can clear it up for me.

There's also the whole thing about games being art and developers the artists, but Interplay makes the best argument against it.

[4too]

""Retarded?"" I quess Saint_Proverbius thinks that's as close as FO:BOS will get to SPECIAL. Was that a "short bus" in the screen shots, or an RV? Is this Interplay's plan to ""Main stream"" FO?


But seriously,


Jimbo san:

....I'm just another Fallout fan, just (presumably) like you. I was just wondering why you're all slating this game before it's even released.....

Seeing the first screen shots, and until learning that BG:DA was the engine and game play template, my first "simile" evoked chamber pots turned on unsuspsecting console players. Now I'm not certian what Chuck Cuevas has brewing in the pot.


Seeing the first screen shots, and knowing how well some console factories
present their titles on Macro-flash sites. I presumed a pack of slackers were drooling out a half masticated product. Wrong image, the FO:BOS site implies a serious effort of prestidigitation. Smoke,mirrors, and spin to relate FO:BOS as 'kin' of FO. Maybe the final product will be fully 'digested'. Whether it fully metabolizes into the commercial body, the entertainment psyche,
and shines well oiled and "buff" in dynamic tension, or passes on to the water treatment plant, is up to the crew at Interplay.

Could I be more positive than this? Yes, but, I've been "profiled", radicalized, not by you Jimbo san, you sense my coy flirtation with the entertainment industry's realities.


There are Partisans of Interplay that have all the social skills that are
demonstrated at DAC. I WON'T tell you how to digest that, spit it out if you like. If it cuts both ways, we might have a (bloody) gasp of this 'schtick'.

I've been "profiled" as DAC excriment, for daring to
opinion that FO:BOS could be 'mediocre' given Interplay's "mediocre"
quality assurrance in the PC titles I "OWN". Don't be flipant and tell me to take my "CD's" and go home. Don't BLOW ME OFF and say I have no right to critque past performance, maybe,.... after I vent, my agenda could be to ENCOURAGE EXCELLENCE IN THE FUTURE.

Tough love.

But, ah, I'm up on the soap box again, Jimbo san, sorry if you're 'down range'. Ah, here's a kleenex. Glad you're here to help me work this out.

Brewin'....

That FO:BOS site, it reminds me of what's called "strawberry shnapps"
back in the "Valley". The closest the moonshine has got'ten to strawberries maybe the jelly in the frig'. The closest FO:BOS may get to FO is,....... the FO in the title. Now the "shine" could still be good and burn with that cool blue flame. FO:BOS could intoxicate the console crowd with over the top, third person shootin', and "shine" not on batteries 'ripped'
from FO, but on it's own FUSION power.

It all depends on what Chuck's brewin'in that pot...........



4too

Clear as 'Everclear' MM RW?

4too 2

[Mad Max RW]

Haha, sure

I met only one other person whose posts made me as dizzy as yours. What's scary is I actually understand them. This forum would probably explode if it had any more 4toos.

[DarkUnderlord]

Touche. Except...

Except in this case, we've seen pictures of the child, so we already know it's ugly.

That's subjective.

I'll stop you right there. Let's say the game is released, and I play the game, and to me, the game is crap. That's subjective.

... but what if you play the game and you say it's great? That's subjective. Nice way to shoot yourself in the head there.

The circle of life... except I'm not bitching. I was asking why you're all bitching. If somebody gave me a more convincing answer I might be forced to concede, but no, not yet...

Now are you truly saying that a game full of thong girls is Fallout to you? You're no longer here to find out why we're bitching. You know why we're bitching. You're here because your argument is now "Interplay will never make a decent Fallout game. So why not give up and accept what you're being fed?"

Correct?

If a new, proper Fallout game was made, say Fallout 3, would it be able to please the fans? I don't think so. Some will want to see it in 3D, some will want it to be absolutely traditional. Some might want it to have the freefrom gameplay of Morrowind, some might want a more 50's retro feel. They won't be able to please everyone.

Remember Fallout 2? Did that please everyone? Nope. Do Fallout fans like it though? Yep. I play Fallout 2 and I quite happily enjoy some of the quests and information about the world found within the game. There are things I don't agree with, and I say why I don't agree with them. But I still bought it, and I still enjoy it. I still consider it a decent Fallout game, despite its flaws. Are you saying BiS are incapable of making something like that? Something that on a whole, can be accepted, but something that people might find a few flaws with here and there?

The point is - Fallout is, at least as far as the videogame industry is concerned, an old game.

Wolfenstein 3D was older, and look what they did to that. Made a shitty console out of it? Nope, same old same old. You escape from a castle and shoot Nazi's. They added a lot more story, but nothing that wasn't already hinted at in the original (occult, weird tests etc...). Return to Castle Wolfenstein sold really well too... Better yet, they kept it as an FPS. They didn't change it's basic gameplay in any way.

So, when you bring out the shiny new sequel, will what is left of the hardcore audience really be your target, or will you try and adapt the game to concentrate on a new market and garnering new fans to the series?

How will making this Fallout action game that roots the game world garner new fans to the series? Wouldn't a Fallout 3 that actually fit the setting accomplish the same task?

I'd place my bet on the latter. It looks like they have too.

Of course they think they have to. They're trying to make money quick. They don't have the finances to spend 3 years making a Fallout RPG. If Van Bueren is FO3, Interplay may not survive long enough for it to see the light of day.

Now, going by the serious amount of feedback this game has received, I'd say the Fallout license, the FALLOUT - RPG game is still wanted. Have you checked any other forums recently? Even non-fallout ones? Quite a few I've seen have a thread or two about "Hey, anyone heard about that new Fallout game?". Most of the posts aren't in favour of the game either. I'd say that's a pretty strong suggestion that a fair bit of the "old fan base" is still out there.

On the other hand, isn't your opinion subjective? What evidence do you have that this Fallout console game is the way of the future? That Fallout fans will have no choice but to accept this crap? You do realise the FO:BOS forums on the Interplay board were shut-down due to critiscism of the game, don't you? For every post that went in there that was a good thing about the game, there were a dozen more attacking the game.

That doesn't indicate a strong selling title. It certainly doesn't indicate that this is the way of the future. Besides, that's subjective.

[Zbyram]

Now are you truly saying that a game full of thong girls is Fallout to you? You're no longer here to find out why we're bitching. You know why we're bitching. You're here because your argument is now "Interplay will never make a decent Fallout game. So why not give up and accept what you're being fed?"

That sounds exactly like Matrix Reloaded.

[Red]

Well, not really. He seeked the the Oracle simply because he was clueless. And he leaves just as clueless - but this time with a mission...

[Jimbo san]

Let's say the game is released, and I play the game, and to me, the game is crap. That's subjective.

... but what if you play the game and you say it's great? That's subjective. Nice way to shoot yourself in the head there.

I'm pointing out that there's a difference between opinion and fact.

You're here because your argument is now "Interplay will never make a decent Fallout game. So why not give up and accept what you're being fed?"

Correct?

No. I'm pointing out that I don't think that we're the priority market for this game.

Remember Fallout 2? Did that please everyone? Nope. Do Fallout fans like it though? Yep. I play Fallout 2 and I quite happily enjoy some of the quests and information about the world found within the game. There are things I don't agree with, and I say why I don't agree with them. But I still bought it, and I still enjoy it. I still consider it a decent Fallout game, despite its flaws. Are you saying BiS are incapable of making something like that? Something that on a whole, can be accepted, but something that people might find a few flaws with here and there?

And there will be Fallout fans who will enjoy FOBOS, the same as there were Fallout fans who enjoyed Fallout: Tactics.

How will making this Fallout action game that roots the game world garner new fans to the series? Wouldn't a Fallout 3 that actually fit the setting accomplish the same task?

Now, going by the serious amount of feedback this game has received, I'd say the Fallout license, the FALLOUT - RPG game is still wanted. Have you checked any other forums recently? Even non-fallout ones? Quite a few I've seen have a thread or two about "Hey, anyone heard about that new Fallout game?". Most of the posts aren't in favour of the game either. I'd say that's a pretty strong suggestion that a fair bit of the "old fan base" is still out there.

But are there enough fans out there to guaruantee that a "real" Fallout game would manage to actually break even, let alone make a profit?

You do realise the FO:BOS forums on the Interplay board were shut-down due to critiscism of the game, don't you? For every post that went in there that was a good thing about the game, there were a dozen more attacking the game.

"Criticism"? You mean flaming?

Besides, that's subjective.

And so is that.

[atoga]

You know Jimbo, I think I can sum all of your arguments up by saying: there's both good taste and bad taste. Both are relative and by no means black and white, but being an intelligent, well-informed person, I think I can define who has good taste and who has bad taste (myself in the former group). Yes, that's right, I'm in the right and they're in the wrong for the most part. An ignorant decision maker is worse than a well-informed decision maker because the well informed one knows what he's doing. You can argue against this however you want, but it'll essentially boil down to that - accept it if you want, or deny it if it makes you feel better.

If you're just going to poke holes in the method's we've used to scorn FOBOS, what you're doing is entirely pointless. All of this is painfully one-sided and typical of the uninitiated Fallout fans who are for FOBOS. DAC posters are mainly debating the principles and taste involved in making the game, not money and logistics. A 'real' Fallout game is as likely to break even, given the sales. Do a little market research.

[Rosh]

By far the most ironic thing about this whole thread would be the title of it.

[388]

I'm pointing out that there's a difference between opinion and fact.

And the fact is, if the majority of subjective opinions are that FO:BoS is a heap of pap, it will be a failure. Being successful or not is factual, but opinion determines that. What the hell are you getting at?

No. I'm pointing out that I don't think that we're the priority market for this game.

I was about too agree with you, there, but then I thought about what the 'F' stood for in "FO:BoS". Apperantly, it means 'Fallout'. Unfortunately, then, "we" would be the priority market, seeing as how "we're" the people who know what "Fallout" means. I subjectively think you're stupid.

And there will be Fallout fans who will enjoy FOBOS, the same as there were Fallout fans who enjoyed Fallout: Tactics.

That's a great deal, but what the fuck is it's significants? That the number of people who liked Tactics couldn't keep it from tanking in any way, so the number of people who might like FO:BoS is equily negligable?

But are there enough fans out there to guaruantee that a "real" Fallout game would manage to actually break even, let alone make a profit?

Yes, you tit. This is a fact.

I'd like to know, though, why every "pro-FO:BoS" person uses the same arguement. Is there a checklist? "Ignore unfeasability of arguing that they haven't played it, be retarded". I don't get it.

[Dan]

but then I thought about what the 'F' stood for in "FO:BoS". Apperantly, it means 'Fallout'.

Well, I think the 'F' actually means Fall and the 'O' means out, and then you get the Fallout, but never mind...

[DarkUnderlord]

No. I'm pointing out that I don't think that we're the priority market for this game.

I was about too agree with you, there, but then I thought about what the 'F' stood for in "FO:BoS". Apperantly, it means 'Fallout'. Unfortunately, then, "we" would be the priority market, seeing as how "we're" the people who know what "Fallout" means. I subjectively think you're stupid.

There's also the bit where Chucky opens up every chat, dev update and interview with "Dear Fallout fans".

[Fusion Cola]

The 50's feel, the isometric, suedo-3D view, the open-ended gameplay, the interesting plot and storyline are all part of what made Fallout a great game. If these things are gone, then, no, I cannot see any Fallout fan buying/enjoying a game that deviated so far from the core of what Fallout is and was.

I have nothing overly enlightening to add to this thread, but I must say that I do agree with the above point. Like so many people have pointed out in this thread, just because it has Fallout in the title doesn't make it a Fallout game. The best comparison I can come up with is when NES used to make movie-based games, and came up with utterly unrelated crap, like Back to the Future.

Like I said, nothing enlightening here.

[Ghetto Goose]

No more enlightening? Then we're done here.