Hmm I think Interplay liked my suggestions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Guest
I suggested to Interplay two years ago that they need to try a tactics based game. I even posted my thoughts on this board from time to time.


I understand the arguments and complaints that the next Fallout game isn't a pure roleplaying game. But diversity in a title is a GOOD thing. Maybe Interplay is trying to attract people from other game genres. Strategic gaming has a large following and this game may attract more people to the Fallout universe.

And for those complaining about this game I think it's fair to point out that this DOESN'T mean that there will be NO Fallout 3. We knew that the developement of Fallout 3 would take three or four YEARS before a game would be released. This way we have a game to fill the void of not having ANY Fallout title. I think that something is better than nothing.

BTW I wonder if they took my plot ideas for this game ? IF so look for Area 51, NORAD in Colorado, the Grand Canyon and other posible battle areas for this game. As well as a "Skynet" type computer and an army of robots to battle. Hmm anyone for Cyborg player characters ?
 
>
>
>I understand the arguments and complaints
>that the next Fallout game
>isn't a pure roleplaying game.
>But diversity in a title
>is a GOOD thing. Maybe
>Interplay is trying to attract
>people from other game genres.
>Strategic gaming has a large
>following and this game may
>attract more people to the
>Fallout universe.
>

Honestly, what are you smoking?

Name one series where either the spin-off or the original has kept up and not suffered in the least.

Hey, there isn't any!

And people wonder why some of us are skeptics....
 
Super Mario Bros. Although, it's not like any of them are really great games; but cross-genre didn't seem to affect them.

Umm, Ultima with Ultima Underworld. They were doing quite well until Ultima Online.

Do Sim-games count? The spin-offs seem to have done well, and yet SimCity hasn't suffered for it.

Skie
 
>Super Mario Bros. Although, it's
>not like any of them
>are really great games; but
>cross-genre didn't seem to affect
>them.

Agreed. Utter trash, all of them.

>Umm, Ultima with Ultima Underworld.
>They were doing quite well
>until Ultima Online.

The only difference between those games is really the viewpoint. One's in 3rd, the other is in 3rd. Other than that, Underworld is a bit more into dungeon-delving, but aside from that it's about the same. It *could* be just as easily done in 3rd-person (however it would have to be iso).

>Do Sim-games count? The spin-offs
>seem to have done well,
>and yet SimCity hasn't suffered
>for it.

Every Sim game follows the same concept. They can't really be considered cross-genre or hybrid, as they are "Sim" as well.
 
What about Final Fantasy? The people who liked to watch the previous interactive movies, still like the ones that came after Final Fantasy: Tactics.

As far as Ultima, I think that a transition to a 1st person view changes the game. Just as a transition to massive-multi changes a game.

Does it make either a cross-genre or hybrid? I don't think so. So, if it doesn't; then citing them as examples of failed cross-genre or hybrid games doesn't make sense either.

X-COM is a bad example, because they never returned to the original format after they attempted a cross-genre game. The closest thing to revisiting X-COM: UFO Defense would be Freedom Ridge (yet, to be released).

I think you had a couple other examples of how cross-genre/hybrids caused the sequals to suffer, but I can't think of them. So, I can't say I agree or disagree.

Skie
 
>What about Final Fantasy? The
>people who liked to watch
>the previous interactive movies, still
>like the ones that came
>after Final Fantasy: Tactics.

Tactics never had a sequel, and FFVIII really bombed in comparasin to number VII. It was too much of a movie, and really linear. Some news that has been flying around, is that Squaresoft has learned from that and is going back to the gamestyle found in V and VI. If so, I can safely buy another FF game. If not, the series will go downhill as they lose people. It's gotten so bad so that all you have to do is rent the game and play it once, and you will never need to play it again. It's like a movie. With Fallout, you could play it multiple times right back to back different ways and still not get bored. (Me, not get bored with a game? Must be saying a lot!)


>X-COM is a bad example, because
>they never returned to the
>original format after they attempted
>a cross-genre game. The
>closest thing to revisiting X-COM:
>UFO Defense would be Freedom
>Ridge (yet, to be released).

Nope, they didn't. So what did most of the hardcore followers of the X-Com series do after Apocalypse? Like me, they left the series. If I wanted a combat flight sim, then I will go play Wing Commander. It just wasn't X-Com anymore, and I seriously hope they return to how they once were instead of further bastardising the name of X-Com.

>I think you had a couple
>other examples of how cross-genre/hybrids
>caused the sequals to suffer,
>but I can't think of
>them. So, I can't
>say I agree or disagree.

They are hre somewhere, in one of the long-ass threads, I think.
 
"Tactics never had a sequel."

I never meant to insinuate that it did. I meant that the FFVIII (not sure if VII came after), still was considered a good game.

"It's gotten so bad so that all you have to do is rent the game and play it once, and you will never need to play it again. It's like a movie."

They've all been like that. They are very linear with the emphasis on story. All the FF have been interactive movies.

"It just wasn't X-Com anymore, and I seriously hope they return to how they once were instead of further bastardising the name of X-Com."

Yeah, it wasn't X-COM. It was a space sim in the X-COM world. How can a cross-genre be the same game as the original?

And, they are 'further bastardising the name of X-COM.' The next X-COM game is a first person sqaud-based/tactical game.

Skie
 
True about the FInal Fantasy bit, but a big thing too...

With number 4 and 5, you could change classes and such. The designer that made 1-6 is back on the team and making number 9, so look for a return to the goodness (hopefully!).

He got put back in place because number 8 really bombed and had people thrashing it badly.

I seriously hope that the original designer puts back in the class system from 4, 5, Tactics.
 
I haven't really enjoyed a FF since FF2 (US). 3 (US) was alright. None of the characters (in 3) really impressed me, this goes for 7 too. So, I wrote the FF series off.

I figured I can get better animation, characters, & stories by buying/renting some anime. It's also easier to find time for a 2hr movie, than a 60hr game (that should be condensed to a 2hr movie).

Skie
 
>I haven't really enjoyed a FF
>since FF2 (US). 3
>(US) was alright. None
>of the characters (in 3)
>really impressed me, this goes
>for 7 too. So,
>I wrote the FF series
>off.
>


Try the FInal Fantasy Anthology/Anthologies.

I forget which it is.

It has a PSX version of Final Fantasy 5 and 6.

5 was where you could decide how to advance your party. And 6 was the US number 3.
 
There have been many series that have bombed after spinoffs.

Wing Commander: It has had many spin-offs. Wing Commander Armada was a real time strategy game. Privateer was a space trading game. They were both built between Wing Commander II and III. Few Wing Commander fans will say the series sucked after Wing Commander II.

Oregon Trail: After many versions of the original, Amazon Trail, Yukon Trail, and a few others were made. Oregon Trail II and III are much better than the original.

Descent: Freespace, although extremely terrible, did not ruin Descent III.

Sim City: Sim Tower, Sim Ant, Sim Farm, Sim Earth, etc did not hurt Sim City 2000 or 3000.

Civilization: Alpha Centauri will not ruin Civilization III.

Command and Conquer: Red Alert did not hurt C&C2.

Yes, some spin-offs have hurt series, but many series without spinn-offs have been ruined too.

Will Moeller
The Final Battlefield
 
The main point was about cross-genre games. Most of your examples don't fit this category.

Descent Freespace was still a shooter though. So it doesn't count.

XXXX Trail games play the same.

We ruled out Sim games. They are Sim, because they're simulation. This doesn't make the other titles spin-offs.

Alpha Centauri is it's own entinty (although similar to Civ). Civilization hasn't had any a cross-genre. There hasn't been Civ: The FPS, or Civ: The RPG.

C&C, RA, & C&C2 are all RTS games set in the C&C Universe. The C&C FPS that's coming out would be considered a cross-genre. An interesting point with Westwood titles - they only have a good game when it isn't a sequel/prequel. (Dune II, C&C, LoL, Blade Runner, Nox.)

Skie
 
I think that guy has some "confusion" about the term: SPIN-OFFS.
Spin-offs are not just simple SEQUELS.

You cannot take C&C and say that RA, or C&C2 are spin-offs of eachother.
If they would make a game called:

C&C: COLD STEEL

In which you play in the 13th Century, fighting and conquoring land, while having only primitve guns, cannons and swords as your weapons.

THIS IS A spin-off (partial)
It has nothing to do with the orginal C&C besides the fact they are both RTSs.

Same thing about TOTAL ANAHILATION , original, and kingdoms...

A wilder spin-off would be a total different genre of games.
Like making a C&C: deplomacy in times of war...
or - C&C: the battle of negotiation...

if they made an I STILL BELIEVE THAT I ONCE KNEW WHAT YOUR NEPHEW DID LAST SUMMER movie, about a simple romantic movie that includes betrayal(and isn't a horror movie), THAT would be a total spin-off (if made by the original makers... or whoever holds the copy rights).

...

SIMS BEING SPIN-OFFS, is the... most ridiculous thing i ever heard.
THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE "SIM" SERIES IS PLAIN AND SIMPLE, alot of "control-on-life" simulators in various types and situations.
SIM CITY, duh - is the managment and establishment of a CITY...

SIM TOWER, is merely a FOCUS on the construction and management of ONE SINGLE TOWER!!!!
it isn't a spinoff!!!!1
If they make X-MEN comics, and then they make the WOLVERINE series, it isn't a spin-off.
All they did was focusing on the character of wolverine - in a dedicated title.

they chould have done SIM ROOM, SIM BATHROOM,
SIM DESK, or SIM SHOP in the same way...
It's all the same TYPE OF GAMES, in the same KIND OF GAMEPLAY, and the same CONCEPT.

There wasn't a sim in which you played ONE OF THE CONSUMERS, OR CITIZENS, or something like that...
Because it is totally off the concept, and genre.

There is BAYWATCH, and there is BAYWATCH NIGHTS... all it MEANS is a focus on the NIGHTS or whatever they show there - with the same basic actors, in the same LOCATION, and with the same idea... bla bla good guys, bla bla danger or trouble, bla bla solution or tragedy.

NOW - for the first guy , who actually started this post-chain.. (from which we totally took off to a different route).

Read this:

"Hey, you know, I actually offered the idea to Steven spielberg to make JURASSIC PARK, so I suppose he liked my idea.

I also offered him to make JURASSIC PARK 3, so expect to see: "DINO, from the flinstones"
"George, the talking dinosaur", "mookachu, a tribe that lives together with T-REXs and hunts and co-operates with them..."


Interesting, huh?
Hey, you know what was your most logical argument?
this one:
********************************************
And for those complaining about this game I think it's fair to point out that this DOESN'T mean that there will be NO Fallout 3. We knew that the developement of Fallout 3 would take three or four YEARS before a game would be released. This way we have a game to fill the void of not having ANY Fallout title
*******************************************

Hmmm - wait - i get it...
BECAUSE Fallout 3 will take 3 or 4 years... (?!)
haha - wait...
IT IS BETTER TO MAKE ANOTHER GAME, AFTER FALLOUT 2, SO UNTIL THEY ARE FINISHED WITH FALLOUT 3, IN 3 OR 4 YEARS, WE WILL HAVE A GAME TO PLAY WITH!

huh????!
This is what you actually said.
DON'T YOU THINK... URR... no you don't - DIDN'T THE SIMPLE FACT THAT fallout BOS will take time to MAKE - JUST AS WELL move across your head?

Oh i know, WHY DON'T WE MAKE FALLOUT 4, before fallout 3, so UNTIL THEY FINISH 3, we will have a 4 already....
WAIT, why don't we make 5,6,7 in the same chance!
This way we will have plenty of stuff to do until FALLOUT 3 comes out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

DIDN'T YOU NOTICE THAT fallout 2 was already out in 1998! that is TWO YEARS AGO...
so if it will take them THREE YEARS, they are supposed to finish it in 2001!!!!!1
whoops - that is JUST THE TIME WHEN THEY WILL FINISH Tactics!!!

BESIDES... hmm, 3 years... hey that is logical, considering the fact there is a high chance they are going to use AN ALREADY EXISTING ENGINE, and considering the fact that FALLOUT 2, which was made with the existing engine OF 1, took about ONE YEAR TO MAKE!
So what will it take fallout 3?
1.5 YEARS? 2 YEARS? three years?
LETS SAY THREE, then it's already done next year! whoopieeee....

but no.
Why?
because they didn't EVEN START IT.
They didn't make TACTICS so in the meantime we will have another GAME, they are trying to make more money.
***IF*** - they will make Fallout 3, they won't start it now, not after they finish making tactics, not after it is OUT...
BUT WHEN THEY DECIDE TO... if they decide to.

It can be in 2002 that they will JUST START IT.
Things will be different in 2002.
Maybe then they will decide their engine is too old, and they will make a NEW ONE...
THEN - it will take them 3+ years.
THEN it will only be out in 2005 or 2006.
Whoopie!
EEEEEEIGHT YEARS AFTER FALLOUT 2! good way to make sequels!

TACTICS just wasted more time.
If they started Fallout 3 instead, they would have been done with it in 2001 or 2002.

I'm not complaining though.
I believe it will be a nice game, and being a fallout, and taking a place and a plot in the fallout universe, it probably will even be nicer.

I don't take efforts on trying to make Fallout 3 come any earlier tho.
It's not that i don't care... there isn't a game in the UNIVERSE that i want to have more than Fallout 3, but it is useless since they apparently choosed a different route so far.

The tactics is a good sign, since they came back to Fallout, but it ISN'T FALLOUT 3, and it is much easier to make, and a much bigger money-maker.

Klayhamn- ThieFoRent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top