Eurogamer interviews Pete Hines

I actually liked the interview. FO3's gonna be different, but there's plenty of good to see along with the stuff that looks bad. Always they're emphasizing choice, locking of paths to the player, and so on, so who knows.
 
Somehow I got used to hearing such responses from Pete. Nothing new really. I'll just read NMA review once more :D
 
I'm not sure why you got annoyed over him mentioning 1994.
He was saying that some people had already made their minds up about Bethesda's games in 1994 when Elder Scrolls 1 was released.
He was in no way falsely quoting the year Fallout 1 was released or implying that Fallout fans have the ability to see into the future.

I am no big fan of what I have seen of the game so far but please read what he's actually saying before spewing contempt on the man or else that just makes all fallout fans seem petty.

Guess this should be enough to get me banned ;)
 
Elijah said:
He was saying that some people had already made their minds up about Bethesda's games in 1994 when Elder Scrolls 1 was released.

That doesn't make any sense, because he's talking about us as a group, which simply did not exist in 1994.

I get the angle you say he's coming from, but it takes a stretch of believability to see it
 
We had discussions and agreed collectively - seeing as nobody's doing anything with it...

Wtf? Call me a fatso but were the original developers not also trying to get the license? Of course, whatever gets you through the day, Petey...
 
OG Loc said:
We had discussions and agreed collectively - seeing as nobody's doing anything with it...

Wtf? Call me a fatso but were the original developers not also trying to get the license? Of course, whatever gets you through the day, Petey...


I would have LOVED to see Fallout in the hands of Troika, but only if they had the time and money... No fucking pushing them! :crazy:
 
For all the crap that they throw at Fallout Fans, I can appreciate Peter for being a bit honest about it.

Bethesda lies almost as badly as the Bush administration.
 
Elijah said:
I'm not sure why you got annoyed over him mentioning 1994.
He was saying that some people had already made their minds up about Bethesda's games in 1994 when Elder Scrolls 1 was released.
He was in no way falsely quoting the year Fallout 1 was released or implying that Fallout fans have the ability to see into the future.
That's a stretch. If he was in fact referring to 1994 because it was the year Daggerfall (or Arena? can't remember which was first) was released, then it simply doesn't make sense in the context it was used. How did anybody have their minds made up about whether or not Bethesda could do a good FO3 before the first game was even released?
 
Maybe he meant 2004 instead of 1994, in which case he would be at least partially right.

Bethesda Dev complaining in July 2004 (from NMA news archive):

Hardcore Fallout fans are already registering accounts on the Elder Scrolls forums for the sole purpose of telling us how much we suck, and that this is the worst decision in the history of the industry.

:)
 
myzko said:
I would have LOVED to see Fallout in the hands of Troika, but only if they had the time and money... No fucking pushing them! :crazy:

Too bad Troika is practically dead now... (info)

But would be nice if Obsidian would get it... If Bethesda doesn't want to get into anything "they have no experience on", then maybe Fallout fans would be happier if the actual sequel was done by people who even now keep making isometric games?
 
Brother None said:
Elijah said:
He was saying that some people had already made their minds up about Bethesda's games in 1994 when Elder Scrolls 1 was released.

That doesn't make any sense, because he's talking about us as a group, which simply did not exist in 1994.

I get the angle you say he's coming from, but it takes a stretch of believability to see it

Actually, I saw it exactly the same way as Elijah did. Yes, the Fallout community didn't exist back then, but the people who would later make up that community did. Of course, there's some exaggerating going on, but to me, the way he said it looks fine: "there are people out there who, as soon as they saw our very first game, decided that we don't make the sort of games they like, and so aren't going to be pleased by any game we make". He's not even saying "everyone who likes Fallout hates our stuff", he's saying "some of the people who are Fallout fans don't like our games, and haven't liked them since the very beginning". That seems perfectly reasonable to me. The only thing that isn't reasonable is that when he says "our fanbase", he means "the Fallout fanbase"; acquiring the rights to a game doesn't automatically transfer fans' affections to you.

I wonder if Bethesda truly doesn't see the differences between the Fallout games and Fallout 3. Or, if they see them, do they not think them important enough?
 
Personally, I think they don't see them thus they are not capable of doing a proper Fallout successor. They define immersiveness as an FPP backed by a good 3D engine and real-time combat instead of a good story with strong characters conveyed by well-written dialog.
 
If looking at the way Pete and the rest of the guys are going about interviews I think it's safe to assume you will be able to bluff your way through the entire game, either by talking incoherently the whole time or just not answering the questions :P

Mutant: "Are you's being enemy?"
You: "I like cheese!"
*Mutant's head explodes, immersing you in gore*
 
Delduwath said:
Actually, I saw it exactly the same way as Elijah did. Yes, the Fallout community didn't exist back then, but the people who would later make up that community did.

I was 10 then. Many of us were too young to play video games let alone massive games like Arena or Daggerfall back then. So no, still makes no sense
 
Brother None said:
...I mean the Fallout fanbase - that has basically decided back in 1994 that we're doing it all wrong and that they're going to hate our game whatever we do...

Well, I wouldn't want to defend the man too much - the sentiment is very much wide of the mark with respect to most of the community. Maybe, just maybe, this utterly nonsensical aspect of the jibe was just a slip of the tongue? After all, Bethesda acquired Fallout in 2004?

I still sometimes start writing the date, 199... (I must be getting old.)
 
Bernard Bumner said:
I still sometimes start writing the date, 199... (I must be getting old.)
It seems some of us are indeed stuck eight years in the past. :P

But anyway, what's up with this sort of dismissive straw men as a response to negative criticism against Fallout 3? "Everyone loves the game, except a bunch close-minded people stuck in the past, who don't matter anyway." - besides being bad PR and obviously untrue, this wouldn't make the criticism any less valid.
I suppose they're trying to sell the game to those who couldn't care less, in which case if Oblivion is any indication, things will work out just fine for them. *sigh*
 
We had discussions and agreed collectively - seeing as nobody's doing anything with it, if we could get Fallout, we would love to do a Fallout game,
We were sitting there thinking we wanted to play another Fallout game, and if nobody else was going to make one then we might as well do it ourselves.
Wasn't Troika trying to get the license? Is someone lying?

There's a lot of folks that think we're borderline suicidal for attempting to make another game as it is, but going back and trying to make the first one... yeah, that would definitely be pitchforks and swarming the gates.
I say, that they are pretty suicidal even trying to make a sequal.


Obviously we're fans
*COUGH COUGH COUGH HACK HACK COUGH COUGH HACK COUGH HACK COUGH COUGH WHIzz..*
From another interview on Bethesda lead artist Josh Jones:
Ever play the Fallout games?

No.
Oh yeah, they are big fans, numero uno fans they are, wee...

but there is a segment of our fanbase - I say 'our', I mean the Fallout fanbase
Ooo, so... we are Beths fans now?

- that has basically decided back in 1994 that we're doing it all wrong and that they're going to hate our game whatever we do.
Is Mr. Hines psychic? I could have sworn that Fallout did not exist then. He must be psychic.

I mean if you have made up your mind and said 'Here's my specific list of things that my game must have', and we're not meeting your list, then you're probably not going to like the game.
Well, StarCraft fans complained about a StarCraft2 Protoss unit they didn't like, and Blizzard pulled it out. It worked for them, and the fans didn't really make a big bitch about it. It is amazing that well informed intelligent Fallout fans who knows what they want and like make a suggestion, Beths treat it like it do not exist.
But you know, we're OK with it, we're used to it by now - the Elder Scrolls fanbase is a very global and very large community that has very strong opinions about what they want, so we appreciate that folks are very passionate about certain franchises, certain series.
Elder Scroll fans are global? We are we. Elder Scroll fans have strong opinions? He should rub shoulders with us for awhile. They appreciate folks that are passionate about certain franchise? He's got to be kidding.


Pete Hines: Absolutely. We didn't go acquire the rights just to make one game. We fully intend for this to be a success, and as long as we don't fuck it up and we make a good game, we think it will be.
Fallout 3 will be a good game, but it won't be a true fallout. When finally release, Fallout3 will have a big sale, and every reviewers from Russia to California will hail it as the next gen game. Then Beths will be rolling in money and think that they did it right, and might even sing and dance a 'I told you so' to us. Then they will churn out F4 and F5, further removing from the old 'Fallouty' concept.
So people, hold hands now, sing a little song, pray a little prayer, let us share our thoughts and hopes and dreams. Let us embrace each other and wipe the other's tears. For the end is near, the end of True Fallout.
 
Back
Top