Bethesda can make any game about Fallout like they did with Falliout 3, a prequal to the orignal Fallout. They sold the rights to a company to make a Fallout MMO by 2012 or another company that's more successful will make it. What do you think about a Fallout MMO or another Fallout game like Fallout 3? I am looking forward to a Fallout MMo because I liked Fallout and Fallout 2 but if it's like Fallout 3 I will love it because first person games are my forte. But I want to hear what other people think about Bethesda owning Fallout rights and a Fallout MMO

They don't just own it they PWNed it with FO3.
They have earned the right to call it theirs.

Yep. Interplay was the original owner of the series. In 2004 they licensed the rights to FO3, 4, & 5 to Bethesda. Later Bethesda purchased the license outright, but Interplay held on to the MMO rights - although there are some stipulations.

As for your questions, I think getting a hold of the entire license made a lot of sense from a business point of view. I'm less enthused about Interplay's MMO. The setting is partially built around the concept of desolation, but I don't see how they can preserve that in an MMO while maintaining the necessary critical mass of players and player interaction. I'm certainly not going to pass judgment until I've seen the game, and if they can pull it off more power to them - but I remain skeptical.

Jimi Hendrix : All Along the Watchtower :: Bethesda : Fallout

If you want to hear what other people think, the people who actually played Fallout 1 & 2 pretty much hate Bethesda and Interplay for selling to Bethesda because the game is not Fallout 3, but a spin-off series using Oblivion.

The canonical lore has been tampered with and disgraced to some, the ending was crap to most.

Most people enjoyed the game play. They did something inovative.

Is it Fallout? No. It's Oblivion with guns, with someone who had the cliff notes of Fallout 1 & 2 doing the Storyline.

There was so much diversity in California, and F 1/2. Why is it, that the Capitol Wasteland is festered with all of Californias factions? Where the East Coast just not cool enough to have thier own paramilitary and ex-goverment forces?

As an old F1/F2 nut, I agree with this.

Translation: Those viewing Fallout and Fallout 2 with rose colored nostalgia glasses are ticked off because Bethesda didn't bow to their every whim. Also not enough six and pop culture references.

Those people that actually played Fallout and Fallout 2 and enjoyed them for what they were typically are damn impressed with how much respect Bethesda has treated the property.




That's funny. Lore being tampered with. Only thing Bethesda did was expand the lore and fill in some gaps.




Agreed.



Fallout 3 is Oblivion with Guns in the same way Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura is Fallout 2 with Magic. Or Planescape: Torment is Baulder's Gate.



The Enclave has a vested interest in reclaiming the seat of power of the United States.
Also the Brotherhood of Steel has long been established as moving eastward.

Then there's the fact that not including either groups would have had fans up in arms about Fallout 3 being "completely different" from anything before. If the Brotherhood hadn't been in the game, fans would have screamed for them to be put there.

Beyond the simple fact that it shares the same engine, perspective, I see very little resemblance to Oblivion, well, fast travel works the same too, but that's about all. Calling it Oblivion with guns is about as absurd as calling Neverwinter Nights "Fallout with magic".

And Fallout 3 seems pretty consistent with Fallout lore from my understanding, yes, there are changes, but most of them come with an explanation and expand on previous lore and explain some of the new things in the game. All in all, it's about as Fallout as I ever dared expect from Bethesda, in fact maybe even more so.

And those fans of the original games who claim to hate it? More than likely, they're just enraged because Bethesda did not make it exactly like what they had hoped for, that's fine, they don't have to like it, they have no obligation to like a game just because it bears the name of "fallout", just as Bethesda has no obligation to make this game called "Fallout" into what these fans demand it to be, but unfortunately for them, the fact that Bethesda now owns the license, and Fallout 3's success, means that we can expect to see many more Fallout games from Bethesda in the future. Recently I have been playing both Fallout 1 and Fallout 3 (not Fallout 2 yet, I'll get to that when I'm done with Fallout 1, I'm sure.) and I like both games, though they differ a lot in gameplay, and I hope for the best from whatever Bethesda does with the Fallout franchise next, certainly, Fallout 3 isn't a perfect game, it has its flaws, and many areas have room for improvement, just like every other game I've played, just as even Fallout 1 and 2 are, though some fans might blind themselves to them, but if a perfect game were ever made, then there would be no point to making sequels to it, since there would be no way the next game could ever do better anyway.

And the right to sell (but make no changes to) the old games.

Seriously it's just video games and I wish those epople would just stop it. They need to play Fallout 1 & 2 again or something or make REASONABLE complaints. Maybe they could channel the effort they use to complain into making a plug-in for Fallout 3 to change whatever problems they have? Whatever flaws Bethesda has they are awesome about making their games modder friendly.

It's just video games, people. They may be fun and interesting, but in the end they're just video games.

This thread seems like a blatant flame bait just as fanatics about FO1-2 post similar inflammatory threads. I see little point in this besides drawing out arguments between the two camps in yet another flame war that neither side will concede to another and be content to play name tag games with.

I mean really, if a poster disagrees with the original OP's message it will simply result in their flaming. I disagree with many of the changes in FO3 and it's ending. It was a good game, but nothing more then that with a few tuggings to an older game of another age. The two types are so radically different that it should be expected that people see FO3 going in to the wrong/right way. Besides removing the RPG elements FO3 is about as different as you can get from the first 2 gameplay wise.

But yes, the OP is correct that Bethesda owns the Fallout series. The OP is not correct however that people do not have a right to object to the way the FO series is going under Bethesda's guidance, even if some people go to far with their objections and how FO "should" be since the ideal version of people's FO will be quite varying and skewed resulting in no correct version except that which panders to the masses.

Edit: A FO MMO makes no sense IMO, how to balance an economy that must have a constant stream of resources when the very setting stresses lack of resources and daily survival is going to break the immersion over a knee. Plus the fact of playing with a lot of other people in the Wastelands makes it much less intense. I feel a FO MMO cannot retain what makes FO successful, it's atmosphere and gameplay. Especially how the S.P.E.C.I.A.L system would work online would be quite interesting. A limited economy would be much better, but poor for gameplay.

I don't personally like the way FO3 was taken with the FPS view, it is grossly immersing however. FO1-2's combat did svck hardcoe with multiple combatants, but FPS just feels wrong regardless to me. I wish the tensions between BOS and the Outcasts were more played out with much more grey in morality. I don't mind a paladin like BOS if the original BOS was also shown as they were, self-concerned and self-indulgent. The Super Mutants felt wrong in the case of having no overlaying structure or leadership, they might be strong but they're legendarily stupid without untainted dipped victims leading the way so I cannot see how they're such a large threat with organized BOS and Enclave forces milling about especially since the Vats for the Super Mutants are emptied of FEV.

The storyline just has a lot of niggling story holes that need to be filled, FO2 had an ugly variety of them as well. I'd just like to see more motivation behind each faction in the next game and more fleshing out. All of the factions are quite 1 faced in their complexity and defeating them leaves little to think about nor care about since they'll be back in a day or 2.

*More fleshed out story/motivations.
*Bigger towns. (Megaton with about twice the size being the upper most limit IMO for a properly sized town, the other towns are more like families then towns in size)
*Better ending(s) with preferably descriptions of what happens in the lands.

Well, I'm new to these forums, but I really don't think Bethesda deserves all the crap they get from diehard Fallout fans. I never played the first two Fallout games, but I understand to a point where the fans are coming from. If a developer I had never heard of bought the rights for the next Elder Scrolls game and completely screwed it up, I would be understandably miffed. However, Bethesda has revitalized interest in the Fallout franchise, and did a great job of bringing it into the next generation of gaming. So, yeah, I would say Bethesda OWNS the Fallout series.
I think turn-based games are a thing of the past, but obviously there are people who do not share my opinion, and I respect that.

If a games company released a top down, text ridden, dotted line on a map RPG for modern computers in this day and age ide be pretty pee'd off. Dont get me wrong i loved FO1 and FO2, but you cant expect games to stay like that forever, people demand more and more from there computers (and why not the ammount of money they cost). Im not a big lore man, i couldnt care less if theres a few things that dont make sense (i didnt spot any, because i didnt look for any), a good game is a good game.

Bethesda have put Fallout on the map, theyve given a great series of games the acknowledgment theyve always deserved, which i dont think Interplay could have done.

As for the MMO....eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!! OoOoO its a "Whose got the highest " competition, cant see it working at all. Unless the world is HUUUUUUUUUUGEEE and has limited human players

Got any evidence for this? Because all the major Fallout fansites pretty much hate Bethesda for ruining what was once a great series.

And the \"you\'re just looking through rose tinted glasses\" accusation is getting pretty old. Give it a rest.



The problem is, the more money and time a company has to spend on graphics and expensive voice acting the less goes into making the game good. Bloom and particle effects aren\'t needed to make an enjoyable gameplay experience.



Fallout was on the map long before Bethesda got its hands on it - it\'s considered one of the best PC RPGs of all time. Just because ten-year old console kids didn\'t know about it before it came out for the XBOX doesn\'t mean it wasn\'t \"on the map.\"

ummm I always find it funny how people like to use "All people" or "Most people" have a certain opinion just because its theirs.

Of course if you go to a certain site it looks like everyone hates Bethesda for making Fallout 3. Also these people will tend to be more vocal than other old fallout fans who are enjoying the game. They'd have no reason to join the forums!

I recall someone made a poll here which asked "Fallout Vets" to vote how they liked the game and the overwhelming majority voted positively.

Learn to read. I made no claims, I simply challenged his unsupported claim that "Those people that actually played Fallout and Fallout 2 and enjoyed them for what they were typically are damn impressed with how much respect Bethesda has treated the property."



If I ran a poll at a Republican rally about who would make a better President, what do you think the results of the poll would be?

Ok, you walk up to someone in the street today aged 12 - 30 in the street today and ask if theyve heard about a Fallout game, the answer "YES I HAVE" is alot more probable than it was a couple of years ago. Hence it has been put in public eye and is now accessible to everyone ("On the map").

I dont think the gameplay has been hindered at all, its just different to the originals, which for me were a right ball ache to get into. I dont see how liking the originals AND FO3 is seen as such a heinous crime. Its like fans of 1 & 2 want to keep "their" game all to themselves, and if the normal plebs start playing it it becomes cliche and something to be hated.

[EDIT]

Also about the graphics/gameplay, you cannot release a crappy looking game nowadays. I myself couldnt care less about how a game looks aslong as its playable and enjoyable but todays market needs games to look good so i think theyve done a pretty good job of turning a dated looking game into something that is acceptable to todays market whilst still keeping alot of content (yes maybe not as much, but this content can be heard and seen, not just read) and good play value.

Considering I played only the first game at 2003 than in 1997, I'm pretty indifferent if the series just stayed in limbo forever. Though I actually supported the idea that Beth owns and are making the sequel for the series, and I know it's not going to be the same as the old games, it annoyed me that they took local West Coast aspects and transferred it far east. The personal vision thing was far more important than fanservice.

Fallout 3 is a SEQUEL, not a PREQUEL. Bethesda didn't sell the rights. They bought it all from Interplay, which kept the rights ot a Fallout MMO to 1012. If they don't get it done by then, Bethesda will take those rights as well.

I own and played Fallout 1, 2, Brotherhood of Steel as well as the Baldurs Gate Games of that same era.
I used to post on the Black Isle Forums too.

I think Bethesda Softworks is one of the last best hopes of Comp Gaming.
I've seen those other companys literally destroy most games they have gotten their hands on.
Look at the decay of Dungeons and Dragons after Wizards of the Coast got their greedy hands on it as an example.

The fellas from the makers of Fallout and Baldur's Gate used to actively help us mod these games. I am glad they kept the old values.

I am glad gamesas got the rights, and not some draconian console centered outfit.

Fallout should have ended with Black Isle.

i agree i think bethesda did a good job and IMO i think they did better then interplay.

If this thread degenerates into a flame fest its likely to get locked so lets keep it civil people.

Let me just start by saying that I am an old school Fallout 1 and 2 fan. I knew from the minute Bethesda bought the series that it wouldnt be an isometric RPG that they would release.
To expect them to is just stupid because thats not what they do, not what they are strong at.

Gameplay wise Fallout 3 is solid. Its a VAST VAST VAST improvement over Oblivion. There are few bugs and none of them are game breaking.
The atmosphere of the game is really immersive.

The only drawback here is the stupid VATS system. Its pretty useless. By taking the effort to put it in as a nod - a pathetic nod - to TBS fans leaves me wondering why they didnt just go the whole way and make all combat TBS based...

The graphics are astounding. I run OB at High on my comp and I run F3 at Low and F3 looks MUCH better. I can only imagine if I had a comp that could run at at high how amazing it would look.

Heres where I come to the bad parts of Fallout 3.

I dont think it particularily contradicts anything of the established lore anywhere just compliments it a lot. I dont see the gripes here.


Um my biggest gripe with F3 is the writing. Its terrible. Just terrible.

There is no way around it. The F3 writers were dribbling boobs. I could sit here all day point out every line of bad writing, bad spelling, bad grammar but I wont. It would take too long.
So i will give some examples.



Then theres the Kobiyashi Maru no win scenario that bethesda used in the game. Now no win scenarios are fun, and nice to have but the problem is Bethesda used them again and again and again in this game. I lost count of how many times the supposed "good" option resulted in deaths or otherwise negative effects.
It loses its effectiveness having been so used and just gets boring.

Then the various plot holes and nonsensical happenings that occur while playing. Primarily playing the Main Quest.


Thats just the start. It goes on.


And it goes on and on and on. Plot hole after plot hole. One thing after another that makes you just go *facepalm* that are just blatant examples of poor writing.

Everything else in the game is great. Well the lack of six, relationships, and homosixuality which was in the previous ventures was dissapointing. But I seriously love this game.

Im just waiting for the GECK to get to or to help someone else re-write whole portions of the game that MAKE NO SENSE. *ahem*

I think on the whole Bethesda's first outing with the Fallout series they did quite well. They could have done better but hopefully they will fix whats wrong.

Im speaking as a long time Fallout fan too.

[quote name='Ganoes Paran' date='Nov 30 2008, 05:21 PM' post='13336151']
If this thread degenerates into a flame fest its likely to get locked so lets keep it civil people.

Let me just start by saying that I am an old school Fallout 1 and 2 fan. I knew from the minute Bethesda bought the series that it wouldnt be an isometric RPG that they would release.
To expect them to is just stupid because thats not what they do, not what they are strong at.

Gameplay wise Fallout 3 is solid. Its a VAST VAST VAST improvement over Oblivion. There are few bugs and none of them are game breaking.
The atmosphere of the game is really immersive.

The only drawback here is the stupid VATS system. Its pretty useless. By taking the effort to put it in as a nod - a pathetic nod - to TBS fans leaves me wondering why they didnt just go the whole way and make all combat TBS based...

The graphics are astounding. I run OB at High on my comp and I run F3 at Low and F3 looks MUCH better. I can only imagine if I had a comp that could run at at high how amazing it would look.

Heres where I come to the bad parts of Fallout 3.

I dont think it particularily contradicts anything of the established lore anywhere just compliments it a lot. I dont see the gripes here.


Um my biggest gripe with F3 is the writing. Its terrible. Just terrible.

There is no way around it. The F3 writers were dribbling boobs. I could sit here all day point out every line of bad writing, bad spelling, bad grammar but I wont. It would take too long.
So i will give some examples.



Then theres the Kobiyashi Maru no win scenario that bethesda used in the game. Now no win scenarios are fun, and nice to have but the problem is Bethesda used them again and again and again in this game. I lost count of how many times the supposed "good" option resulted in deaths or otherwise negative effects.
It loses its effectiveness having been so used and just gets boring.

Then the various plot holes and nonsensical happenings that occur while playing. Primarily playing the Main Quest.


Thats just the start. It goes on.


And it goes on and on and on. Plot hole after plot hole. One thing after another that makes you just go *facepalm* that are just blatant examples of poor writing.

Everything else in the game is great. Well the lack of six, relationships, and homosixuality which was in the previous ventures was dissapointing. But I seriously love this game.

Im just waiting for the GECK to get to or to help someone else re-write whole portions of the game that MAKE NO SENSE. *ahem*

I think on the whole Bethesda's first outing with the Fallout series they did quite well. They could have done better but hopefully they will fix whats wrong.

Im speaking as a long time Fallout fan too.
[/quote





Still Fallout 3 is still a great game and Fallout 1and Fallout 2 are great aswell. im still a huge fan of Fallout 1 and 2

Way to generalize. I played FO1 and 2, so has many of my friends. All of us enjoyed FO3 and feel it very worthy as a successor.

I am sorry to say, but it seems like its mostly the louder internet boardwarriors who proclaim the game as "non-FO3".



Because wow, a series that has lay dorment for so many years and gets started up again could never make changes to an old design vision. How horrible. I honestly doubt a mass amount of players keep tabs of everything of the old lore and are probably more than happy with the references and story.



Actually in some way it falls in line with FO1 and FO2 with that. To many of us FO was always about the journey, not like in other games a mad dash for a grand finale super cutscene.



Maybe not to you, but to others it definetly is.

A lot of the issues seems to be just nitpicking after minor things, which sometimes is either in the eye of the beholder or just things that had to go that way to get an enjoyable game out the door instead of endless delays.