What can we do?

I was merely using the monty python thing as a broad example of pop culture references . Don't get me wrong, i pretty much agree with rosh, i was just saying that some people might view those comments as hypocritical.
He does have a very visible position in these forums and some interplay plant might use that against him.
Forgive me im kind of sleep deprived right now :cry:

or just disregard the first paragraph the second one was better anyway.
 
Django said:
Weren't the monty python jokes in FoT 1and2 mindless pop culture references? The new jokes are simply pandering to the new target audience; the mainstream console gamer.The old jokes were simply pandering to the old target audience; computer nerd. Not that there's anything wrong with either; but your kind of setting yourself up for a fall there Roshambo.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point.

The shitty easter eggs that were thrown haphazardly into Fo2 and FOT were pretty bad. It would be one thing if they were done in a REAL easter egg manner, or if there was some damn talent behind them, but there wasn't. Those done in Fo1 were done with significantly more care and detail, and therefore people at large do not consider them to be crap.

Now, about the pop-culture aspects, that is intended to pander to a new crowd. It is also violating the setting quite badly and is the reason why many people, not just the "hardcore" fans, are upset about it. The thongs really have no place to begin with, and are there for the sake of having them there, not to mention that character model looks like shit along with many others. Well, I lie. All the other character models. One, in fact, looks like MegaMan and the Policeman from the Village People had a baby and pissed on it.

In losing the unique style of Fallout, it's really not going to look anything special. That's the thing Dumbfuck Chuck apparently doesn't get. The graphics look like shit, the gameplay (including hearing that moron at IGN go on about it) sounds like nothing special, the setting looks like it takes a FAR back seat - therefore without the specific unique style of the game, it will be nothing really special. It will be BG:DA with different graphics and guns, it will probably use the same shitty quest formula, too.
 
Fallout had pop culture references, but they stuck to the theme of 1950s sci-fi, or Post Apocalyptic, or Nuclear Warfare.

Fallout 2 didn't stick to the theme when they added their easter eggs, which seemed to follow quantity of easter eggs over making sure they fit in to the theme of the game. Fallout 2 had well over 200 of them, which almost seems more like a game made out of easter eggs than a game containing them.

As for what we can do about Fallout Enforcer. Sitting back does nothing, really. The best thing you can do is when you see a thread about Fallout Enforcer, voice your opinion on it. Let the chowderheads at IPLY know you don't like what they're doing. Let them know loud and clear that this is not something you think is remotely cool.

If only a handful put forth on the record that this game isn't what they want, then you can dismiss those as fringe riders. 1,000 voices speak louder than 10 people screaming.
 
I'm just trying to think about the references in FO1. I'm pretty sure there were no Monty Python ones... If there were, it was a few. Fallout 1 had Doctor Who's the Tardis, which was a simple blue box that vanished with no explanation when you got near it. A bottle truck fallen over with bottlecaps lying about and so on. Note that none of these references were obvious, or were found in major quests. In fact, the special encounters were just that, special. A dinosaur footprint, a spaceship with an Elvis painting and so on.

In Fallout 2, on the other hand, every god-damned special encounter was a reference. We had the bridgekeeper, the Holy Hand Grenade, two references from Silence of the Lambs (both in significant quests and both of them being about eating Liver), two references to the Terminator (Skynet and something else somewhere I think I recall).

Hmmm... I'm sure I had a point in all of this. I think I lost it somewhere along the way though.

Anyway, if there's anything in this game that doesn't fit Fallout Canon, I'm blaming Elara. :)
 
Things like the Tardis were also special encounters, which is really where things like that should be placed. In Fallout 2, the easter eggs like that weren't reserved for things like that, they were everywhere.
 
You know what I felt when I first read the news about the Fallout: BOS consolegame? Absolutely nothing! No anger, no rage, just nothing. I think I've become too jaded. I no longer believe there will ever be a worthy sequel or spin off in the fallout series and so I find myself not caring.

These days every publisher just wants to make a quick buck and they don't care about what rubbish they'll put out. The next Sam & Max and Full Throttle games will be action games too. Everyone who played the originals knows these sequels will suck. But the games will still get made to satisfy the younger generation of gamers who never did play the old point and click adventures.

I still believe that save for a few idiots gamers in general are not stupid. And when a game is bad it just won't sell well. We'll see how things turn out...
 
NNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Shadowman said:
The next Sam & Max and Full Throttle will be action games too.
Click to expand...

NNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

First FO: POS and now this. Two more awesome franchises lost to crappy action games! What is wrong with the gaming industry? Who will stop the madness? Will someone please think of the children/teenagers/adults/senior citizens?
 
Crap. I just typed a few paragraphs on my Fallout:BOS observations. Then my computer froze, and it's gone forever. Basically, it boiled down to:

1. Thing X is not out yet. Everyone who loved Thing Y hates Thing X. This is universal on every message board everywhere.

2. Betty Page = Rowr.

3. FBOS's trailer is a graphics fiesta. And the 3D modeling looks very much like the the tiles and the rendered models.

4. If it turns out to be a crapcake, I'll call it a crapcake. But I'm going to make that call when I'm informed.

5. Tolkein isn't any less cool because somebody made a colectible card game out of Lord of the Rings.
 
brm130 said:
4. If it turns out to be a crapcake, I'll call it a crapcake. But I'm going to make that call when I'm informed.
Click to expand...

You don't have to ride a horse to know it's lame.

5. Tolkein isn't any less cool because somebody made a colectible card game out of Lord of the Rings.
Click to expand...

Let's put it this way:

1. Fellowship is released (yay, it's great!)

2. Two towers is released (started by tolkien, but finshed by others, it's not quite as good. But still more LotR!! yay!)

3. Return of the Kind is released (but they decided to "broaden" the universe and make it sci-fi. P.S. it's shit)

4. then many years after the original release, they decide to make a pop-up prono book. They guise it as high fantasy but it's obviously not.

Now what do you think of your precious LotR?
 
You don't have to ride a horse to know it's lame.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but you do have to at least see it try to walk; It's foolish to put a gun to its head based on rumor and speculation.

Now what do you think of your precious LotR?
Click to expand...

The same as I did before! The novels haven't changed. New Line didn't come to my house and issue me revised copies of the novels when the movies came out- They haven't changed at all.

Your example did give me a lot of understanding into the differing mindsets here. To put it another way:

I'd say that "A View to a Kill" was garbage, but that doesn't make "Dr. No" a bad movie.
You'd say that Dalton hurts James Bond as a whole, by not being as good as Connery.
 
brm130 said:
You don't have to ride a horse to know it's lame.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but you do have to at least see it try to walk; It's foolish to put a gun to its head based on rumor and speculation.
Click to expand...

Take a look at the trailer and some of the bullshit on the official site. I really doubt it could be any more clear.

Now what do you think of your precious LotR?
Click to expand...

The same as I did before! The novels haven't changed. New Line didn't come to my house and issue me revised copies of the novels when the movies came out- They haven't changed at all.
Click to expand...

In context to his example. Try again.

I'd say that "A View to a Kill" was garbage, but that doesn't make "Dr. No" a bad movie.
Click to expand...

Bad analogy. "A View to a Kill" could be garbage, but that would make it garbage...(here's a tricky "logic" part)...compared to other Bond films. Even though I didn't mind AVtaK, I'll put it into a better perspective that I hope you can appreciate. We're not saying Fallout is crap because of this new title. We're saying this new title is crap because it doesn't have what makes Fallout Fallout. It also disregards the timeline, making changes for no real purpose, which will have to be "erased" or "forgotten" in time for Fo2 (along with all their other idiotic changes) in some deus ex machina for their bad design to even remotely fit into the setting. Perhaps they'll use a Vault Dweller/BoS initiate waking up from a dream as the ending, that sounds lame enough for the makers of Run Like Hell.

You'd say that Dalton hurts James Bond as a whole, by not being as good as Connery.
Click to expand...

To put it into perspective, since it's boggling that you really can't see what is wrong, it's like comparing Casino Royale to the Bond flicks people have preferred over the years.

A bit of curiosity, do you read the neews forum, or are just this naturally optomistic that common sense doesn't come into play?

Their reasoning on having these changes, especially when it's set between Fallout 1 and 2, and none of these things are seen in Fallout 2, is just pure bullshit. Even if it were set after Fallout 2, it wouldn't fit into the setting. Kid Chuck and the rest of his stupes are really fumbling in the dark if they have to come up with lame excuses like "Well...we're excusing the stupid chick in thongs and the rest of the skimpy stuff as...(insert 50's pin-up here) influenced, yeah!"

It would be like someone excusing Tammy Fae Baker as a Ziggy Stardust influence, whereas the real connection would be Marylin Manson in his Mechanical Animals phase as a Ziggy Stardust phase, because both were based upon glam rock. Excusing a cliché sadistic thong-wearing character as a Betty Page influence

Here's the part that Team Chuck forgets. Fallout uses an alternate timeline, and was supposed to use fictional aspects of our own. Therefore, there would be NO Betty Page, maybe a character similar to her, but even that wouldn't quite fit as you wouldn't see a pin-up model out in the wasteland. Nor would you see someone live if they were dumb enough to go out into gunfights wearing a thong, unless it was a +9 Thong of Armoring that Chuck pulled out of his ass. Of course, if you want a real fuck-up, look to the Fo2 designers and "Mr. Nixon". There was a development "oops" that slipped through.
 
I think a better analogy would be what Paramount's done with Star Trek. Star Trek: The Next Generation was a huge hit, Deep Space 9 did fairly well too. Then came TNG movies, which were really awful, as well as Voyager and Enterprise, which are spin offs which totally screw up the Star Trek canon because the writers don't bother checking any of their plots versus the previous shows.

The last movie, Nemesis, was a HUGE flop filled with overly silly, pointless action sequences, piss poor writing, cliches, and so on. Best of all, it totally screwed over one of the big factions in Star Trek canon, the Romulans, just to set up this awful, awful plot they had which basically is a rip off of The Wrath of Kahn.

The original Star Trek and The Next Generation TV show may still be good shows, but the franchise of Star Trek is pretty critically wounded at this point. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Paramount didn't pull the plug on the franchise.
 
Ok. I looked at the site and the trailer, which looked more or less identical to about 65% of the other videogame preview sites out there.

I found the graphics somewhere between impressive and average. The "Red megaman" is a suit of riot armor, which makes sense in Fallout. (Why would people spend months crafting MkI metal armor when they could just wear pre-formed impact plastic?)

Were you saying that if someone were to do a LotR inspired porn, it would devalue the original? I am doubtful.

I am disappointed that we're not getting FO3. I'm also looking forward to some mindless fun, revisiting the wasteland with a PS2 controller. They don't seem to have bastardized too much of the continuity, and this could have been handled much, much worse.

The bikini/thong thing makes me laugh. FO:T had one loading screen that showed some BoS woman in a metal thong, with the BoS logo on the ass. Yet this didn't seem to offend anyone.
One of the Pre-gen characters was curve-oriented, and "Sex appeal" was a perk, if I remember right. "Fluffer" was as well.


Is this thing set between 1 and 2? I haven't seen anything 'official' putting it anywhere in the timeline. If anything, it would go way before Fallout 1. ("Born as the last bombs fell" puts her birth in 2077, which is also when the brotherhood is founded. And probably explains the goofy symbol.)

But I usually stay out of these forums, and probably will continue to. Again, I like the idea of BoS, and hope they do a good job with it. What I don't like is when "Harder-core than thou" fans reject any posibility that a title will be fun, and want it to suffer or do poorly.

If BoS bombs, we won't see Fallout 3.
I can see why that this is flawed, but Interplay won't.
 
brm130 said:
I found the graphics somewhere between impressive and average. The "Red megaman" is a suit of riot armor, which makes sense in Fallout. (Why would people spend months crafting MkI metal armor when they could just wear pre-formed impact plastic?)
Click to expand...

Guess you missed the whole Fallout concept, it's based on a 50ies Futuristic world. And I don't belive they had red riot armour in that time period.

brm130 said:
Were you saying that if someone were to do a LotR inspired porn, it would devalue the original? I am doubtful.
Click to expand...

Now what are you talking about, making a porn movie about a setting isn't remotely comparative to making a game and saying it's the real deal. They're not selling this off as a copy, but rather as FALLOUT. But I do believe you're onto something. Porn is the way to go for Chuckie..

brm130 said:
I am disappointed that we're not getting FO3. I'm also looking forward to some mindless fun, revisiting the wasteland with a PS2 controller. They don't seem to have bastardized too much of the continuity, and this could have been handled much, much worse.
Click to expand...

erm..what?! I'd agree with you (somewhat) if this title didn't have Fallout in it's name. And try to read a little about the story and for christs sake look at the screenshots, we've seen shots from 97 that had the same kind of graphics.

brm130 said:
The bikini/thong thing makes me laugh. FO:T had one loading screen that showed some BoS woman in a metal thong, with the BoS logo on the ass. Yet this didn't seem to offend anyone.
One of the Pre-gen characters was curve-oriented, and "Sex appeal" was a perk, if I remember right. "Fluffer" was as well.
Click to expand...

And yes we do love FOT don't we?!

brm130 said:
Is this thing set between 1 and 2? I haven't seen anything 'official' putting it anywhere in the timeline. If anything, it would go way before Fallout 1. ("Born as the last bombs fell" puts her birth in 2077, which is also when the brotherhood is founded. And probably explains the goofy symbol.)
Click to expand...

Actually that's one of Team Chucks errors, they say the game is set between Fo1 and Fo2, you can read about it here. And the narrator says she was born just after the bombs fell, guess she's quite old.. Now that's a sight, old worn out woman in a thong.

brm130 said:
But I usually stay out of these forums, and probably will continue to. Again, I like the idea of BoS, and hope they do a good job with it. What I don't like is when "Harder-core than thou" fans reject any posibility that a title will be fun, and want it to suffer or do poorly.
Click to expand...

We don't reject a Fallout title on the consoles, BUT this title which looks bad, has a bad story with several flaws in it and doesn't really stay true to the Fallout concept isn't worth shouting "Yippi" about. Actually if Chuck would have listened to us, this might have been something, well better at least. But look at the treatment we're getting, they're totally shutting EVERYONE out and claiming we're harrasing them. Oh, and they're still saying they're listening to the fans..
Try reading a little more about why we say want we say, before making judgement.

brm130 said:
If BoS bombs, we won't see Fallout 3.
I can see why that this is flawed, but Interplay won't.
Click to expand...

Now let's recap, if Fbos sells big it won't get us Fo3 but rather Fbos 2, makes sence doesn't it. And when Fbos tanks, it will only surve to ruin the series. Just look at the X-Com series and what's happened to that one.
 
brm130 said:
Is this thing set between 1 and 2? I haven't seen anything 'official' putting it anywhere in the timeline. If anything, it would go way before Fallout 1. ("Born as the last bombs fell" puts her birth in 2077, which is also when the brotherhood is founded. And probably explains the goofy symbol.)
Click to expand...
Here's a bright idea brm130, do some reading about the game before shooting yourself in the arse next time. If you actually have a brain at all, you'll spot continuity errors galore.

Odin said:
brm130 said:
If BoS bombs, we won't see Fallout 3.
I can see why that this is flawed, but Interplay won't.
Click to expand...

Now let's recap, if Fbos sells big it won't get us Fo3 but rather Fbos 2, makes sence doesn't it. And when Fbos tanks, it will only surve to ruin the series. Just look at the X-Com series and what's happened to that one.
Click to expand...
... and the simple fact that after Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, they went right out and started work on BG:DA No#2. Not another BG RPG, but another console hack 'n slash.

Behold: The future.
 
Here's an idea...

why don't you start like a fallout charity?

where everyone donate's a couple of bucks, which an "elected" (?) group uses to buy up interplay stock.

Then use the purchased stock as leway and "importance" to interplay, to force them to make more QUALITY fallout games? For a couple of grand you could probably buy out the company, and garuntee the production of FO3 etc.

We could then prove to interplay our importance as fans, and perhaps actually get what we want.

Who really has a problem paying a couple extra bucks for Fallout 3?

*my two cents...
 
Probably because Titus still owns controlling interest of Interplay stock, and without a few million dollars, that won't change at all.
 
a Fallout CHARITY?! are you kidding? you mean a fund which deals with actual money? i must say, i love the idea. allow me to take care of everything. please mail your money to my address or submit it to account number which i will specify later. i accept checks and cash. the reason why i am an ideal person for this important task is because us Croats are very experienced with untransparent funds and budgets that handle large quantities of money. the proof of our competence are countless bankrupted companies, saving funds and banks, not to mention the great collapse of our banking system in 1999. when five of ten of our largest banks bankrupted and several billions of euros went missing. they were last seen resting comfortably on off-shore accounts belonging to several dozen non-existent companies. why, Croatia is well known for its four greatest inventions:
1) alternating current (yeah, Nikola Tesla was from Croatia)
2) mechanical pen (yeah, that thing everybody writes with)
3) tie (yeah, that thing you never wanted to wear around your neck)
4) model of purchasing a company with its own funds (yeah, that thing Croatian tycoons did to make Croatian economy go BOOM)

of course, YOU don't need to worry about YOUR money being spent unwisely or mysteriously disappearing in shady transactions. YOUR money will be well invested into viable businesses like real estates (a respected businessman such as myself needs a villa, a coutnryhouse and at least 300 square apartment), automobile industry (i can't go to work on a bike, can i? on the other hand, that new Mercedes Maybach will represent our rich and reputable fund properly), clothing industry (Armani suits are a must for a respectable businessman, not to mention the Versace dresses for his wife) and naval transport (worry not, i do not intend to spent it unwisely on expensive tankers and cargo ships, a 30 meter yacht will suit the needs of our fund more than enough). uh...am i showing my frustrations?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top