http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3354
These are the only Van Buren screens in existence, anything else you see is fan art.
These are the only Van Buren screens in existence, anything else you see is fan art.
Van Buren to the bin?...what a waste!
- Thread starter Jame Hammer
- Start date
Silencer said:
Are you sure about that? And what about these screenshots? I guess they are real either - or am I wrong?
Also I'd like to add my private opinion about Van Buren source code. First of all I think that Bethesda bought the rights to F3 only because of the title itself - not the game. Moreover I suppose that their game will be a big disappointment for most of real Fallout fans. And actually that Van Buren project was (I'd like to write "is" but I'm afraid it's only wishful thinking now) the only hope for the Fallout community. And I guess Bethesda is aware of this - and that's way they won't make that source code available to anybody.
To sum it up - it seems to me that Van Buren source code is lost - what a shame
I think that we (I mean some real hardcore Fallout fans) are in a deep sh*t - there's no way out - and I really can't see any good solution of that problem.
voodzia said:
Yeah, all real, but that's about it.
voodzia said:Also I'd like to add my private opinion about Van Buren source code. First of all I think that Bethesda bought the rights to F3 only because of the title itself - not the game. Moreover I suppose that their game will be a big disappointment for most of real Fallout fans. And actually that Van Buren project was (I'd like to write "is" but I'm afraid it's only wishful thinking now) the only hope for the Fallout community. And I guess Bethesda is aware of this - and that's way they won't make that source code available to anybody.
To sum it up - it seems to me that Van Buren source code is lost - what a shame
I don't know what Bethesda has exactly. The design docs and the half-finished game, I suppose. Of course they're not going to do anything with it. They're contractually obliged not to release anything from it, I'd guess, and them finishing someone else's game would be just stupid. Really stupid
Kharn said:
I'd rather say that they won't use Van Buren source code only because of one reason I guess - namely they think it just sucks because the game engine is out-of-date - it ain't 3D and has no all these special effects that make the game look nice at present times. And this means only one thing to them - "We ain't gonna sell it in million copies - so we have to forget about it". And that's the end of the story of very promising Van Buren source code (for me at least).
And btw, I think that finishing that project ain't stupid (I think it's a wrong word - even a bit insulting for people who really like Van Buren) - it's just unprofitable for Bethesda - and that's all.
And one more thing - does anyone know if someone from Bethesda is a registered user here or at least is following some discussions on the forum? Or maybe they've posted any open letters to the Fallout community?
voodzia said:
The Van Buren engine was 3D. With isometric view. But still 3D.
Is it outdated? Meh, it's a good CRPG engine, but not of the graphic quality of the current, say, TES and Gothic engines. And those seem to be setting the pace for CRPG graphics
voodzia said:
And yet it isn't. This is someone else's game. Why should the people of Bethesda feel obliged to finish someone else's game rather than make their own. That really is just stupid.
Bethesda wants to do their own thing, for good or bad
voodzia said:
They're here, they can't talk though, game's in pre-pre-pre-production. Shouldn't even have been announced yet.
Kharn said:
I didn't say that it's a bad cRPG engine - actually I think it's a very good engine (for me even FO2 engine is very good so Van Buren's could be only better).
But as I said before - Bethesda thinks it's not good enough to make FO3 a bestseller so they're gonna make something new. But the question is - is it gonna be better than Van Buren? I guess no one can answer that question now - we just have to wait and we'll see. But if anyone wants to know my opinion - here it's - I have a bad feeling that Bethesda's Fallout will have only one thing in common with original Fallouts - the title - and nothing more. I wish I was wrong about that but that's what I think today.
Kharn said:
I don't know why you're still saying that is someone else's game? It ain't the point here - it doesn't matter to people who are gonna buy FO3 whether Bethesda or BIS was the original maker of the source code. I think that they decided not to use Van Buren only because of money - and that's the only reason.
And one more thing - of course that no one can oblige Bethesda to finish Van Buren but if they really have all rights to that source code they are just as that dog in the manger - at least in my judgement.
voodzia said:
You and many others, but we can only wait and see
voodzia said:
It *is* the point and they *do* have other reasons not to finish it.
Look, Bethesda is a well-respected independant game developer. Even if you don't like their games you can at least acknowledge they're respectable. Respectable developers generally don't take half-finished games to patch up and release as their own product. It's bad form and lacks self-respect.
Kharn said:
Oh, come on - don't be so naive. This business ain't about self-respect - it's about money and money only matters here (I know it's sad but it's true - money makes the world go round). I can give an example - Apple Computer Inc. - they use UNIX source code in their latest operating system Mac OS X. And you could ask - "Why does such a big and respectable corporation use someone else's source code?" I hope you know the answer*.
It looks like our discussion goes a bit off topic so I'm not gonna argue with you about that issue anymore. Generally I just wanted to say that it's a really big waste that Van Buren project won't be finished. We don't know the true reason for that (we can only guess) but there's no doubt that it was very promising game engine.
* - to those who don't know - because UNIX is a very good and reliable operating system
voodzia said:
Actually, that'd be because Apple lost their original source code after Mac OS 6. They redesigned their OS from scratch for 7, 8 and 9, all which were terrible, and at that point decided to switch to UNIX.
Don't presume to lecture me, please.
Don't be stupid. This isn't time for communist propaganda about capitalism. Yes, money matters, but it isn't the bloody only thing that matters.
Kharn said:
LOL - I guess I'll have to lecture you 'cause you know sh*t about Mac OS. First of all - nobody from Apple lost source code of their OS. And besides, do you really think such thing can be lost?! And if you do then you must be either a fool or a f*cking ignorant.
Moreover, Apple decided to implement not their own source code in early 1997 when they bought from NeXT Computer Inc. their OS - OPENSTEP - so it was more than 2 years before Mac OS 9 was released. And the last thing - I really have no idea what you meant by saying "decided to switch to UNIX" but I guess it only shows that you just don't know what you're talking about. UNIX source code (to be exact it's a combination of xBSD, GNU, Mach and Linux) is used in Mac OS X only in the kernel layer which is called XNU. So I don't know what "switching" you're talking about?
In general, do me a favor and don't try to give me your bullsh*t next time you post in here. And stop talking about things that ain't true - you can make a fool of yourself if you want to but don't try to fool me - you ain't gonna make it.
Kharn said:
LOL again - I can bet you know a lot of things about communist propaganda (btw, have you lived on the east side of The Iron Curtain before 1989?) but if you really think that in show business there's something that matters more than money then you're both naive and stupid - and that's for sure.
p.s.
I'm sorry it's a off topic post but I couldn't resist to reply.
Wódzia, nie przeginaj ;] I nie pyskuj jak przyjdzie deathclaw ;]
The screens - Right, there were three more. This amounts to five screens. But that's it, I was referring to the "Deathclaw Commandos" screens.
As for the whole Van Buren vs. Bethesda's development thing, tthe whole idea is that we're discussiong to sparate entities. If bethesda is going to make a good Fallout game from scratch, that's fine. If the fans get a hold of VB's docs and code, that's fine. But don't expect bethesda to actually steal someone's ideas (I mean, come on, that's not the way thinking up a game works) and sell them in their own products.
An option would be to get some of the original VB designers to work on it for Bethesda, but I don't think that's likely.
The screens - Right, there were three more. This amounts to five screens. But that's it, I was referring to the "Deathclaw Commandos" screens.
As for the whole Van Buren vs. Bethesda's development thing, tthe whole idea is that we're discussiong to sparate entities. If bethesda is going to make a good Fallout game from scratch, that's fine. If the fans get a hold of VB's docs and code, that's fine. But don't expect bethesda to actually steal someone's ideas (I mean, come on, that's not the way thinking up a game works) and sell them in their own products.
An option would be to get some of the original VB designers to work on it for Bethesda, but I don't think that's likely.
Silencer said:
I'm far from saying that Bethesda stole someone else's ideas - actually they didn't steal it - they bought it, right?
And of course it would be great if Bethesda would release their own FO3 - made from scratch - hell yeah, why not. Btw, how anyone will be able to say if their FO3 is really their in 100%? Actually we won't know it whether they used some code, docs or even ideas from BIS project. But that's not the point.
The problem is (at least for me it's a problem) that they're not gonna make Van Buren source code available to the public or some other game developers. And that's why I called them a dog in the manger.
And why it's a problem for me? 'cause as we all can see Van Buren was a very promising game and could be easily finished if only Bethesda would allow for it. Unfortunately it ain't gonna happen I suppose and Van Buren is gonna to be forgotten for a month, year or whatever. And that's gonna be a real waste for Fallout fans. And that's all I'm trying to say here.
voodzia said:
They're only licensed to make a new Fallout game, they don't own the code and thus can't release it even if they want to.
voodzia said:
BIS doesn't exist anymore, 'cept in name.
The Fallout license and the sourcecode of the older games and Van Buren are all owned by Interplay under Herve Caen.
All Bethesda has is the right to produce and release Fallout 3, with an option to buy the rights for Fallout 4 and 5, as long as they have no MMO elements. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they also have all the old documentation and, presumably, the source code, but don't have the right to publish any of it.