Zippy's Thread

[zippy1]

Someone tried to collect all of them like "official" NPD numbers or something (hope thats the right spelling) explaining that Fallout 3 sold rather poor for some AAA game. It was interesting. But hardly could anyone say if it is accurate or not.

I find it highly amusing that NMA still has people continuing to try and spread this "Fallout 3 is a commercial failure" drivel even now.

 

[zippy1]

So the point here being that development of cross-platform titles is market-driven instead of quality-driven and that Fallout IP is in the hands of a money-hungry mogul?

It's driven by both. And the Fallout IP is reaching more happy gamers than ever before. As cool as it is to rage against the man, it turns out that doing good things that people like brings success. Who knew?

Bethesda makes solid, innovative games and knows how to promote them, and as a result the money flows their way. Trying to do this from the top-down, rather than bottom-up the way it should be, makes for poor performance. Blizzard learned this. EA is (finally) learning this. Activision is currently forgetting this. And Interplay died because they couldn't learn this at the end.

 

[Tagaziel]

You know what's sad? You're trying to antagonize every single poster on this forum and drag them ino a pointless "debate" with you on a subject we've gone over about... two to three years ago.

Too bad it didn't work then. Would save us a lot of trouble now.

Why exactly do you hope to achieve here? It's been stated repeatedly that we don't agree with you or like you. We have different tastes and are vocal about it, if you don't agree, fine, but don't act as if you have some divine insight or know what's proper.

In short, shut up if you don't have anything constructive to say.

 

[zippy1]

The part about antagonizing, or am I missing something here?

The subject that's been gone over before. Maybe it keeps coming up because the voice of logic and reason jumps into this forum once in a while to see if anyone's ready yet.

In short, shut up if you don't have anything constructive to say.

I've been constructively debating over dozens of posts here. If you don't see it that way, then that's unfortunate.

 

[FeelTheRads]

innovative games

Don't you mean the same game over and over again, maybe?

And Interplay died because they couldn't learn this at the end.

It died because it went console. Teh funnay!

 

[FeelTheRads]

Is that the voice of logic that says we should bend down and take whatever it's given to us?

Then thank you, but no thank you.

 

[zippy1]

It died because it went console. Teh funnay!

Well, or it could be because Brotherhood of Steel was a doomed project from the start. Plenty of more well-grounded publishers and developers "went console" and have done fantastically well.

 

[zippy1]

Is that the voice of logic that says we should bend down and take whatever it's given to us?

Start enjoying the newest RPGs again. Figure out a way. There's a wonderful world of great games waiting for you out there if you can let go of all that bitterness and anger.

 

[FeelTheRads]

On the other hand if they stayed with their acquired fanbase which was PC they would've probably continued to do very well.
Aren't assumptions fun?

 

[Tagaziel]

I've been constructively debating over dozens of posts here. If you don't see it that way, then that's unfortunate.

You're simply rehashing arguments that are three to four years old. Your concern has been noted and dismissed.

Is it that hard for you to understand the point?

 

[zippy1]

On the other hand if they stayed with their acquired fanbase which was PC they would've probably continued to do very well.
Aren't assumptions fun?

Would FO:BOS have been better if it was on the PC? No, I hear? Right.

They put their eggs into one basket - a bad game that would have been bad on any platform - and then blindly rode it until the bitter end.

 

[Tagaziel]

Van Buren would've saved Interplay, or at least bought it enough time to shamble on.

 

[Lexx]

It is like telling christian fanatics that god doesn't exists.

 

[zippy1]

You're simply rehashing arguments that are three to four years old. Your concern has been noted and dismissed.

Is it that hard for you to understand the point?

Democracy is hundreds of years old, and if often takes a while to spread. Sometimes it takes repeated applications to get it to stick.

Sometimes that voice of logic and reason has trouble getting through but perseveres in the end. Sometimes it doesn't.

 

[zippy1]

Van Buren would've saved Interplay, or at least bought it enough time to shamble on.

Could Interplay really have funded full-scale development for a couple of years without selling off the Fallout license? They seemed to have been running barely on fumes in the last couple years, even with the cash from the Fallout license purchase.

 

[Daimyo]

I find it highly amusing that NMA still has people continuing to try and spread this "Fallout 3 is a commercial failure" drivel even now.

We are not an entity; we are simply individuals registered at the same site ...

I am afraid you will always find individuals of a different opinion than your own.
In other words NMA will always "have people" trying to spread this and that.

In fact you are also one of "the people" voicing your own opinions right now.

Freedom of speech - a grand thing indeed.

 

[Patton89]

You actually dare to call fallout 3 innovative. All it does, is simply takes components from previous games that have been published. VATS isnt that original, as it is aiming mode with pause and slow-mo, or well thought out, as the near god like damage reduction it has shows. The combat skill implemention is directly taken from oblivion. The "open-world" is nothing new.
Calling game that allows you to max most of your skills and has meaningless stats solid is nothing but a lie. Broken game mechanics are not solid.
You cant refute the fact that you can rather easily become jack-of-all-trades, and that stats besides intelligence arent really used.
Even the oblivion style combat skill implemention is odd in a game that has firearms.

 

[zippy1]

You actually dare to call fallout 3 innovative. All it does, is simply takes components from previous games that have been published. VATS isnt that original, as it is aiming mode with pause and slow-mo, or well thought out, as the near god like damage reduction it has shows.
Calling game that allows you to max most of your skills and has meaningless stats solid is nothing but a lie. Broken game mechanics are not solid.
You cant refute the fact that you can rather easily become jack-of-all-trades, and that stats besides intelligence arent really used.
Even the oblivion style combat skill implemention is odd in a game that has firearms.

Vast majority of the people who played and enjoyed this game don't give a damn about any of these nitpicks.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Start enjoying the newest RPGs again. Figure out a way.

Tell me... did you "role-play" a geisha in Oblivion?
Just curious, because all this argument amounts to is "if you pretend is good, then it's good" which is what most Bethards resort to.

Sorry, I won't force myself to like anything, nor will I excuse stupid design with stupid "it's not important" arguments, again constantly used by people of your ilk. Interesting how nothing that we criticized was important. Guess what, magical clothing is important in the game and IS stupid.

 

[Public]

It died because it went console. Teh funnay!

Well, or it could be because Brotherhood of Steel was a doomed project from the start. Plenty of more well-grounded publishers and developers "went console" and have done fantastically well.

But Interplay was famous because of its games on PCs, and when they started doing games for consoles they've lost most of their customers.

Company's failure happened not only because it changed its target audience from PC to consoles, but mostly because of a bad leadership, that forced good designers to quit (Fargo, Boyarsky, Cain, Anderson, etc).