Fallout 3 explained..

[Odin]

On the IPLY boards donkey asked a question about the actual science and history in VB (Fallout 3), here's the question/answers:<blockquote>Q: Are you going to attempt to flesh out the science theorys and history in VB or will you leave it for interpretation? It'd be nice to have some definitive reference materials in-game that have been checked enough so it'd be more accurate than the fo:bible is too the fallout universe?

Damien 'Puuk' Foletto: To a certain point, yes, but not to the point of Star Trek techno-babble. Some things are best left to the imagination of the player - i.e. "It works because it does." But there is an attempt at explaining a lot.

JE Sawyer: However, it's important to remember the fiction element. If we try to make too much sense out of Fallout's world, well... some things don't work. That's okay, of course.</blockquote>Bip I say!
Link: Thread@IPLY

 

[4too]

Fuzzy Clarity

Fuzzy Clarity

Ah.. the need for 'clear boundaries of uncertainty', to paraphrase Douglas Adams.

Once again the world witnesses the ... desirability ... of a firm hand on the FO bible project.

Taking control of the existing body of work would help define what is implied in the games' world and what is interpolated by fan conjectures. Lay out the foundations so that the complex imagery of "masses" can be culled for future games.

Keeping things simple may make the project manageable and allow the mysterious and powerful ability of the imagination to paint in the details. We're bringing our concepts and preconditions and expectations with us, why not use them? Put your imaginary friends to work.

"I" wouldn't want to see any future FO dev's paint themselves into a corner, and than kick their way out through the dry wall, as the ""balls out"" time/money/aesthetic management of FO:BOS.

Unless that was their real intention. To thumb their auxiliary anatomy at the strict interpretationists.

Blamed the fans that there is no "Unified" FO Universal Theory? Fuzzy rationalization hiding in that wood pile. Don't see "Unified FO U Theory" construction in my job description. Why go there at all.

Interplay owns the intellectual content. Why accelerate it's decay by lack of common sense maintenance? Tax deduction for depreciation of intellectual property? Mining the tax code like Enron?

Hardly.


4too

 

[DarkUnderlord]

What? Science explanations? But I really like the descriptions FOBOS has!!

Yep, crazy psycho's making weapons, armour that protects "you know, the jewels and such" and complicated science stuff that's just too damn hard to explain. Yup, there's that lovely Fallout feeling for you right there.

 

[Demostrike]

That tesla armour looks too high tech like not fallouty...

 

[Briosafreak]

That`s what DU is saying using sarcasm Gameshark

DU have Odin talked to you yet on that thing you send us?

 

[Odin]

Sure have, given him the scoop as well.. DU I can also show you the rest, just not post it all..

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Yep. I've e-mailed Odin a link to an updated version. I've posted what of the e-mail you gave me. Do you want me to modify it?

Actually, it might be a good idea to throw in the questions you asked him.

 

[Pipboy2000]

Riot Armor looks gay, to the extreme.

 

[Eldar]

ah, cut the inside crap, swine hearted wretches! I just don't want Fallout to become embroiled in the Trekkie "geek-o-rama." I agree with Sawyer and Puuk in that I don't want to be forced to play comic book guy from the Simpsons to enjoy the game.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

That's where the conslusion comes in. I also need to throw in the "sex sells" quotes yet. Using the Fallout name for recognition only and throwing in thong girls.

That's Fallout++

Oh, I've got the special pre-order item in there too.

By the way Odin, #19 has the e-mail.

 

[Odin]

Well I can always show you the questions, but I really don't see the reason for printing them all. Besides, sometimes it seems like we are trying to beat a dead horse here..

But the interview part did really amaze me, the questions, what I told him everything is amazing. It was actually a great chance for him to try to fix things and explain, yet in some freaky way he decided not to do it.

Examples of questions:

• What got you started making computer games?
• It's been earlier said that this title is in no way related to Fallout 1-2 or Tactics, yet you call it "Fallout Brotherhood of Steel", why is that ?
• Who's involved in making this game?
• The current available screenshots have been said not to look like the 50ies retro style Fallout did, is this being overlooked (ie the thongs and other things)?
• There's been a lot of bashing from the fallout community about this game, how does that make you feel and how does it help/hinder your work on this project?
• You’ve earlier said that you looked at what the fan sites wanted out of a future Fallout title, you must have seen that the only title the fans want is Fallout 3. Why make this title instead of Fallout 3?
• If this title goes well, will it help to make Fallout 3 or just another PS2/Xbox title of Fallout?
• You’ve said that the brotherhood grew in strength after the fall of the mutants, didn’t they actually loose strength according to Fallout 2?

Actually I tried to get answers to all the things we know as wrong, guess he didn't have the balls to answer them....even tho he said he did... (have the balls that is)...

Another funny quote:

As far as BoS is concerned, the story is staying to true canon. Many fans are making presumptions about the story, the BoS in our story, the characters and much more. Should more information have been released? Maybe. Was it a miscalculation on our part to the fury and fandom that exist? Yes. Will more information be released? Of course. And of course we would like to win more fan support. By by your own (by your own I mean the Fallout fan base) admission, you do not want this game, you want a CRPG turn-based PC game. I can't give you that. The console division doesn't make RPG or even PC title's any longer.

We are listening to the fans (even if I have to wade through piles of insults, racial slurs and threats to do it). But please understand, we own Fallout, we decide what the story is and we have that right to create new stories from the base story. Does this mean we will not listen? By no means does it mean that. I will listen to anyone whom wishes to treat us with respect and dignity. All I ask is that you give us a chance. The Fallout community did not. But if the current fandom does not want this game, why should I believe that they want anything to do with it? I believe my reluctance to show up on the boards is warranted. That does not mean I will stay off forever.

Yes, from Chuckie..tha man himself..

 

[Odin]

Yet, the man has a point. The Fallout community did start pointing out flaws (some harder than others), which only drowe them more away...

There are possible reasons to why they didn't fix any thing:

• They didn't see these flaws as flaws.. (which basicly means they have no clue to the setting/story of Fallout)
• They had gone past the point of no return and thus couldn't go back (ie to expensive for IPLY)
• They just didn't care, because this is only buildt to be a cash-cow for IPLY. A quickfix of cash flow..

So far all of these seem like the reason, because:

• They claim is does stay true to the setting.
• They ignored the fans, when we tried to point out errors/flaws.
• We all know the current state of IPLY, let me spell it.... They need CASH..

So are we getting any where with bashing him more? nah, I don't really think so.. For now I'll wait for the game, try it out and post my opinion..

BUT I will correct people that come to our boards and try to show us the Chuckie light, that's my god given right...

Oh, and I will of course post about their talks on the IPLY forums, because that's what we're here to do..

 

[DarkUnderlord]

sometimes it seems like we are trying to beat a dead horse here..

We are, that's why it's fun! Waaay back, right when the "Fallout console game" info was released on DaC, it was made clear that no-one wanted this. At THAT time, FO3 wasn't even in production and Jefferson was still on the cards.

The main issues I have with BoS are the sex. Fallout 2 had it slightly over-done with New Reno, but this is pushing it to new limits. I doubt any future Fallout game is going to get clear of it. Worse yet, is that if it fails and the sex backfires, what does Fallout become? Fallout? Oh, isn't that that porn game?.

As well as that, it's the lack of setting, that great sprinkling of 50's touch. Those item descriptions are horrible and the scenery from the screenshots so far looks more trashy than it does 50's. Then there's the music...

The way Chucky talks doesn't help either. Just add a few 'OMFG LOL!!11!' to the end of his sentences and that's the impression you get.

Fallout - 50's + Sex + Techno / Rock + 'Developer Kids' hyping it for things that Fallout never was.

 

[Eldar]

I thought those images and the flavor text were something you made up to cause problems, DU. I didn't mind the graphics. It's not 50ish, but it's not a big deal. The flavor text causes me to wonder.

It's kind of funny. All of my arguments to the Fallout community were true. I never suggested that they buy FO:BoS. I never suggested that they encourage other folks to buy FO:BoS.

I always hit on the same basic argument:

* FO:BoS is a reality. You can't stop it from hitting the shelves.

* Hurting FO:BoS doesn't help Fallout 3.

* Flaming the Interplay boards just makes the Fallout fans look bad.

* If you truly hate the idea of FO:BoS, ignore it.

* Some of the venom you spit at FO:BoS is likely to fall on Fallout 3.

That's all true but I do scratch my head sometimes.

 

[Odin]

I thought those images and the flavor text were something you made up to cause problems, DU. I didn't mind the graphics. It's not 50ish, but it's not a big deal. The flavor text causes me to wonder.

Erm, if you are talking about the text on those images those are real. The one that were/are on the Fbos site...

* If you truly hate the idea of FO:BoS, ignore it.

No, this is were I disagree. I will state my opinion as long as I have to, Killzig wanted to simply ignore Fbos. As for me I was unsure at that time, but thought about it a little (and also heard SP's arguments) and decided that NMA should cover Fbos...

And as DU have clearly stated before, when rumours of the problems with FOT came out. Sales dropped like a stone...

Am I doing this only to hurt Fbos, nah..It's called journalistic integrity, I say my honest opinion about it...

As long as they use the Fallout name, I will talk about it, post about it and say my opinion about it.

 

[Brother None]

It's kind of funny. All of my arguments to the Fallout community were true.

* Hurting FO:BoS doesn't help Fallout 3.

This was mulled over many times before it became public knowledge that VB is Fallout 3, but consider this; is this argument really valid? No. We're presenting an honest opinion here.

Now if you said "criticizing Fo:BoS will make the world blow up", I'd say "Well, then, I won't do it", but ignoring a product simply as a favour to the gamemakers would turn a fanpage that has journalistic integrity, like this one, into a miniature Fallout-loving version of Gamespy "We love everything LOL". Jeesh.

* Flaming the Interplay boards just makes the Fallout fans look bad.

In the eyes of Interplay people, probably. Also, mindless flames always make you look bad, just like mindless fellating of a game will do the same. That's not relevant, let us consider the more serious Fallout fanbase...

Posting our honest opinions about this game, here or on the Interplay boards, does not make Fallout fans look bad, it makes us look like fans, because...hey, would you look at that, we are!

That's what fandom is about, when someone decides to use the title you love and stick it on some random action-game that has nothing to do with the original genre, you, as a fan, react.

* If you truly hate the idea of FO:BoS, ignore it.

What Odin said

* Some of the venom you spit at FO:BoS is likely to fall on Fallout 3.

Same thing I said above applies here. We're not Naked Lunch's Mugwumps, we have a feeling of integrity, I thank you.

Ask yourself a simple question that applies to all genres that have a fanbase; is it the fans responsibility to support what effects to raping of the thing they love so much, just so a proper sequel to the genre can exist later? Of course not!

Did you see Batman fanboys cheering and hollering about Batman 4 just because they wanted Batman 5? Of course not, that would just result in Batman 5 being identical to Batman 4.

And guess what, here's the real shocker; it works! Batman 5 has been given to Darren Aronovsky, one of the darkest and doomiest directors around. He already promised to give us the true Dark Knight back, if not make the darkest version of Batman yet.

So far for that theory.

 

[JJ86]

I think whatever anyone in the Fallout community says about FOBOS really will have no impact on sales. Consider that Cuevas has said as a fact that their intended market for the game isn't the current fanbase, but an entirely different demographic. This demographic obviously doesn't come here or to the Interplay forums for that matter. They are casual console gamers who most probably don't have much internet access at all.

 

[Odin]

Well first the sales departments have to buy the game eh?

 

[Eldar]

Have I said much one way or the other about your posts at Interplay, Odin? I thought I cleared the air with you rather quickly and, since then, we have had no problems.

When I say, "spitting venom" I don't mean making valid and probing statements. I mean making inflamatory remarks meant only to cause problems on the forum. In that regard, Kharn, we are in complete agreement.

I haven't seen a lot of you guys over at Inteprlay, but how often do I muscle folks for giving an honest opinion?

Yes, I think the type of widespread mayhem was bad. I think responsible journalism, and I view you as responisible, is quite different from doggedly trying to attack FO:BoS. ...And, in that light, I will defend every point I made to my dying day.

The point, however, is that I was shocked and dismayed to find out that I was wrong. It really is the flavor text. That was why I posted here. Essentially, I came over to admit that fact.

 

[Odin]

No, don't get me wrong Eldar. I got no problem with you or your opinions, we're cool.

I only stated my opinion about your statements, don't feel attacked. Both Kharn and I only posted our opinions..