FOOL developer quotes and court case update

[WorstUsernameEver]

Ausir rounded up some messages posted by Chris Taylor on the Interplay boards, obviously about Fallout Online, in a newspost on the Vault.

On the possibility of Interplay working on a new single player Fallout:<blockquote>We don't have the rights to make a single-player game in the same format as Fallout 1 and 2. We can only make the massively-multiplayer version.

We are trying to keep the spirit of FO1/2. We think those were great games, and we want to bring the things that made them great into the MMO arena.</blockquote>On the engine:<blockquote>We are not going to use the same engine as FO1/FO2. The camera perspective will be more flexible. You will be able to look up at the sky, for example.</blockquote>On whether the game will have one big server or multiple shards:<blockquote>The intent is to have multiple shards. For gameplay reasons, it's very important there are multiple shards.</blockquote>On whether the game will be multiplatform:<blockquote>The only platform we've even sort of announced is Windows-based PC.</blockquote>On FOOL's SPECIAL:<blockquote>We're using a modified version of the SPECIAL system from Fallout. So there will be levels, XP, skills, perks, traits, stats, derived stats, [deleted] and so on. There are logical changes from the system as presented in FO1/FO2 to update it a little bit and make it work in an MMO, but it's still recognizably the SPECIAL system.</blockquote>On that matter Interplay investor orionquest informed us that Bethesda has filed the request for a trial by jury for the ongoing case with Interplay over the rights of a Fallout MMO as well as Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics.

To conclude, the guys at the Vault are doing a giveaway with some Classic Pack pre-order codes for the PS3 and PC version of Fallout: New Vegas. To enter the contest you just have to be a registered user on the Vault and add an image to an article that was missing it.

 

[K.C. Cool]

I know these are just forum posts from Chris and not official press releases, but wouldn't it seem sort of risky to say "We are trying to keep the spirit of FO1/2?" I'd imagine a large chunk of their audience would be coming from Fallout 3 fans that haven't played the originals. Maybe it's a legal thing, even if they wanted to make an exact copy of Fallout 3 they wouldn't be able to make any comparisons given the nature of their courtroom debates. And well, not to mention that they didn't MAKE Fallout 3.

Even Obsidian (though, yes, they do work for Bethesda) made it clear that Fallout 3 fans will not be left out when it came to New Vegas even with factions, characters, and references from the first two games.

Don't get me wrong, I think FOOL keeping the spirit of the first two games is fantastic! But... if it's a good game then I'd like for the Fallout 3 fans to keep it alive with their money.

 

[Elven6]

I know these are just forum posts from Chris and not official press releases, but wouldn't it seem sort of risky to say "We are trying to keep the spirit of FO1/2?" I'd imagine a large chunk of their audience would be coming from Fallout 3 fans that haven't played the originals. Maybe it's a legal thing, even if they wanted to make an exact copy of Fallout 3 they wouldn't be able to make any comparisons given the nature of their courtroom debates. And well, not to mention that they didn't MAKE Fallout 3.

Even Obsidian (though, yes, they do work for Bethesda) made it clear that Fallout 3 fans will not be left out when it came to New Vegas even with factions, characters, and references from the first two games.

Don't get me wrong, I think FOOL keeping the spirit of the first two games is fantastic! But... if it's a good game then I'd like for the Fallout 3 fans to keep it alive with their money.

I assume they would honor the Fallout 3/NV storylines to a certain extent but the focus might be on Interplay's Fallout titles? Same way that Fallout 3 made references to the originals here and there but largely focused on their own version of Fallout 3?

I'm sure the only ones who would be mad over such a storyline are those that are deep into the Fallout 3+ story. Casual Fallout 3 players who aren't as engaged into the storyline might not even notice.

Would be kind of funny if the two were polarized to a point where those that want references to the "old" stuff go to the MMO and those who want the new stuff stick to the Fallout X titles....ok maybe it's not that funny.

 

[xavierk]

On that matter Interplay investor orionquest informed us that Bethesda has filed the request for a trial by jury for the ongoing case with Interplay over the rights of a Fallout MMO as well as Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics.

The rights of Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics? Now that's just mean. Bethesda doesn't need these rights for anything, they can reference to the lore as much as they want, they did so in F3 and NV. This is just to hinder Interplay's income, e.g. practically end the need for the court case.

They have no legal right to Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics as far as I can see, unless Herve really dropped the ball, more than thought up until now during negotiations.
Just let Interplay make the MMO, Bethesda won't lose any money, unless it sucks it will just build brand recognition. And if it sucks Interplay will soon be bankrupt so the potential for damage is really quite limited.

I think they're also frustrated about the whole "Fallout Trilogy" pack Interplay has been selling, because their dumb as shit average fanboys think Fallout 3 HAS to be the third installment in the series, but that's really the fault of Bethesda's naming and their fanboy's ultimate failure to do even the most basic research, Fallout 3 is anything but tactical so it's hard to confuse the two.

And finally a personal remark: I hope Interplay wins. They deserve another shot at this. If FOOL fails, let them fail.

 

[bonustime]

Request for trial by jury = Lawyers are going to focus on manipulating people's emotions instead of the actual legality

 

[xavierk]

Why have juries for contract disputes anyway? That material is best interpreted by specialist judges. But no, in America everything needs to be democratized, even down to the schoolbooks in Texas.

 

[Huntman]

I don't mean to be a pessimist, but does anyone think that this'll actually be released? I think Bethesda would just buy out Interplay before they let them release a "non-official" Fallout game. Whenever I hear news about Fallout Online, my excitement is always tempered but the nagging feeling it's never going to actually be released. Bethesda has a lot of money and that seems to be what wins these cases. I just don't see this ending well.

 

[Korin]

When I think of Fallout Online, I think of Duke Nukem:Forever, with quarterly releases of photoshopped Ultima Online screenshots. I don't think Interplay releasing an MMO is going to be helping anybody. If they do release an MMO it's pretty much going to tank, the MMO market is not a friendly place with WoW on the scene.

 

[SharkClub]

We are not going to use the same engine as FO1/FO2.

I'd bloody hope not.

It seems like the kinda thing they shouldn't have to point out.

 

[Lexx]

Well, a lot people confuse interplay's FOOL with FOnline.

FOnline isn't Fallout 1 / 2 engine either, but if it looks like that for people, people assume it's the same engine.

 

[Beelzebud]

The bottom line is this: Bethesda made a deal with Interplay, in which Interplay was supposed to retain the rights to do an MMO.

The fact that Bethesda is now trying to screw them out of it, tells me that they negotiated a deal in bad faith, and had no intention of honoring their side of the deal.

They really should just back off. It's not like they haven't made a vault full of money off of this franchise.

Arguing about Interplay being capable of producing a quality MMO is one thing, but Bethesda should have just paid up the 50 million, if they didn't want Interplay working on a Fallout MMO. They've made enough on the Fallout brand that 50 million actually would have been worth it.

 

[Ixyroth]

Arguing about Interplay being capable of producing a quality MMO is one thing, but Bethesda should have just paid up the 50 million, if they didn't want Interplay working on a Fallout MMO. They've made enough on the Fallout brand that 50 million actually would have been worth it.

It's pretty clear that Beth has no interest in making a Fallout MMO, they just don't want anyone else to have any claim over the Fallout name, where there will be an association to "their franchise".

As BN said earlier, it's the rare MMO which turns out to be viable over the long term. Many of the recent entries have been total failures.

 

[Faceless Stranger]

Arguing about Interplay being capable of producing a quality MMO is one thing, but Bethesda should have just paid up the 50 million, if they didn't want Interplay working on a Fallout MMO. They've made enough on the Fallout brand that 50 million actually would have been worth it.

It's pretty clear that Beth has no interest in making a Fallout MMO, they just don't want anyone else to have any claim over the Fallout name, where there will be an association to "their franchise".

As BN said earlier, it's the rare MMO which turns out to be viable over the long term. Many of the recent entries have been total failures.

I can see though now, with the new Fallout "Fanbase", an MMO could be a very profitable investment. COULD is the key word there though.

 

[Ausir]

Well, ZeniMax does have a MMO studio now. They're likely working on TES Online at the moment, but I wouldn't be surprised if they made a FOOL in the future as well.

 

[Per]

The bottom line is this: Bethesda made a deal with Interplay, in which Interplay was supposed to retain the rights to do an MMO.

Bethesda made a deal with Interplay in which Interplay was supposed to retain the rights to do an MMO providing they did X, Y and Z. They didn't.

 

[Elven6]

The bottom line is this: Bethesda made a deal with Interplay, in which Interplay was supposed to retain the rights to do an MMO.

Bethesda made a deal with Interplay in which Interplay was supposed to retain the rights to do an MMO providing they did X, Y and Z. They didn't.

That's what Bethesda says, Interplay says otherwise. It's impossible to know until further details are released.

 

[lisac2k]

Interplay investor orionquest informed us that Bethesda has filed the request for a trial by jury for the ongoing case with Interplay over the rights of a Fallout MMO as well as Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics.

Erhm... In the country I live in, similar cases are usually being resolved on an expert witness(es) basis, rather than a call for jury. Because, you know, the expertise... I didn't expect this. It would be good to know the real reasons behind this decision (probably some legal maneuvre by Beth's legal representatives), but -- shall we ever experience the whole truth? Hardly, I'd say. Looking forward to more info on the trial.

 

[SmartCheetah]

Well, ZeniMax does have a MMO studio now. They're likely working on TES Online at the moment, but I wouldn't be surprised if they made a FOOL in the future as well.

Can't wait to see mmo world filled with people "strafing" through the ground like in TESIV & F3/F:NV. They should change game title to The Elder Skateboards or something.

 

[mobucks]

funny how the multi-servers are referred to as "shards"

this is a old Ultima Online thing. The world of Sosaria was like a crystal ball that was broken into shards, hense the pacific/atlantic/baja shards.

It's neat how that stuck. I loved UO in it's hayday.

 

[Per]

Bethesda made a deal with Interplay in which Interplay was supposed to retain the rights to do an MMO providing they did X, Y and Z. They didn't.

That's what Bethesda says, Interplay says otherwise. It's impossible to know until further details are released.

It's what Interplay said as well; their financial reports never contained any mythical $30M that they had obtained before the funding deadline. They later said they had managed to fulfil the requirements, but never offered any evidence to this effect; and if I remember correctly, they then switched tacks and claimed the contract was so unfavourable to Interplay that Herve should never have signed it in the first place. Which doesn't change that he did.