Hilarious. Although I guess more people playing Fallout and Fallout 2 could cause harm when they see Fallout 3.

My guess is the problem is they branded it as the Fallout "Trilogy", and to most people that implies 1, 2 and 3. In the end, Interplay was tasked with running their plans by Bethesda and they did not. Interplay is 100% at fault here for not living up to their end of the contract in any aspect. It almost seems shady, like a last ditch effort to get something out of the name.

So, I guess the people that bought it thinking that should sue. Hard to see how Bethesda would be hard done by - hurrah for stupid customers not reading a box though. Probably a bit miffed that it sold so well. Funny that you think this classes as shady though, heh.

Yeah, turns out there are actually two lawsuits:

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Ausir/Bethesda_vs._Interplay_-_more_detail

Odd but makes sense though... I've never bought the Starcraft battlechest, but the box has what at first looks like four titles in it, only its the Starcraft and Broodwar covers, printed twice; I'm pretty sure there's just the two in the box, but its so common to depict bundles that way that anyone who didn't know there was just the two, would at first assume there were four.

I never bought it, so maybe I'm wrong? Fallout trilogy [to me] always meant FO1, 2 & Tactics, but I can totally see that most would assume it was 1, 2 & 3.

gamesas will probably let GOG distribute them as usual, only thing would change is Zenimax getting their share instead of interplay. It would be dumb to remove them from distribution (both retail & online) seeing as they're selling pretty well.

Not sure, it's very much possible that the games would end up in an ownership limbo, with neither company having full rights to distribute them (e.g. Bethesda owning the content and Interplay owning the code). If you don't have the original Fallouts already, better get them while you still can.

You never know...

There was this man that invented an image scanner that looked like a rolling pin, you'd roll it across a book, and it scanned the pages ~worked beautifully.
It was bought outright by a large scanner company ~and promptly buried, because they'd invested heavily in flat-bed scanner technology. They wanted that idea of his to be gone.

Reminds me of the supposed car engine that ran on water which the auto industry with the help of the bush administration seized from its inventor.



I think the original retail Fallout 2 is in my basemant somewhere, unless its fate follows Fallout 1's (and a bunch of other old games) and got thrown out during a flood several years ago...

Sad times, nature washes my childhood memories away. :shakehead:

I think it's interesting, reading this thread, how gamers view dev studios and publishers as big bad monsters, or as flagging wimps being pushed around. It's all business, and if you can't be seen keeping a handle on your IP as a business then you may as well stop doing... uh... business. The name of Interplay is locked into my brain in unison with the titles of some classic games, but I don't have any loyalty to the Interplay brand, nor to Bethesda. I just play games, based on reviews, previews, trailers, demos, advertising, word of mouth, if I think they svck I'll trade 'em for better. If Bethesda doesn't protect the IP with all the gusto of a drunk declaring who is best friends are... pssh... flagging wimps can take advantage.

Absurdly I raised a brow at reading that Bethesda are not seeking monetary damages! Just the legal fees. My first thought was 'Why not?' Might be due to negative consumer opinion of Beth should it be made public that Beth the First rate shot the crap out of the sinking Interplay frigate. Some here seem to be getting all pent up about a company protecting itself from a legitimate, back-riding competitor with their 'money grabbing monster, no more Beth games on my shelves etc' statements.

If Beth can't right hook a large company for taking the p iss over granted license agreements, how would a couple of publishing houses feel about releasing some Fallout novels, or a local chemist releasing some Vault-Boy toothburshes, or online nerds peddling... uh... Fallout parody anime pr0n... and on and on. Interplay sending out the original Fallouts with a sly surfboard to catch the nearest and costly Fallout 3 wave of marketing and publicity, and established popularity is... ... ... pretty funny actually.

Bah, started laughing and lost my point, forgot why I'm commenting, its in here somewhere. :blink:

Seeing all these details that suggest Interplay has breached their contract multiple times and failed to live up to the biggest part in any capaticty whatsoever.. what do you think it is? Maybe it isn't shady.. maybe it's complete and utter ineptitude. Or maybe it was a last ditch effort to make some cash off the Fallout name desperately hoping someone would cough up $30mil to make a Bulgarian MMO...

I guess you read wrong. Bethesda demands that Interplay stop manufacturing and distributing the original Fallout games, as well as pay for damages and legal fees, and asks for the trademark agreement to be declared terminated.

Yep, it's ineptitude. I get that you're on the mustache twirling Interplay image here, but this looks like just a screw up. And hey, who can blame them for wanting to make money off games they developed and published. I hope Interplay wins this, somehow, heh.

Except this Interplay has nothing in common with the fabled Interplay of yore. Sorry, I have a hard time cheering for Herve to win anything other than a room at the retired company-ruiners home.

Well not about the winner, in this case.

Sounds reasonable to me, if not eminently just. I read the Gamespot article, so the information must be off. I relocated my point in the interim though: Gamers shouldn't be at all annoyed or judgemental when reading about Bethesda taking action, I'm no harping fan-boy before anyone jumps me for it, I just like Fallout 3... Bethesda are just in the right. :deal:

They are, and you can hate Bethesda but still should support this. I'm sure if the shoe were on the other foot they would agree that protecting your IP is a good idea and contracts aren't something to be ignored just because you like one guy and not the other.

I agree that ineptitude all it amounts to: Interplay doesn't have the management capable of raising or spending an 8-figure sum, which is what a Fallout MMO of the necessary scale and production values is going to need. There is no reason to posit malice when the facts at hand can be explained by mere incompetence.

But there is nothing that prevents you from being sued, successfully, for culpable incompetence: Interplay took Bethesda's money, binding themselves to the deal. They spent it all just to remain a going concern, did none of what it would take to get the Fallout MMO off the ground, took none of the steps that were required to continue to use the Fallout rights they retained, and can offer no assurance that they will be able to do these things at any time in the future.

Don;t think the example really fits. A roller scanner is a direct threat to a flatbed scanner as people will generally just buy 1 scanner... But is an A-Rated game really threatened by a bargin bin classic?

Depends who you ask, and what counts as a threat.

They wanted the scanner gone, because they wanted no other kind in the spotlight. (I presume) they could compete with products similar to their own, but would have to re-tool their whole operation to compete with the unusual one ~better it not get popular, and spark a demand.

Interplay better not be stealing my Nuka-Cola!!!! :stare:

or I shoot them........I shoot them dead! :gun:

It is a threat when it's shipped in a way that is misleading those consumers looking for a title released by another company completely (Bethesda). It’s threatening when they generate sales for any Fallout products, sales based on the success of a game they had no hand in creating. S'all about the IP.

Imagine you had a great idea for how to revive an old game and got an independent dev team together to get to work on it. You bought the rights and all is going swimmingly, work begins. The original developer likes the idea you have and asks you to give him a go at creating a separate title. You agree and give the guy a degree of freedom to play with the premise, and stipulate in very certain terms when writing up the contract that whatever he is up to invovling the brand has to go through you first. You own it, and you don't want anything you've done fracked up, it's in your hands now afterall.

You create and release your new title to the world, whilst at the same time this guy with his license agreement in hand is supposed to be developing his title. But instead of completing the project he was given licensing rights to complete, or even raising a modicum of the capital required to see it done - he instead went around selling the old products of the franchise in new packaging akin to the title you created whilst he sat idle. Those along with other products that smack of taking advantage of the successes of your game. He is making a small amount notes with no effort at all. But something tells you those notes should be yours.

Sales of your game may not take a huge hit, but you've been squarely kicked in the rattlers and people are sniggering behind your back. Would you A: Go to town on the man who took the Michael, thereby showing all and everyone you're not gonna be fracked with. A huge “Woe unto those who seek to slime the IP I brought back into being!” Or B: Laugh about it over drinks, and comment on the canny nature of the other guy's hilarious business acumen and knack for… what exactly was he doing during those years it took you to develop a game of the year? Aside from releasing old titles in new packaging, of course. I’m laughing again…

… it just makes me lol, what can I say? Teh Interplayz plight makes me lolz. :wub:

Anyway... given the opportunity to take this guy out completely and have exclusive rights to all and everything you've made great again... anyone'd take that as due compensation me thinks. ^_^

Wow, what an apt description of the situation, really. They had an agreement to allow this. Apparently this is due to their not showing the marketing materials and so forth to Bethesda before hand. The naming isn't off though, calling it a Trilogy. Might mislead the stupid, I suppose.

lol, I'm picking up your sarcasm and you didn't even use [sarcasm]these[/sarcasm]. :goodjob:

It's not an accurate description of the situation, of course it's not, it's just a quirky example skating the lines of an alternate reality sporting a loosely similar situation. A reality that's a cartoon world, I'll have you know, in which game devs are rabbits with attitudes smoking ACME cigars.

Naming something a trilogy... yeah I can see how that isn't misleading except to the eternally stupid! 1, first, 2, second, and tactics... third. Rocky had a similar format I believe. Rocky 1, Rocky 2, and Diet Rocky, not Rocky 3. I can see how stupid people would think the third installment of a trilogy would be Fallout 3! Eedyots, those people! Heh ha.

A trilogy can be things that are similar in theme, not necessarily sequels. Then again, if it was sequels strictly...Fallout 3 would have to be set apart. Also, some other clues might be the names of the games, the publisher (yes, some people may have escaped the media blitz of Fallout 3 and who published it) and the screenshots on the back/side/where on the box. Anyone that was actually deceived by this, well, should feel pretty stupid.