So i hope im not the only one who has been following the news on Interplay's (the creators of fallout) fallout MMO

Am i the only one crushed to hear that Bethesda has destroyed Interplays attempt to keep the licensing rights to a Fallout MMO?
Im not very legal-wise so i cant make speculation on if it was wrong or not but everything was what looked to be smooth sailing and then out of the blue, Gameinformer tells me that its done for!

i cant explain my excitement for a fallout MMO (in the right hands too) but now i guess i have nothing to be excited for, so all i can do is convert it into hatred for Bethesda doing this

before i go on my rant i would like to hear from some forum staff and forum folk alike, about your reactions and to hear if you are a little better informed then i am because at this point im nothing but confused

Caen was driving Interplay to the brink of death.

1. Bethesda set up a chain of rules that were less than lenient, utterly crushing morale and ambition with the project.

Here are some rules for you to see.

1. The project must be completed under a budget of 300 million dollars.
2. The project must have over 10,000 registrations within launch.
3. The project will be overseen by members of Bethesda if the clock is not met.
4. Over 10% of the projects revenue ( or was it 12%) to Bethesda for LETTING Interplay make the MMO

I think you get the picture.

As part of the licensing agreement Interplay had to meet certain developement and funding milestones by early April. It's been speculated that they met neither, which isn't surprising considering that it took them a while before they could really get the developement underway and they were looking for funding during a financial crisis. While unfortunate, last I heard Interplay was committed to continuing V13 whether or not they had the Fallout license.

As far as I can tell the licensing agreement is still in court. I don't imagine GameInformer has any 'new' information since it takes a while to get this stuff in print. At the very least there is no discussion of this on the official V13 forums.

Being that Bethesda already did a great job of wrecking Fallout 3, it wouldn't surprise me that they want to bring their "vision" to the rest of the series. I can see this, being the beginning of the end for the Fallout series.

The end of the Fallout series you know. More people have heard about Fallout now, than before. It's rising in popularity, but it won't be the same Fallout that 1 and 2 were.

Interplay is still disputing Bethesda's claims. It will either end up in court or in settlement.

Guys, if you want to discuss V13 that's fine, but if this turns in to a generic complaint about Bethesda's Fallout it will be locked - we've had enough trouble keeping these threads on track and open as it is.

And as far as I can tell (although please correct me if I'm wrong) there has been no new information since we first learned of this dispute.

I thought Bethesda had bought the Fallout franchise completely? What's the settlement for?

Bethesda are sharks now... because they can!
Some people seem to keep maintaining a romantic view about them for some reason.

The fact of the matter is, Interplay on their 10-K report admitted they had no money... Beyond that, they had a large overdraft. Interplay's agreement with Bethesda required them to have a certain amount of money in the Bank.

Interplay are Broke... I'm suprised that we havent had a major bankruptcy announcement or anything yet.

MMO's cost a lot of money to build and run, Almost dead gaming companies are in no position to even try to make one... TBH Cancelling V13 is the best thing Interplay can do for their long term survival.

really? how that going to work in the waste with large groups 101 dwellers poking themselves and the vault itself looking like a train station.
some games should be only what they suppose to be.

Bethesda did purchase the entire IP, but as part of that agreement they licensed the MMO rights back to Interplay. While Interplay was self-destructing back in 2004 they actually announced that they'd be making a Fallout MMO. It wasn't taken too seriously given their financial situation at the time; in fact this was a few weeks before Bethesda announced that they had the rights to Fallout 3, 4, & 5.

Since this MMO was supposedly in some state of developement I imagine they were only willing to sell the franchise if Bethesda gave them the MMO license. As part of the contract Interplay had to http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Project_V13_FAQ#cite_note-3 or the MMO license would return to Bethesda. I'd guess Bethesda feels that they didn't meet these milestones, and Interplay disputes that, hence the legal situation.

As agent_c points out Interplay doesn't seem to have any money, and their licensing contract requires that they secure $30 million in funding for this project.

We know very little about the case. It's possible the two sides are trying to re-negotiate the contract. It's also possible that Interplay will loose the license and continue working on V13.

(very) young Padawan, you think we havent heard of this before?

the only people who say that are people who have only played fallout 3 and dont know that there are actually dozens of other large factions you could be from (ie: BoS or Raiders) and this isnt going to be like an rpg where its one world you explore. have you ever played an MMO before?

oh and welcome to the forums


funny how that works that the Bethesda haters flock to the Bethesda forums


well when i checked your website last (SMALL WORLD?!?!?!?!?!?) it said that GameInformer had the scoop, but of course i can hardly understand how they know more than us.

funny how ive been so worked up about this, causing me to forget i havent even started point lookout
from what the reviews say i should probably get on it

You assume too much, old whatever you are.
i played FO1 & FO2 and the spinoff and the new beth FO

what i do know that the spawn area and the no longer a waste will be flooded by hordes of players doing fed ex missions
and that much like FO3 most of the game will revolve not about RPG elements but about shoting and blowing stuff with arenas and other BS

this is not FO if i want to waste my life on a MMO i will choose a better one (p.s. with your padawn references you should look into the old republic MMO)

First off, I don't think it "was in the right hands" with Iplay. If you really want the Fallout MMO to be a success, the bigger the budget, the better. I'd be more inclined to think that Zenimax would be more likely to properly fund not just the project, but the talent required for a good game.

No, you don't know that.

If you have played any number of modern MMOs you would know taht with the use of global instancing, the population of "common areas" (do you consider Guild Wars an MMO?) can be controlled to the extent that crowding would not be an issue.

I have maybe a pinch of hope of Interplay even getting close to finishing this project, just because Herve is still the CEO.

This is the same guy who allowed continued development of Baldur's Gate III even though they didn't hold the license (out of an accounting error according to Avellone.) He also canceled Van Buren (which was pretty much guaranteed to turn a profit) in favor of a hack n' slash game which sold an embarrassing number of copies (around 20,000). IMO Chris Taylor should take Jason Anderson's example and work at Inexile.

As far as I am concerned, the main problem with Bethesda doing Fallout wasn't just Bethesda, but the entire "Next Gen" movement that focused on flashy graphics and explosions. Same problem with Oblivion, and the lack luster AI and depth in games like Red Faction, Last Reminant, and a few others. Very few games can balance size and depth well, especially games as large as Fallout and The Elder Scrolls, and hopefully, Bethesda can turn that around. I mean, they did get better between Oblivion and Fallout, so by the time TES V and FO4 come out, if Bethesda does get the rights to the MMO in full, I think they could pull it off, especially since there is TES V and FO4 before then most likely. And during that time technology will also advance, especially with higher capacity mediums like Blu Ray, or the ridiculous 500MB Holographic Discs from GE, witch will open more room for graphics and put less squeeze on gameplay mechanics. Also the memory and storage on consoles as of now, along with processing power, is quite less than good gaming PCs, making consoles of tomorrow more promising for the future.

And I agree, it is odd that Bethesda haters flock to the Bethesda forum, but have you seen the Obsidian forum? lulz the slander.

The required money is 30 mi US$. 300 mi is absolutely ridiculous. Anyway there are other time limitations, that could be extended if beth see they are developing well.
Anyway, what is happening is that Beth allowed the developement, however if they didnt prove they were capable, the licence would be revoke.

And so, bethesda wants results, its a successful enterprise, and set the same standarts to partners, so what you expect? Interplay proves once more it cant do any more game.

Man, seriously i read a lot of your posts, if you HATE so much Bethesda and fallout3, and the way Beth do the things, why you come here just to bash? It would be better to be 'enlighted' by DAC or NMA.

Watch, he'll pull out the "I'm here on the official Fallout forums to talk about Fallout". I asked him the same thing. He has the right to express his opinion, but sometimes I think he's just trolling. Why talk down about Bethesda on a forum where most of the people like Bethesda?

Yeah pretty much, Interplay is dead it just doesnt know it yet. It made a few critically acclaimed games and then a whole lot of nothing. FO1 and 2 never really sold well, and this is going to get people worked up but IMO it was Betheseda made Fallout a well known game franchise.

And MMOs take a lot of start up money, time, and marketing savvy which Interplay has none of.

Exactly. There is a lot of people that rationalize about their frustrations on fo3, while actually playing it, but this guy just systematically bash everything about Beth or fo3. To do that is like we say on my country "to punch the sharp edge of a knife". You know it will solve nothing and will only cause pain, but somehow people find pleasure on it.



Sincerely i wished not to say what im going to say, but Interplay business model is a relic, something from the past, like the old 'classics' fallout you know? Enterprises like Sierra, Interplay, Origin, Sega and lots of others lose their trail somewhere in the past. The more versatile and creative got bigger or changed their ways, like ID getting with Beth, or Sid firaxis or Maxis.

Its business after all.

To tell the truth, I'm kind of glad V13 didn't make it.

I can only continue to pay for a game I own for so long before the 12's speaking like it's a text message and the party members logging out at crucial moments and the lack of any proper narrative starts to get to me.

Oh, and the charging millions of gold for worthless items.

I have yet to find an MMO that is actually any good, and I don't expect that to change with Fallout Online, to be perfectly frank.

[quote name='Kjarista' post='14627745' date='Jul 6 2009, 05:26 PM']First off, I don't think it "was in the right hands" with Iplay. If you really want the Fallout MMO to be a success, the bigger the budget, the better. I'd be more inclined to think that Zenimax would be more likely to properly fund not just the project, but the talent required for a good game.[/quote]To this I agree, Zenimax is a much better choice for an MMOG ~but Fallout is a poor choice for such an endeavor, unless you are willing to gut it for all but the setting.

[quote name='Expresate' post='14623997' date='Jul 6 2009, 02:15 AM']The end of the Fallout series you know. More people have heard about Fallout now, than before. It's rising in popularity, but it won't be the same Fallout that 1 and 2 were.[/quote]This is effectively the same as not Fallout; Think about it. Strictly speaking Fallout 1 defined the game and the setting. Fallout 3 did truthfully abandon the gameplay entirely, and shifted the setting ~not just across the country (which I have no qualms about), but the very foundation of the gameworld and its behavior. Fallout 3's setting is a mirrored parody of the first game. Consider [for minor instance] the fact that all Mr. Handy droids in the series were 6 armed mute utility 'bots with twin turbine fans for mobility ~while Fallout 3's identically named Mr.Handy's (which are presumed to be the very same robots ~literally) are all 3 armed (hand-less!) robots with a central thermal jet of some kind and bad stereo-typical (and talkative) AI's.

The setting is two centuries past the war, and the world is one where everyone's father and their father's father (and their father's father's fa... ) must have never scavenged anything in their life! and even the Brotherhood's inner Citadel was a filthy mess (like no one ever (ever!) picked up a broom or at least set the robot to tidying up ~Its a paramilitary cult! Without a doubt its guaranteed that the recruits would have been forced to clean the place Spic & Span, and their bunks better bounce a bottle cap).

FO3 is the only game in the series with radioactive water (AFAIK), and no amount of explaining will ever excuse the PC's drinking from toilets while still inside Vault 101 (much less on the surface). Personally I love the engine, the level design (except the subways), and (most of) the game assets (sound, textures, and meshes); but Fans that they are... they never once contacted Mark Morgan about doing the soundtrack, and (assumed) were always planning a TES4.9 post apoc FPS with dialog dressed as Fallout ~instead of a Fallout sequel.
....And by sequel I mean, a game that favors the player figuring things out for themselves; A game that fully [and equally] supports whatever build that the player chooses to focus on; A game with three (or more), distinct methods of solving each and every quest; A game that includes player dialog that reflects the PC's skills and stats with more than meaningless one-liners. ~Most importantly a game with the "everybody wins" mentality blessedly absent.
Personally I'd prefer a modern refinement and adaptation of the series turn based mechanics (as set down by the original and it's sequel) ~no, this does not mean VATS by any reach. This means an updated Turn Based combat engine that supports the fully 3D DX9 game engine. Also an overhead view so you can see what's going on in the world ~like NWN 1 & 2 and Dawn of War... and Fallout (In fact rather like the game listed first in my SIG )

This in addition to a fitting tale and clever quips for [clever chaps] in the dialog (In Fallout even the lines that ended badly [fr the PC] were often fun in their own right, and not something you'd get unless you fail).

Fallout [as a series!] was positively anti-Sandbox. This is the single number one peeve I have with Fallout 3 ~Nothing makes a dent (except the Megaton showpiece ~which I expect is just why its there). Sand Box games in general are nothing more than single player MMOG's and they [for me at least] completely destroy the "immersion" they strive so hard to foster, by the very virtue of the sandbox amnesia had by the NPC's. In Fallout you are held to your actions, in FO3 you can shoot your dad in the face 150 times with a bb gun (he'll give you the reloads in between shouts of "Stop screwing around!").
People say its "better", people say its "progress", people point to the "shinies", and worst of all... People say its Fallout ~and to most it now is... That's what Fallout has become; and its the very thing those NMA'ers and DAC "zealots" (of which I am one) most feared would occur, and why many are/ or were so vocal about it early on and still today. Fallout 3 is Wheel of Fortune when it should have been Jeopardy.