Interplay intends to start development of Fallout Online

[LazyD]

Here's a better idea: use an ordinary death system (near-instantaneous resurrection with some moderate penalties), rename the game to something else, design as a regular MMO and don't try to associate it with Fallout.

I've been waiting for Mad Max Online for Fucking YEARS!

you will never be able to explain how one can have true roleplaying depth in a world populated by thousands of players. How can a player's choices in such a world matter, when the world must be static in order to accommodate all the *other* players? Creating a game where one protagonist makes world-changing decisions is difficult enough, but how do you go about creating a game where thousands of players want to be protagonists and decide the fate of the world?

This is true.. Static worlds are a boring.. predictable.. and well repeditive and tedious. Mmo designers are working on less static worlds... from what I've read I hear there a long ways away from making anything but Static MMo Worlds.. but at least there working on it..

So with that said. The true Fool is above the technology we poses atm. Not only does the static world prove an issue, but also the SPECIAL system.. Thats near imposible.

So ya.. Good luck to Herve. Hes gonna need at least 10 points dedicated to luck for that+a zeta scan and maybe throw some caps in a fucking well while hes at it.. Also good luck to anyone who tries to defend fool.. Better start doing your homework.. I know I'm too lazy for that.

 

[morfeuz]

They should sell fallout online rights to a Korean company

 

[LazyD]

They should sell fallout online rights to a Korean company

Very funny.. but I can't help but reply with something not so funny..

Why? So we can end up with another shitty grind oriented, lacking content, lacking graphics, And lacking a coherent community Kind of MMo? I'll pass.

 

[frissy]

Here's a better idea: use an ordinary death system (near-instantaneous resurrection with some moderate penalties), rename the game to something else, design as a regular MMO and don't try to associate it with Fallout.

I also agree on that, but that's not for me to decide. It's a discussion about HOW they would make it suck as less as possible (if they are going to make it). They won't listen to us about making or not making the game. Hell, even Beth knew better than to come here are ask for help. I wonder why...

I just fear that this anti-anything will cause this community to alienete from the current Fallout projects. Who whould ever wanto to discuss or try to solve anything here...oh yeah..they don't.

 

[frissy]

This might be a good read for this thread.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3155486

" It seems that one of the big challenges in a big multiplayer universe is that you can't really have the player shape the world like you can in a single-player game ... "

 

[DirtyDreamDesigner]

FFS, frissy, double-posting!? Did your kid brother take over your account? You should know that's a big no-no by now.

 

[Sander]

I also agree on that, but that's not for me to decide. It's a discussion about HOW they would make it suck as less as possible (if they are going to make it). They won't listen to us about making or not making the game. Hell, even Beth knew better than to come here are ask for help. I wonder why...

I just fear that this anti-anything will cause this community to alienete from the current Fallout projects. Who whould ever wanto to discuss or try to solve anything here...oh yeah..they don't.

So then what? We're supposed to applaud selling out the Fallout license just so we can 'discuss' something with developers?

 

[Batz]

FOOL is just a clusterfuck waiting to happen

 

[frissy]

So then what? We're supposed to applaud selling out the Fallout license just so we can 'discuss' something with developers?

Not applaud, but I have a gut feeling there are other options. With this attitude they will stay far away from here.

We might not be able to change the ideas of creating a Fallout MMO, but we might actually have a chance to make it LESS SUCKY with giving creative and constructive ideas. Not just hammering everything down because it's not in the previous Fallouts.

Ps. sorry about double-post. My bad.

 

[Sander]

Not applaud, but I have a gut feeling there are other options. With this attitude they will stay far away from here.

We might not be able to change the ideas of creating a Fallout MMO, but we might actually have a chance to make it LESS SUCKY with giving creative and constructive ideas.

Oh, right, because that worked for Tactics and FOPOS.

Not just hammering everything down because it's not in the previous Fallouts.

Ugh, again with this bullshit frissy?

 

[frissy]

Oh, right, because that worked for Tactics and FOPOS.

Ugh, again with this bullshit Sander?

You of all people (or ratty, can't remember) who is constantly reminding that Fallout does not equal the setting. Tactics and FOPOS don't equal FOOL. Fallout 1 & 2 don't equal Tactics or FOPOS.

 

[Briosafreak]

So then what? We're supposed to applaud selling out the Fallout license just so we can 'discuss' something with developers?

Not applaud, but I have a gut feeling there are other options. With this attitude they will stay far away from here.

We might not be able to change the ideas of creating a Fallout MMO, but we might actually have a chance to make it LESS SUCKY with giving creative and constructive ideas. Not just hammering everything down because it's not in the previous Fallouts.

Ps. sorry about double-post. My bad.

Frissy it would help your quest on finding creative ideas to make a FOOL game if you had given good arguments against Ratty's last posts, but you haven't, you are running in circles here. Why don't you study the issues at hand a bit more and we'll continue the discussion in a few months, what do you say?

 

[Sander]

Ugh, again with this bullshit Sander?

You of all people (or ratty, can't remember) who is constantly reminding that Fallout does not equal the setting. Tactics and FOPOS don't equal FOOL. Fallout 1 & 2 don't equal Tactics or FOPOS.

Eh, what?
This bit wasn't about the contents of the game but about the the reaction of the developers to sucking-up and being 'constructive' about poor ideas: nil. And since FOPOS was actually developed by, gee, Interplay the treatment wouldn't be any different now.

 

[frissy]

How on earth could I do anything else than run in circles with this? ( I didn't respond to all the arguments, because it would be simply spam and stupid).

Everything about Fallout Online, down to the most basic idea, is a horrible, horrible nightmare.

I can't imagine anything less entertaining or more likely to fail miserably.

No one has ever, *ever* managed to change the mechanics of a CRPG without completely changing the feel of the game and alienating the core fan base. It can't be done, plain and simple.

Does WoW feel like RTS? Seems like the fans still play it, and somehow they also got new customers. The feel is completely different, but it still didn't alienate the fan base. Perfect example that the feel of the game can be compelety different and yet, be a good game.

rename the game to something else, design as a regular MMO and don't try to associate it with Fallout.

A possibility, too bad they hold the license for it.

It isn't possible to create a massively multiplayer online roleplaying game.

Who made you a gamedesign god? Lucky me that there are professionals working on this particular element. For example: http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3155486

A Fallout MMO would never have the gameplay of Fallout and Fallout 2 and consequently wouldn't appeal to fans of the CRPG series. Therefore, Fallout Online would initially have no target audience and would have to compete with all the other MMOs for players.

Who has said that it should have the same target audience. Why would FOOL automatically be a the most horrible game ever, just because YOU don't like the idea (or even the fans of CRPG). It's Fallout Online, not Fallout.

Besides there are players left in the universe. Why? Because all players don't like the MMO settings or the games itself that are out there. You can get new customers. In theory you might not have to compete at all (in reality, of course you do). Is there a MMO with Post-apocalyptic Fallout setting? No.

 

[Jebus]

When the question is still put to us why Fallout Fans fight with such fanaticism against the FOOL element in the gaming world, why it pressed and still presses for its removal then the answer can only be: Because Fallout fans desire to establish a true community of the people…. Because we are Fallout Fans, we can never suffer an alien game which has nothing to do with Fallout to claim the money of our working people!

(Prof. Dr. Jebus Gobson's closing speech at the Nurnberg Hattery conference, 18 sept. 1936)

 

[Briosafreak]

just because YOU don't like the idea

Many many arguments were already risen against the idea, this is not about will, but of simple reasoning. Yet again why are you trying to slide past the problems and go ahead and accuse the others of doing the same thing when they are clearly the voice of reason, against the smoke of your not so thought through defence of FOOL, is beyond me.

Frissy this is not about liking the idea or not, it's about finding the obstacles and dangers of the venture, it's a shame you are acting like just because you like the idea all the problems with it should be rushed aside, and instead we all should go into a masochistic quest with no basis to lean on.

Please think this through a bit more.

 

[frissy]

There are solid arguments, and not solid ones. I'm not too weak to admit that many of my arguments are faulty and not even intended to be the "right one", but just a push into the unknows. A possibility.

I mostly see the arguments shot down due to them not being Fallouty. Not because they are impossible.

I'm not defending FOOL as an good idea (I would still prefer VB), but i'm defending it being possible to do.


No basis to lean? Sorry, one says it's impossible to create a MMO with roleplaying. I gave a example of Bioware working on that. Will it work? I don't know, but I'm fairly confident that they know more and if they think it's POSSIBLE I think it's pretty retarted to argue that it's IMPOSSIBLE.

 

[Sander]

...
Frissy, have you gone absolutely bonkers insane?
First you name *commercial success* as a measuring rod of a good game.
Then you say that we should not want a Fallout-y game, even though we're a Fallout community and the game will bear the Fallout name.
Then you name Bioware as an example of a company working on a roleplaying game.
Bioware.
What the hell, man?

 

[frissy]

...
Frissy, have you gone absolutely bonkers insane?

Nope. Always been

First you name *commercial success* as a measuring rod of a good game.

Only as much as you say it's not a measurment of a good game. It can be a measurment for it. Just because masses play it, doesn't mean it's crap. Usually there is a reason why people don't stop playing it...

Then you say that we should not want a Fallout-y game, even though we're a Fallout community and the game will bear the Fallout name.

I'm not saying that. I'm simply implying that a game can be Fallout-y even if you don't follow the previous versions 100% (it hasn't been done yet, but as I've stated before...and as some have also agreed with me...it's POSSIBLE (slim chance).

Then you name Bioware as an example of a company working on a roleplaying game.
Bioware.
What the hell, man?

Because the are working on one. Will it be a good one? I don't know. Will it be roleplay as you see it? I don't know. Will it be roleplaying as I see it? I don't know. Will Fallout Online work? I don't know, but I'm sure as hell neither can you.

 

[Sander]

Only as much as you say it's not a measurment of a good game. It can be a measurment for it. Just because masses play it, doesn't mean it's crap. Usually there is a reason why people don't stop playing it...

Oh goodie, twisting my words.
I never claimed that mass-appeal implied crappiness, but I did say that mass-appeal does not make for a good game, or a good Fallout game. That's where the qualities of the game in question come into play, not the amount of people who like it. Unless you're willing to certify that Oblivion was actually a good game.

I'm not saying that. I'm simply implying that a game can be Fallout-y even if you don't follow the previous versions 100% (it hasn't been done yet, but as I've stated before...and as some have also agreed with me...it's POSSIBLE (slim chance).

Gee, I don't see me denying that anywhere.

Because the are working on one. Will it be a good one? I don't know. Will it be roleplay as you see it? I don't know. Will it be roleplaying as I see it? I don't know. Will Fallout Online work? I don't know, but I'm sure as hell neither can you.

Yes, I do know, as I've explained, in detail, with arguments you have yet to even touch upon, let alone refute.