Now I know that many of us here have a love for the Fallout Series, but I stand here as a person who started with Fallout 3 and now play Fallout: New Vegas with a passion for it. Not to be offensive to anyone who loves Fallout or Fallout 2, but I have no interest in going back to a game that, quite frankly, is out of date. Now, just because I haven't played the first two doesn't mean I haven't gone back and looked at the amazing storyline that was created. Fallout has, by far, one of the greatest storyline any game has had, and the story can be played for years with new release after new release. This being said, I have a small controversy on whether to look forward to gamesas making what could be either the largest waste of money or perhaps the next best thing in the MMORPG world.

As many of you already know gamesas made Fallout and Fallout 2, while Bethesda has made Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas. Here's the problem, Bethesda took over the Fallout team, not all of them, but a majority of the original team that made the story we love is now working for them, Who is gamesas using to continue the story?

That's not my only worry about gamesas making the MMO, my other problem is the history of gamesas. We look at the games they have made in the past and we hit two problems:
1. Their most famous games are only Earthworm and MDK
2. Everything they have made is ancient in the game world

I can say that I never liked Earthworm but I loved MDK, back in the Playstation days. This worries me for the simple fact that gamesas is trying to make what could be an amazing game but they haven't been around for a while. Bethesda on the other hand has been making Elder Scrolls from 1993 to now, and I think we can all say that Elder Scrolls has been magnificent.

I'm not saying that I don't think gamesas can make it be a good game, any company with their mind to it and the right people can make it a good game, I'm saying that an MMO of Fallout is a very hard task that will take more than just a group of people who would like to make a good game, it will take a group of people who need to make an amazing game. gamesas doesn't have much of a history, and not having the original team that created what Fallout is today makes it much more skeptical. I see Fallout how it is right now and would love to have an MMO, but I would want it to be what Bethesda has done plus more, and I think that might be too big of a task for any company to do and do well.

Very few of the people who worked on FO3 worked on FO1 or FO2, and none of the leads did. http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_3_developers

Obsidian, not bethesda made NV. A lot of thier team were former members of Black Isle and worked on Van Buren, and some worked on FO2.

That being said, Beth did not take over the FO team, they took over the fallout title with the exception of FOOL. Infact, gamesas has more of the original team for FO1 working for them than Beth does.

Also, i wouldn't worry about the story. They can't mess it up any more than FO3 did, and it's easy enough to avoid the bastardized stories by having FOOL take place somewhere that the bastardized FOs didn't take place in.

I also wouldn't worry about FOOL being made by gamesas. They gave us fallout to begin with, and without them we wouldn't have any FOs, either the originals of the bastardized ones. That alone should be enough to inspire confidence that they can create a good, quality FO MMO.

I have to recommend you try FO1+2 if you get the chance. Not trying such good games because they're outdated, would be like not reading J.R. Tolkien because the books are out of date compared to the movies .

Very true, but I don't do well when playing old games, just like I hate Mass Effect but love Mass Effect 2, Hate Diablo but love Diablo 2, love New Vegas and now Fallout 3 pisses me off. Once I've seen the outcome I hate the original.

I also don't know how they plan on making what I think is amazing now to an MMO, are they planning on ruining what has developed in the gameplay and design their own? I think that I expecting Project V13 to be New Vegas, New Vegas's Map x 10, Guilds, and instead of the same quests over and over again the players make the story, the developers just help push it with something new here and there. Like I have said in my other post, they need to follow Eve.

You'd be insane to think that FOOL will be like New Vegas. Graphics? Sure. But game play wise its just not feasible. If you're looking for fallout 3/NV online you're looking at the wrong game.

Edit: Also -palmface- at this guy... Bethesda didn't make "fallout" IP, They bought it. So before you go off saying that Bethesda is so great etc etc. Please understand that they did not create the universe merely the engine to lay it on. They took an ALREADY amazing game idea, and merely put it in 3d real action. There are more people who worked on the original Fallout in this company then bethesda ever had, as the poster above said. Please read up before claiming things. And I just want to reiterate again. If you are looking for fallout 3 / new vegas online. This is NOT the game you are looking for. This game will be much better, in many different ways.

Oh I completely understand the Bethesda didn't make the story. I completely agree that the story is, by far, one of the most important aspects of Fallout, but Bethesda improved the game so much and made it something that is playable, entertaining, productive, and all around good. Fallout and Fallout 2, ok for the time, but still, TBS, really? I'm also trying to look at more then the companies interactions with Fallout, look at all the games they've made, gamesas looks inexperienced to me and I just think that people will be expecting a lot of things that they wont be able to come through with, the games going to be like Lord of the Rings Online, great idea, tons of fans, but so "amazing" they had to make it free just to get people to play it.

Bethesda didn't take over the Fallout team at all. I don't think anyone from any of the Fallout teams was working at Bethesda during Fallout 3's development. New Vegas was created by a studio that was made up of quite few ex Fallout people but I think they are largely from the 2 era.

gamesas currently has Chris Taylor (Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout: Tactics, Fallout Warfare) and Mark O'Green (Fallout, Fallout 2), Jason Anderson also contributed in the early stages but left early on.

I wasn't a fan of Fallout 3's storyline, it had its moments but it just didn't do it for me overall. Haven't played New Vegas yet.

And gamesas has been publishing/developing games since 1983, they only stopped development/publishing from mid 2004-2008 or so due to financial difficulties.

Edit: "Improved" is objective, very few Fallout fans will agree with that. And "playable"...

Calling a company such as gamesas with as many IP's, releases, and awards that it has behind it "inexperienced" is really negating your credibility.

I never new much about gamesas until I discovered that they were the initial developers of Fallout, I wiki'd them to see what other games they had made, I have only heard of a few, and of those few, not many were good games. I'm basing this purely off of what I have looked at on research. They seem to not be the right company to be developing such a game, and not to disagree with the people here or say that your dreams are going to fail, but I hope Bethesda wins the lawsuit so that I can have more hopes in what the game will become. I could care less about old games, they aren't good anymore, I care about the games that a company is making today, and gamesas doesn't have that. Plus, the financial difficulties they had shows that they couldn't have been that great of a company, not to insult them.

The Wiki is horribly outdated and is never a great resource for research asides from a few topics, you'd have a better view by browsing IGN or Gamespot's company page for gamesas. Titles like Fallout, Sacrifice, Earthworm Jim, Planetscape Torment, Baldur's Gate, Star Trek, etc are critically acclaimed titles that were published by gamesas and developed in house.

Have you played any of gamesas's recent releases? Have you played any of Bethesda's old releases recently? And why are you so sure that a Fallout MMO will be made if gamesas doesn't win?

Financial difficulties mean you can't be a good company anymore? Good to know, Activision, Apple, etc should just pack up.

Well, there's your problem, you're looking just at gamesas . Also look at blackisle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Isle_Studios) which used to be a division of gamesas. On top of that, look up the porfolios of the people working on FOOL. Christ Taylor, for example (i believe he haunts the forums as Fallout_Chris) was a producer for LORTO. Also, gamesas is working closely with Masthead studios which is the company developing Earthrise.

Also, you're basing your hopes, or lack thereof on the wrong things. You say you hope Beth wins the lawsuit because you think they will make a better MMO because of thier more resent experience with games. Yet, on the other hand, you've referenced EVE several times, even though CCP games has had no other projects other than EVE. And you also have to consider the track record of MMOs. Large companies who have a lot of experience with game developing tend to do worse when they break into the MMO market than smaller companies with a relatively smaller degree of recent experience. Just look at games like DDO, Warhammer online, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, Auto Assault, Star Trek online, and Champions online. They all released and performed poorly in regards to expectations, and most of them are either not around anymore, or have had to adopt a F2P model that is different than thier original intended structure.

It's rather hard to take you seriously though, when you say old games aren't good anymore. They aren't as shiny and don't have nearly as good of graphics as newer releases, but a lot of them have a better story, better gameplay, and more detail (gameplay and character development wise) than most newer games. You're a fan of Beth, so just look at the differences between Morrowind and Oblivion. Yes, Oblivion has better graphics, but Morrowind had a lot more options in regards to character development and advancement, more variety of spells, weapons, and armor, and the game world was a lot more realistic in that the difficulty of your enemies wasn't based on your level.

Actually, Star Trek Online and Champions Online did really well, Star Trek Online has a user base of over 1 million subscribers IIRC and receives regular content updates. Champions Online has been out for a while now and still isn't doing so bad for activity, it's going Freemium next year though.

Hmm.. you say you haven't played ANY Fallout series except FO3... and then claim that it has been "improved"? If you dont know the flavor, how can you judge what it tastes like?

In my opinion, FO3 was merely Oblivion with guns. More linear, and plonking existing lore onto a 3D engine does not make it "the best!". The gameplay in original was pure tactical - FO3 is pure shooter. The "illusion" of tactics via the targetting computer is a joke. Pick up the hidden sniper rifle right at start - and you can complete the game with it - no more weapons needed. Thats what I did.



Here are some of their releases:



Not exactly amateurs. Also, keep in mind that Fallout wasn't the first in the series - WASTELAND was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasteland_%28video_game%29 - which was released in the IBM 286 Monochrome days and Commodore 64.
Wastelander since C=64!

Awaiting Alpha/Beta testing!

Last i checked, Cryptic had roughly 1 mil accounts, not subscribers, huge difference. Everyone i've talked to who play(ed) STO said it was pretty much dead, and everyone i know who paid the $300 or however much for a lifetime sub regrets it. The 1 mil accounts are a combination of champions online and STO, and again, that isn't subscriptions.

The thing a lot of people don't keep in mind, is that very few, if any company actually release current accurate numbers in regards to thier player base. For instance, even World of Warcraft with it's "12 million subscribers" isn't an accurate representation, because they are not "12 million active subscribers" meaning that they can include players in thier count who once subscribed for a month, even if they haven't payed for or played WoW in years.

It's not news that ZeniMax Media, the parent company of Bethesda Softworks and now id Software, is working on an MMO. The company has been hiring at ZeniMax Online to develop a "next-generation MMO" for some time. But the continued legal battles between gamesas and Bethesda over the rights to the Fallout brand have brought some (albeit small) details to light about that upcoming MMO.
For one, it's not based in the Fallout world. It would've been pretty natural to assume it's not a Fallout-based online adventure because gamesas themselves retained the rights to a Fallout MMO after Bethesda bought Fallout, but in latest court transcripts from Fallout community site Duck And Cover, it's been confirmed Bethesda (and, by extension, ZeniMax) is not developing a Fallout MMO.
In the words of Bethesda's lawyer, they're working "on something else."

Read more: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701984/more-rumors-about-bethesdas-mmo-even-though-its-nothing-really-new-.html#ixzz152e5e6Sd

This was announced a while ago, but there has been a lot of talk that they want the MMO title if they ever decide to track away from what they're already making.





Actually, I have a huge strike against Activision for how they're running, I hope their company dies fast, and Apple has yet to make something that makes me think that I should pay more for less. I like your examples.

I can't figure out the point of this post. Making a good game is hard therefore the developers should hide under the bed and cry? gamesas is responsible for a handful of the best games ever created. Whether or not you're familiar with them or whether they "look inexperienced to you" is neither here nor there. With all due respect, it sounds as if you don't know what you're talking about. I'm sure you have good ideas, but if you want anyone to listen to them, you'd do well to not state the patently false.

I agree with OP, however like it was mentioned gamesas is making this game, no matter how brilliant FO3 and FONV was. Keep in mind FO3 was voted game of the year several places so there is no doubt it was good. I don't care what companies did 10 years ago, I live today.

It seems that this has somehow turned into a fo1 & 2 vs fo 3 & nv for some reason. I guess the only thing you can compare with those games are the storyline, gameplaywise they are 2 different genre so theres not really a point to compare them. Also they where made in different ages of gamehistory. Basicly I think that comparing companies based on these titles are like comparing cars and cakes.

I have full confidence that gamesas can make a superb story. I'm a little worried about gameplay though. And gameplay is way way more important than storyline to say the least. The only thing we can do is give support and suggestions, and ofcourse speculate like there is no tomorrow. No matter how this turns out I know that I will try it out.

Indeed, seems the original poster is a tad misguided. I played Fallout 2 years and years ago, gave it 2 play through's and never really looked back. But once Fallout 3 came about, I completed it and thought to my self "you know what, would not mind trying the old Fallouts again", so I did. And while the graphics are dated by today's standards, they are enough to realise almost the full potential of what gamesas wanted to achieve. And in many cases I feel the originals are much better gameplay wise than Fallout 3 could have even hoped to come close to.

I think with the original post it's a case of "I played Fallout 3 and it was the best game ever, how can any other game even an older one surpass it". Try it, you might like it "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence."

Last i checked, Cryptic had roughly 1 mil accounts, not subscribers, huge difference. Everyone i've talked to who play(ed) STO said it was pretty much dead, and everyone i know who paid the $300 or however much for a lifetime sub regrets it. The 1 mil accounts are a combination of champions online and STO, and again, that isn't subscriptions.

The thing a lot of people don't keep in mind, is that very few, if any company actually release current accurate numbers in regards to thier player base. For instance, even World of Warcraft with it's "12 million subscribers" isn't an accurate representation, because they are not "12 million active subscribers" meaning that they can include players in thier count who once subscribed for a month, even if they haven't payed for or played WoW in years.

Double checked and it seems you are right, they were talking about ST: O "accounts" and not subscribers. But I don't think there has been any server closures so I guess it isn't doing that bad? Surely the Star Trek community should be enough to keep it healthy? It worked for Galaxies after all (until the changes).

I used to play Star Trek Online when it released, I liked it but had to give it up for a few personal reasons (and no, I wasn't playing it for hours on end like WoW guy from South Park either. ). It had a few issues initially with quest management though and basically keeping track of what you've finished and what you haven't (within the game world and not via menus for instance).

It's not news that ZeniMax Media, the parent company of Bethesda Softworks and now id Software, is working on an MMO. The company has been hiring at ZeniMax Online to develop a "next-generation MMO" for some time. But the continued legal battles between gamesas and Bethesda over the rights to the Fallout brand have brought some (albeit small) details to light about that upcoming MMO.
For one, it's not based in the Fallout world. It would've been pretty natural to assume it's not a Fallout-based online adventure because gamesas themselves retained the rights to a Fallout MMO after Bethesda bought Fallout, but in latest court transcripts from Fallout community site Duck And Cover, it's been confirmed Bethesda (and, by extension, ZeniMax) is not developing a Fallout MMO.
In the words of Bethesda's lawyer, they're working "on something else."

Read more: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701984/more-rumors-about-bethesdas-mmo-even-though-its-nothing-really-new-.html#ixzz152e5e6Sd

This was announced a while ago, but there has been a lot of talk that they want the MMO title if they ever decide to track away from what they're already making.

That essentially drills the point home, they aren't making a Fallout MMO. And it being an Elder Scrolls MMO is all but confirmed at this point.

It seems like "new" fans will be content with the current titles. Older fans and some newer will probably gravitate to the MMO since from everything I've read so far, it'll likely be appealing to them in certain ways.



Why? In terms of financial viability, both those companies are leading their industries. They release some pretty good games/products too.

By that train of thought, why care about what companies did a year ago? Or even a month ago? After all, you live today, not last week.

I wouldn't call FO3 brilliant. Although a pretty decent game, it was a case of a company saying "We know how to make game X, and we have the rights to make a sequel to games Y. Let's make game X but change the setting so it's a sequel to game Y." Also, it's story was pretty dull and generic; 1. look for X. 2. Find X 3. Bad guys show up, ruin X 4. Kill bad guys 5. watch ending that's basically the same no matter what you do.

gamesas has a very good history of making games, several of the games they've made have a habit of being rated in the top 25 games of all time, not just game of the year; Freespace 2, Buldar's gate 1 and/or 2, Wasteland, A Bard's Tale, and of course fallout 1 and/or 2.

Ok, I understand what a lot of you guys are saying, and yes I know that by not playing the first two Fallouts it's not for me to say that they're bad, I'm sure they were great games for the time but would eat a pint of ice-cream that's been in your freezer since 1997? and a good friend of mine said not to waste my time and just read the storyline off wiki (we have the same video game taste).

I'm not trying to hate on gamesas, and I agree that what they have made in the past doesn't show who they are now, but they haven't made any games recently, that's where my doubts come from. I will give them major props for coming back from the dead to make this game though, that's where I find a little hope that this game might be good, when you have people so dedicated that they are willing to go to a business that's had some beyond tough times, that's great. But, I just don't know what to expect from them, which is a little scary for a game that could not only attract the old fans, but the new fans as well, and, could possibly beat WoW.

I will say that a lot of you have pointed some critical areas out to me, and I see how you all lay your trust in that this game will be good, I just never trust companies that look at MMOs today because the only MMO that I could play for more then two hours was Eve, and I got bored after I while but loved the concept. I just hope that they make the game more suitable for people who like to do more then just click and run around in circles doing the same thing time and time again, I want an MMO where things change, you don't do the same quest as others have done, where people can't post a guide on how to get your character through every quest, I want excitement, I want mystery, I want to not play for two or three months, come back, and have a lot of changes in the Fallout World. I essentially want people to have more of a point in the game then just level up and PvP, I want a story that the players make, not the company.

Well then you and your friend don't have good taste in video games since your not willing to play a late 90's games. Break out of that state of mind because you're missing out on a great game. Fallout 3 was the first fallout game I ever played and was interested in the first, so I bought it and loved it. It completely different then Fallout 3 in a very good way. I was willing to try it out despite it being old. Anyway, to answer your question, no we shouldn't be worried, if anyone can do it, it's gamesas.