Soooo... Fallout 3...

[QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]Eother Bethesda bought the rights to Fallout and made a Fallout game that was a drastic departure from the classic Fallout formula and is more oriented to the Bethesda style of game design OR the made a game similar in atmosphere without the Fallout name, and Interplay and the Fallout IP died off completely.That's reality. So, what would you choose?PC fans don't realize that Fallout WAS DEAD.If you don't like the idea of Bethesda developing a Bethesda style action RPG bearing the Fallout name then continue to treat it as it was before they bought the IP and treat the franchise as deadVandalvideo

I completely understand your reasoning.

I think it's pathetic bordering on insane.

It is just a name, the game was dead, Bethesda bought the IP. Ignore the upcoming game if you don't like the idea of Bethesda completely changing the formula. IT HAS NO EFFECT ON THE OLD GAMES OR THE CULTURE SURROUNDING THEM.

And if they did that with Halo it would be h-i-l-a-r-i-o-u-s. Lol, that would make me quite happy, just the sheer spectacle of it.

[QUOTE="bballm10"][QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]So here's reality.

Eother Bethesda bought the rights to Fallout and made a Fallout game that was a drastic departure from the classic Fallout formula and is more oriented to the Bethesda style of game design OR the made a game similar in atmosphere without the Fallout name, and Interplay and the Fallout IP died off completely.

That's reality. So, what would you choose?RuprechtMonkey

I'd rather Fallout to remain dead.

Then ignore it, and in your world it will (and you'll save yourself a headache.)

I can't let go that easily :cry:

You really need to stop assuming everyone who disagrees with you despises the PC and has never gamed on one.RuprechtMonkey

:lol: Wait, where did I say that?:?

I used to be a hardcore PC fan (before these forums even existed.) I still dig the PC, I'm just not an unreasonable fanboy, so that may seem alien to you.Monkey

What kind of fanboy am I? I hate PC and I hate Fallout.

Played those games to death, the original Half Life (and was playing HL against others online before stuff like CS existed) and Deus Ex are my favorite games of all time.Monkey

LOLWUT? You know, it's ironic, I knew you were going to say that. :lol:

I remember pouring copious amounts of time into the original Arena. The joy of playing now forgotten games like Blood 2, Shogo, and being wowed by Unreal's visuals the first time I played it.Monkey

It's funny how you mention one game and then some others that came out 10 years later. You know, there were some quality RPGs within that 10 year difference, of course, you wouldn't know, they came out before your time. ;)

I most certainly played the original 2. Loved them. I consider them classics, just as I do games like BG2 and PT.Monkey

This is just great. :lol:

The franchise and the company behind it WAS DEAD, COMPLETELY DEAD as was the company behind it.Monkey

The company wasn't dead.

Bethesda are "ruining" nothing. It was dead, you can't kill something that's dead. So, you're saying they revived it, and you're worried they'll re-kill it.

Monkey

Bethesda is ruining everything about Fallout, that's why we hate it. Thanks for your time fakeboy. :)

"Before your time."

Haha, I'm 32.

Oh I only wish certain things had come out before my time....

It is just a name, the game was dead, Bethesda bought the IP. Ignore the upcoming game if you don't like the idea of Bethesda completely changing the formula. IT HAS NO EFFECT ON THE OLD GAMES OR THE CULTURE SURROUNDING THEM.And if they did that with Halo it would be h-i-l-a-r-i-o-u-s. Lol, that would make me quite happy.RuprechtMonkey

LOLWUT? You know, it's ironic, I knew you were going to say that. :lol:

The company wasn't dead.

VoodooGamer

LOL OKAY BIG GUY LOL!!11!1

And they were most certainly dead. The only thing that allowed the company to continue serious work on developing games again was the cash from the Fallout IP deal.

I completely understand your reasoning.RuprechtMonkey

You're not agreeing with him, so no you don't.

I think it's pathetic bordering on insane.Monkey

See? You need to understand it moar. :lol:

It is just a name, the game was dead, Bethesda bought the IP. Ignore the upcoming game if you don't like the idea of Bethesda completely changing the formula. IT HAS NO EFFECT ON THE OLD GAMES OR THE CULTURE SURROUNDING THEM.Monkey

Okay, I'll just let you guys praise this game like it's the paragon of RPG design...wait... but wouldn't that be a double-standard?????

[QUOTE="VoodooGamer"]

LOLWUT? You know, it's ironic, I knew you were going to say that. :lol:

The company wasn't dead.

RuprechtMonkey

LOL OKAY BIG GUY LOL!!11!1

And they were most certainly dead. The only thing that allowed the company to continue serious work on developing games again was the cash from the Fallout IP deal.

They weren't dead.:|

SOURCE

[QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]It is just a name, the game was dead, Bethesda bought the IP. Ignore the upcoming game if you don't like the idea of Bethesda completely changing the formula. IT HAS NO EFFECT ON THE OLD GAMES OR THE CULTURE SURROUNDING THEM.And if they did that with Halo it would be h-i-l-a-r-i-o-u-s. Lol, that would make me quite happy.Vandalvideo

Hahaha, yes, the saying was developed by society for things as trivial and inconsequential as a dead video game franchise being revived and subsequently altered. Such things are so enormous in scope there are few things grand enough to capture the impact. 9/11, pfft. 10/1. NEVER FORGET.

I have to get back to work, but honestly guys, it's gotten to the point where it's pathetic. Find a new e-cause, seriously. This one is so, so worn.

This has no impact on anyone. The IP was dead, Bethesda bought it (and in doing so revived the franchise's creators) and is changing the formula to mirror their style. That's all, no more no less.

Hahaha, yes, the saying was developed by society for things as trivial and inconsequential as a dead video game franchise being revived and subsequently altered. Such things are so enormous in scope there are few things grand enough to capture the impact. 9/11, pfft.I have to get back to work, but honestly guys, it's gotten to the point where it's pathetic. Find a new e-cause, seriously. This one is so, so worn.This has no impact on anyone. The IP was dead, Bethesda bought it (and in doing so revived the franchise's creators) and is changing the formula to mirror their style. That's all, no more no less.RuprechtMonkey

[QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"][QUOTE="VoodooGamer"]

LOLWUT? You know, it's ironic, I knew you were going to say that. :lol:

The company wasn't dead.

VoodooGamer

LOL OKAY BIG GUY LOL!!11!1

And they were most certainly dead. The only thing that allowed the company to continue serious work on developing games again was the cash from the Fallout IP deal.

They weren't dead.:|

SOURCE

Hey, wow, look at that:

Gamespot reported on November 13, 2007 that Interplay, using money from its sale of the Fallout IP to Bethesda Softworks, is going to restart its in-house game development studio and Interplay has plans on developing sequels to some of its ****c IPs contingent on if it can secure financing. Gamespot stated:

"Among the projects Interplay has said it wants to develop are sequels to Earthworm Jim, Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, Descent, and MDK, provided it can find the financing.[10]

See, I knew the guy was a troll.

Gamespot reported on November 13, 2007 that Interplay, using money from its sale of the Fallout IP to Bethesda Softworks, is going to restart its in-house game development studio and Interplay has plans on developing sequels to some of its ****c IPs contingent on if it can secure financing. Gamespot stated:

"Among the projects Interplay has said it wants to develop are sequels to Earthworm Jim, Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, Descent, and MDK, provided it can find the financing.

RuprechtMonkey

Go back to work please. :)

Oh and I'm right, read the rest of the source.

I still agree with Voodoogamer...

Regardless dead or not..they still took the Fallout name and tarnished it with this bs..its almost has no RPG elements...from the deno and the game is just a plain joke in my eyes from Fallout 1 and fallout 2..its just obvlion with guns nothing more...im sorry for those who havent played the originals and i strongly encourage every to do so..its just for me i still see Fallout 1 and 2 superior in my eyes..from the demo im not impressed at all..gameplay wise, RPG wise, and Story wise...

and also Mini nuclear missle launcher FTL

[QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]Hahaha, yes, the saying was developed by society for things as trivial and inconsequential as a dead video game franchise being revived and subsequently altered. Such things are so enormous in scope there are few things grand enough to capture the impact. 9/11, pfft.I have to get back to work, but honestly guys, it's gotten to the point where it's pathetic. Find a new e-cause, seriously. This one is so, so worn.This has no impact on anyone. The IP was dead, Bethesda bought it (and in doing so revived the franchise's creators) and is changing the formula to mirror their style. That's all, no more no less.Vandalvideo

Again, the IP was dead. It was a dead fish. Bethesda merely revived it and saved its parent company, and altered the formula as used by the old titles. It has no effect on the past titles, no effect on the fan following of the past titles. Please, find a worthy e-cause. It's all so silly and pathetic.

And thanks for suggesting courses but I'm long since done with college and have now settled comfortably into looking for ways to pass time at work, so if you can recommend courses that will improve that ability please let me know. Anyway, I really do have to go. Have fun, anyway. I've devoted just about as much time as I possibly can to talking about how the new Fallout is signaling the coming of the apocalypse.

Fallout 3 an RPG? Doesn't look like one to me. Games that are 5% rpg elements and 95% fps or action (ahem oblvion) do no deserve to be called RPGs.

[QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]

You really need to stop assuming everyone who disagrees with you despises the PC and has never gamed on one.VoodooGamer

:lol: Wait, where did I say that?:?

I used to be a hardcore PC fan (before these forums even existed.) I still dig the PC, I'm just not an unreasonable fanboy, so that may seem alien to you.Monkey

What kind of fanboy am I? I hate PC and I hate Fallout.

Played those games to death, the original Half Life (and was playing HL against others online before stuff like CS existed) and Deus Ex are my favorite games of all time.Monkey

LOLWUT? You know, it's ironic, I knew you were going to say that. :lol:

I remember pouring copious amounts of time into the original Arena. The joy of playing now forgotten games like Blood 2, Shogo, and being wowed by Unreal's visuals the first time I played it.Monkey

It's funny how you mention one game and then some others that came out 10 years later. You know, there were some quality RPGs within that 10 year difference, of course, you wouldn't know, they came out before your time. ;)

I most certainly played the original 2. Loved them. I consider them classics, just as I do games like BG2 and PT.Monkey

This is just great. :lol:

The franchise and the company behind it WAS DEAD, COMPLETELY DEAD as was the company behind it.Monkey

The company wasn't dead.

Bethesda are "ruining" nothing. It was dead, you can't kill something that's dead. So, you're saying they revived it, and you're worried they'll re-kill it.

Monkey

Bethesda is ruining everything about Fallout, that's why we hate it. Thanks for your time fakeboy. :)

And they also ruined what once was a good series (Elder Scrolls)

[QUOTE="VoodooGamer"][QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]

You really need to stop assuming everyone who disagrees with you despises the PC and has never gamed on one.vash47

:lol: Wait, where did I say that?:?

I used to be a hardcore PC fan (before these forums even existed.) I still dig the PC, I'm just not an unreasonable fanboy, so that may seem alien to you.Monkey

What kind of fanboy am I? I hate PC and I hate Fallout.

Played those games to death, the original Half Life (and was playing HL against others online before stuff like CS existed) and Deus Ex are my favorite games of all time.Monkey

LOLWUT? You know, it's ironic, I knew you were going to say that. :lol:

I remember pouring copious amounts of time into the original Arena. The joy of playing now forgotten games like Blood 2, Shogo, and being wowed by Unreal's visuals the first time I played it.Monkey

It's funny how you mention one game and then some others that came out 10 years later. You know, there were some quality RPGs within that 10 year difference, of course, you wouldn't know, they came out before your time. ;)

I most certainly played the original 2. Loved them. I consider them classics, just as I do games like BG2 and PT.Monkey

This is just great. :lol:

The franchise and the company behind it WAS DEAD, COMPLETELY DEAD as was the company behind it.Monkey

The company wasn't dead.

Bethesda are "ruining" nothing. It was dead, you can't kill something that's dead. So, you're saying they revived it, and you're worried they'll re-kill it.

Monkey

Bethesda is ruining everything about Fallout, that's why we hate it. Thanks for your time fakeboy. :)

And they also ruined what once was a good series (Elder Scrolls)

Yeah they did. I was hoping after Oblivion they would go back to their Daggerfall days, but with Fallout 3, it looks like I'm wrong. :(

Bethesda has absolutely no responsibility to you, if you don't dig the game DO NOT BUY THE GAME.Again, the IP was dead. It was a dead fish. Bethesda merely revived it and saved its parent company, and altered the formula as used by the old titles. It has no effect on the past titles, no effect on the fan following of the past titles. Please, find a worthy e-cause. It's all so silly and pathetic.And thanks for suggesting courses but I'm long since done with college and have now settled comfortably into looking for ways to pass time at work, so if you can recommend courses that will improve that ability please let me know. Anyway, I really do have to go. Have fun, anyway. I've devoted just about as much time as I possibly can to talking about how the new Fallout is signaling the coming of the apocalypse.RuprechtMonkey

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]While its going to be a great game, its going to be a horrible "FALLOUT" game. RuprechtMonkey

Yes, because Tactics and BoS were AWESOME!

The franchise, as well as the company that created it, were completely dead in the water before Bethesda bought the IP. That money allowed them to continue to breathe.

There is nothing stopping Interplay from making another turn based and isometric RPG while not using the Fallout name. It is just a name, get over it.

So here's reality.

Eother Bethesda bought the rights to Fallout and made a Fallout game that was a drastic departure from the classic Fallout formula and is more oriented to the Bethesda style of game design OR the made a game similar in atmosphere without the Fallout name, and Interplay and the Fallout IP died off completely.

That's reality. So, what would you choose?

PC fans don't realize that Fallout WAS DEAD.If you don't like the idea of Bethesda developing a Bethesda style action RPG bearing the Fallout name then continue to treat it as it was before they bought the IP and treat the franchise as dead.

Again, there's nothing stopping Interplay from developing a Fallout-like game if there is a demand for one. What's in a name? Are you that concerned about a meaningless name? And the only thing that is allowing them to develop ANYTHING is the money from Bethesda's purchase.

I hate that argument. Lots of franchises have come back from being Dead. A few recent examples are Doom, Bionic Commando, Alone in the Dark and Starcraft.

If the name is so meaningless then why in the world did Bethesda buy the franchise. I mean it is not as if they needed the Fallout name to make a post-Apocalypse Oblivion game.

Ha at that one guy calling me a "troll." What makes me a troll, the fact that I disagree with you or the fact that I find people pouring so much effort into moaning about the changes Bethesda made to the Fallout series to be a pathetic practice? Also, haha at the guy that linked some irrelevant sociology article. Bethesda is a business, their only responsibility is to their stockholders and employees, and as such they strive to make products that will be viable on the consumer market. Nothing they have done so far is fraudulent, and "faithfulness" to the series is a completely subjective thing. Bethesda would say that they have kept the general atmosphere and setting very much in tact and faithful and brought the product into the more viable modern form of gaming. It is such an absurd thing to endlessly whine about, in every respect, and if saying so makes me a troll then I guess I'm a troll.

As I said, if you don't like it don't buy it and replay the old Fallout series if you want to revel in nostalgia. What Bethesda is doing with Fallout has absolutely no effect whatsoever on the old Fallout games or the communities that enjoy said games. had they not purchased the rights to Fallout the IP would have remained dead. They now OWN the franchise, they are free to do with it whatever they choose and to think otherwise is absolutely idiocy.... they have no responsibility to cast the game in whatever mold you think they should. I know the sun revolves around you and your forum buddies and as such Bethesda are beholden to your whims but Bethesda forked over several million dollars for the IP and in this insane world of logic and sense that means they can do with it what they see fit.

Merely parroting the same tired talking points over and over again doesn't make your argument any more valid. It has become so predictable that it now borders on comedy.

I hate that argument. Lots of franchises have come back from being Dead. A few recent examples are Doom, Bionic Commando, Alone in the Dark and Starcraft.

If the name is so meaningless then why in the world did Bethesda buy the franchise. I mean it is not as if they needed the Fallout name to make a post-Apocalypse Oblivion game.

Philmon

Yes, because Capcom, ID, and Blizzard were completely dead companies.

Those names were not dead franchises in the sense that the companies that owned the rights to them were very much alive and financially capable of making true sequels to them, they just chose the "proper" time to dust off the IP's. Also, not that it matters, Doom 3 was a drastic departure from the previous Doom games. Just as large of a departure as this new Fallout is from the previous in the series (and I'm willing to Bionic Commando and Alone in the Dark will be too.)

Interplay was in financial ruins, they did not have the ability to produce a true sequel to their Fallout franchise. Fallout was truly dead because the company that held the rights to the franchise was dead. THe only thing that breathed life into the company was the cash from the Bethesda Fallout purchase.

As for why they bought the IP, I have no idea. I don't work for Bethesda or have any insight as to why they do anything they do.

The game looks pretty terribad and im not talking about th graphics : /

I knew Bathesda was going to **** this up /sigh

Oh and about the music.

Butchering people in MGS4 while listening to soft jazz on your iPod = Awesome

Patriotic music while blowing people up with terrible controls and animations = migrane.

Ha at that one guy calling me a "troll." What makes me a troll, the fact that I disagree with you or the fact that I find people pouring so much effort into moaning about the changes Bethesda made to the Fallout series to be a pathetic practice? Also, haha at the guy that linked some irrelevant sociology article. Bethesda is a business, their only responsibility is to their stockholders and employees, and as such they strive to make products that will be viable on the consumer market. Nothing they have done so far is fraudulent, and "faithfulness" to the series is a completely subjective thing. Bethesda would say that they have kept the general atmosphere and setting very much in tact and faithful and brought the product into the more viable modern form of gaming. It is such an absurd thing to endlessly whine about, in every respect, and if saying so makes me a troll then I guess I'm a troll.

As I said, if you don't like it don't buy it and replay the old Fallout series if you want to revel in nostalgia. What Bethesda is doing with Fallout has absolutely no effect whatsoever on the old Fallout games or the communities that enjoy said games. had they not purchased the rights to Fallout the IP would have remained dead. They now OWN the franchise, they are free to do with it whatever they choose and to think otherwise is absolutely idiocy.... they have no responsibility to cast the game in whatever mold you think they should. I know the sun revolves around you and your forum buddies and as such Bethesda are beholden to your whims but Bethesda forked over several million dollars for the IP and in this insane world of logic and sense that means they can do with it what they see fit.

Merely parroting the same tired talking points over and over again doesn't make your argument any more valid. It has become so predictable that it now borders on comedy.

[QUOTE="Philmon"]I hate that argument. Lots of franchises have come back from being Dead. A few recent examples are Doom, Bionic Commando, Alone in the Dark and Starcraft.

If the name is so meaningless then why in the world did Bethesda buy the franchise. I mean it is not as if they needed the Fallout name to make a post-Apocalypse Oblivion game.

RuprechtMonkey

Yes, because Capcom, ID, and Blizzard were completely dead companies.

Those names were not dead franchises in the sense that the companies that owned the rights to them were very much alive and financially capable of making true sequels to them, they just chose the "proper" time to dust off the IP's. Also, not that it matters, Doom 3 was a drastic departure from the previous Doom games. Just as large of a departure as this new Fallout is from the previous in the series (and I'm willing to Bionic Commando and Alone in the Dark will be too.)

Interplay was in financial ruins, they did not have the ability to produce a true sequel to their Fallout franchise. Fallout was truly dead because the company that held the rights to the franchise was dead. THe only thing that breathed life into the company was the cash from the Bethesda Fallout purchase.

As for why they bought the IP, I have no idea. I don't work for Bethesda or have any insight as to why they do anything they do.

Wrong. What Bethesda is doing to Fallout is KILLING Fallout, both the old and the new, the same way Ubisoft killed Rainbow Six.

Second, Doom 3 was NOT as drastic a departure from the previous Doom games. Neither is Bionic Commando. Why? Because the original Doom and BC were generic games, little more than game templates with no story, no real setting, nothing except pure, unrefined gameplay.

Fallout 1 + 2, however, are COMPLETE games, with stories and their own unique gameplay mechanics as closely identified with the Fallout name as Vault Boy.

Bethesda patterning Fallout 3 after Oblivion is like Square making a Final Fantasy game with no summons, no magic, no items, no party members, nothing except the main character and a selection of guns.

Wrong. What Bethesda is doing to Fallout is KILLING Fallout, both the old and the new, the same way Ubisoft killed Rainbow Six. mjarantilla

Well, I suppose this will be my last point as this has officially gone well beyond the point of reason.

1: The franchise was "dead" in the sense that the company that held the rights to it was not able (and without selling the franchise) would not be able to make a proper sequel to its previous installments.

2: If you believe Bethesda is "killing the old" Fallout games by purchasing the Fallout IP and making another one.... well, that's beyond absurd. This new game in no way affects how the old ones play. Believe it or not, once this new Fallout is released the old game will still run as it always has. If Square chose to do such a thing with their FF franchise (and they did change the combat greatly in the last one) it would not at all change the existence or greatness (if you're into them, personally I'm not a fan) of those that have already been released.

And Doom 3 was certainly a drastic departure, the generic nature of the old games is not at all relevant - it was an enormous change regardless. The series went from a mindless pseudo-3d FPS endless enemy shoot-em up to a barely lit survival horror "BOO I'M COMING AROUND THE CORNER" FPS that revolved around diligent use of a flashlight. That being said, even though it was a giant departure (and I played the old Dooms to death back in the day) I really dug Doom 3, I enjoyed playing it. If it had been made in the old style it would've been a pretty Serious Sam nothing-fest and I likely wouldn't have enjoyed it as much... drastic change isn't always a negative thing in the world of video game franchises. It was quickly overshadowed by the greatness of HL2, and when held against that standard of sequel greatness it was very much a let down, but I dug it none the less.

Anyway, have fun.

Ha at that one guy calling me a "troll." What makes me a troll, the fact that I disagree with you or the fact that I find people pouring so much effort into moaning about the changes Bethesda made to the Fallout series to be a pathetic practice?RuprechtMonkey

The former and the latter and after that one. ;)

Also, haha at the guy that linked some irrelevant sociology articleMonkey

"Haha" isn't a verb. ;)

Bethesda is a business, their only responsibility is to their stockholders and employees, and as such they strive to make products that will be viable on the consumer market.Monkey

You're an Economics Expert, I knew it! :lol:

Nothing they have done so far is fraudulent, and "faithfulness" to the series is a completely subjective thing. Bethesda would say that they have kept the general atmosphere and setting very much in tact and faithful and brought the product into the more viable modern form of gaming. It is such an absurd thing to endlessly whine about, in every respect, and if saying so makes me a troll then I guess I'm a troll.Monkey

Stating that it's subjective is redundant when considering the fact that our positions are subjective. And, it's hypocritical of you when you call us "whiners" because what you're doign right now is whining. Now go back to work please.

As I said, if you don't like it don't buy it and replay the old Fallout series if you want to revel in nostalgia. What Bethesda is doing with Fallout has absolutely no effect whatsoever on the old Fallout games or the communities that enjoy said games. had they not purchased the rights to Fallout the IP would have remained dead. They now OWN the franchise, they are free to do with it whatever they choose and to think otherwise is absolutely idiocy.... they have no responsibility to cast the game in whatever mold you think they should. I know the sun revolves around you and your forum buddies and as such Bethesda are beholden to your whims but Bethesda forked over several million dollars for the IP and in this insane world of logic and sense that means they can do with it what they see fit.Monkey

And in this world of insane logic and sense we have the right to complain to our hearts desires. Your tactless remarks work both ways John. :)

As for why they bought the IP, I have no idea. I don't work for Bethesda or have any insight as to why they do anything they do.

Monkey

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know why they bought a game. ;) Um, I don't know, maybe they wanted to um make a sequal or something??? :roll:

Well, I suppose this will be my last point as this has officially gone well beyond the point of reason.

RuprechtMonkey

Isn't that what you said like an hour ago? :lol: And here you are responding to our lack of reasoning and logic.

[QUOTE="death919"]

RPG of the year, or RPG of the century?

Discuss.

vash47

Sorry, but that title will never belong to a game other than Fallout 2.

wasnt fallout 2 realesed last century anyway...

"Haha" isn't a verb. ;) VoodooGamer

It isn't a word either, but "laughing" is... so I'm sure you'll figure it out eventually.

"You're an Economics Expert, I knew it! :lol: VoodooGamer

Thanks! *insert dumb emoticon here*

Stating that it's subjective is redundant when considering the fact that our positions are subjective. And, it's hypocritical of you when you call us "whiners" because what you're doign right now is whining. Now go back to work please. VoodooGamer

I'm not whining at all, if anything I find it hilarious... merely saying it's ridiculous for you to whine (and whine and whine and whine and whine) about such a thing. Without whining this forum wouldn't exist, I know, so please feel free to continue to do it in such an overblown and dramatic fashion - I'll keep reading it and laughing at how ridiculous it is. bethesda is the DEVIL WAAAAAAHHH! Ahahaha.

And honestly, thanks for reminding me to get back to work. I really am wasting too much time on this silly stuff.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know why they bought a game. ;) Um, I don't know, maybe they wanted to um make a sequal or something??? :roll:

VoodooGamer

It's good it doesn't take a rocket scientist, because I've been running around for the past 20 minutes searching for one to ask. I found a janitor and a plumber, but they didn't know.

1: The franchise was "dead" in the sense that the company that held the rights to it was not able (and without selling the franchise) would not be able to make a proper sequel to its previous installments.RuprechtMonkey

So?

2: If you believe Bethesda is "killing the old" Fallout games by purchasing the Fallout IP and making another one.... well, that's beyond absurd. This new game in no way affects how the old ones play. Believe it or not, once this new Fallout is released the old game will still run as it always has. If Square chose to do such a thing with their FF franchise (and they did change the combat greatly in the last one) it would not at all change the existence or greatness (if you're into them, personally I'm not a fan) of those that have already been released.RuprechtMonkey

Tell that to Rainbow Six. Does anyone but old-school PC gamers even remember how Rainbow Six USED to be like? No. Why? Because despite the fact that the original Rainbow Six games were cla$$ics of PC gaming, the sheer popularity of the "edgy" Rainbow Six of Ubisoft has pushed its memory aside.

And Doom 3 was certainly a drastic departure, the generic nature of the old games is not at all relevant - it was an enormous change regardless. The series went from a mindless pseudo-3d FPS endless enemy shoot-em up to a barely lit survival horror "BOO I'M COMING AROUND THE CORNER" FPS that revolved around diligent use of a flashlight. That being said, even though it was a giant departure (and I played the old Dooms to death back in the day) I really dug Doom 3, I enjoyed playing it. If it had been made in the old style it would've been a pretty Serious Sam nothing-fest and I likely wouldn't have enjoyed it as much... drastic change isn't always a negative thing in the world of video game franchises. It was quickly overshadowed by the greatness of HL2, and when held against that standard of sequel greatness it was very much a let down, but I dug it none the less.RuprechtMonkey

[QUOTE="vash47"][QUOTE="death919"]

RPG of the year, or RPG of the century?

Discuss.

Sonir77

Sorry, but that title will never belong to a game other than Fallout 2.

wasnt fallout 2 realesed last century anyway...

Baldur's Gate II was released this century. Well, sort of. Depending on whether you see 2000 or 2001 as the first year of this century.

So? mjarantilla

So, you can't "Kill" something that is already stone cold dead. In that sense your FF analogy is misleading and nonsensical, it's still a very much "living" franchise owned by a company able to continue to pump out sequels.

Your FF analogy would only make sense if Square released the upcoming FF, went bankrupt years later and were not only unable to continue to develop another FF but were unable to develop ANY game. Then Bungie comes along, buys the FF IP, allows SquareEnix to continue to exist as a company due to the purchase, and Bungie subsequently goes and makes FPS Halo style FF set roughly in the FF universe.

Yes, it would be absurd for hardcore FF fans to whine endlessly seeing as no FF game was going to be made without the purchase, and the new instalment in no way affects the previous ones. They would still play fine, as they always did. It would simply be a handy way for FF fans to release steam.

Tell that to Rainbow Six. Does anyone but old-school PC gamers even remember how Rainbow Six USED to be like? No. Why? Because despite the fact that the original Rainbow Six games were cla$$ics of PC gaming, the sheer popularity of the "edgy" Rainbow Six of Ubisoft has pushed its memory aside. mjarantilla

And... how does that "Kill" the old games? Do they no longer run? No one is able to play them anymore?

They no longer exist?

As I said, this new Fallout in no way affects the old ones. They will still exist and play wonderfully.

The changes made to Doom 3 were accepted because it was quite obvious that the old Doom formula would never work on a modern platform. Ditto with Bionic Commando. But that is NOT the case with Fallout, as BioWare and Blizzard are proving by making Dragon Age and Diablo 3 in the same vein as Baldur's Gate II and Diablo II, but in 3D.

Don't pretend like there isn't a difference. Doom and Bionic Commando were skeletons. That's exactly why those franchises had to be "updated." Fallout 1 + 2 were FULL games. They didn't need any "modernizing" except graphically.mjarantilla

Then how do you explain the existence of Serious Sam? That's what a "Faithful, modern" Doom would be like. So, a serious Sam type FPS is less viable than a turn based RPG with an isometric view? Yes, that would sell a whole, whole lot in this current gaming universe, much moreso than a generic FPS bearing the Doom name. Please.

So, you can't "Kill" something that is already stone cold dead. In that sense your FF analogy is misleading and nonsensical, it's still a very much "living" franchise owned by a company able to continue to pump out sequels.

Your FF analogy would only make sense if Square released a FF, went bakrupt years later and were not only unable to continue to develop another FF but were unable to develop ANY game. Then Bungie comes along, buys FF, allows SquareEnix to continue to exist as a company, and Bungie subsequently goes and makes FPS Halo style FF set roughly in the FF universe.

Yes, it would be absurd for hardcore FF to whine endlessly seeing as no FF game was going to be made excluding the purchase, and the new instalment in now way affects the previous ones. They would still play fine, as they always did.

...

And... how does that "Kill" the old games? Do they no longer run? No one is able to play them anymore?

They no longer exist?

As I said, this new Fallout in no way affects the old ones. They will still exist and play wonderfully.RuprechtMonkey

So your only argument is that, "As long as ONE MACHINE can play the old games, they aren't dead!"

Congratulations, you've taken a totally inassailable but COMPLETELY USELESS position.

As I said, Rainbow Six: a perfect example of a franchise "killed" by an incompetent dev team that didn't care about the originals. The sheer popularity of the new games essentially pushed the memory of the old games out of the public consciousness. Do people still play the originals? Yes, possibly. But does that mean the old games are suddenly "alive"? Hell no.

The old Rainbow Six is DEAD, just as the old Fallout will be DEAD, because the sheer popularity of the new games will fool the majority of the highly gullible video game audience into thinking that Fallout 3 is Fallout as it should have been.

Then how do you explain the existence of Serious Sam? That's what a "Faithful, modern" Doom 3 would be like. So, a serious Sam type FPS is less viable than a turn based RPG with an isometric view? Yes, that would sell a whole, whole lot in this current gaming universe, much moreso than a generic FPS. Please.RuprechtMonkey

Why would Serious Sam be what a faithful, modern Doom 3 would be like? Are YOU the creator of Doom? No. Id is, and Id created Doom 3. Only THEY have the ability to decide what happens to the Doom franchise.

Besides, I see the paths that Doom 3 could've taken as a fork in the road, with Serious Sam being one branch, and Doom 3 being the other. The original Doom was so bereft of atmosphere that it could've gone either way. This is NOT the case with Fallout.

So your only argument is that, "As long as ONE MACHINE can play the old games, they aren't dead!"

Congratulations, you've taken a totally inassailable but COMPLETELY USELESS position.

As I said, Rainbow Six: a perfect example of a franchise "killed" by an incompetent dev team that didn't care about the originals. The sheer popularity of the new games essentially pushed the memory of the old games out of the public consciousness. Do people still play the originals? Yes, possibly. But does that mean the old games are suddenly "alive"? Hell no.

The old Rainbow Six is DEAD, just as the old Fallout will be DEAD, because the sheer popularity of the new games will fool the majority of the highly gullible video game audience into thinking that Fallout 3 is Fallout as it should have been. mjarantilla

Much like your FF analogy, your Rainbow Six analogy isn't comparable either. Ubisoft was a very viable company and Rainbow Six was far from "dead." They merely changed it, in the way Capcom changed RE when the 4th one rolled around. Whether or not it's better or worse is a matter of taste, pointless to debate, personally I know next to nothing about the Rainbow Six series, old or new, not my cup of tea.

The fans that are now railing against about the new Fallout will still play, love, and vividly remember the old Fallout games as they always have (I know I will.) The older ones certainly will not LOSE any audience, the fanbase it has now will remain intact. If anything, the press attention surrounding the IP's "revival" will attract NEW gamers to try the old ones. I had a buddy that after playing (and loving) BioShock tracked down a copy of SS2 and played it, just because of his experience with BioShock.

If that's death to you, well, so be it. There isn't any reason in your position, but.... whatever eases your mind. I suppose that's your version of death. It's also so silly to think these new fans are somehow "ruining" something by enjoying what Fallout has become. How what they feel affects you is beyond me... how elitist.

The old Fallout games will play just as they always have after this game's release. That is a fact. Interplay was dead and thus so was the Fallout IP before Bethesda stepped in, that is a fact.

Why would Serious Sam be what a faithful, modern Doom 3 would be like? Are YOU the creator of Doom? No. Id is, and Id created Doom 3. Only THEY have the ability to decide what happens to the Doom franchise.

Besides, I see the paths that Doom 3 could've taken as a fork in the road, with Serious Sam being one branch, and Doom 3 being the other. The original Doom was so bereft of atmosphere that it could've gone either way. This is NOT the case with Fallout.

mjarantilla

Doom (2, Final, etc.) was a very simple dime a dozen enemy FPS that revolved around overwhelming the player with sheer enemy volume with raw firepower being the only remedy, Serious Sam is very similar. I appreciate you being a condescending dude, but I'm pretty sure you caught the gist of what I meant. Though, thanks for letting me know I'm not creator of Doom.

Anyway, I think I've said everything I could possibly say and will now start going around in endless verbal circles. So, there you go, I think I'll save us both some time by ducking out.

Much like your FF analogy, your Rainbow Six analogy isn't comparable either. Ubisoft was a very viable company and Rainbow Six was far from "dead." They merely changed it, in the way Capcom changed RE when the 4th one rolled around. Whether or not it's better or worse is a matter of taste, pointless to debate, personally I know next to nothing about the Rainbow Six series, old or new, not my cup of tea.RuprechtMonkey

:lol:

Rainbow Six wasn't created by Ubisoft. It was created by Red Storm Entertainment. And much like the Fallout franchise, Ubisoft bought up the Tom Clancy franchises from Red Storm and promptly began ****ing with the formula.

The fans that are now railing against about the new Fallout will still play, love, and vividly remember the old Fallout games as they always have (I know I will.)RuprechtMonkey

No, they won't. They might, but they are just as likely to move on and never play the old games again.

The older ones certainly will not LOSE any audience, the fanbase it has now will remain intact.RuprechtMonkey

So are you saying that games NEVER lose audience?

WTF kind of medication are you on? :lol:

If anything, the press attention surrounding the IP's "revival" will attract NEW gamers to try the old ones. I had a buddy that after playing (and loving) BioShock tracked down a copy of SS2 and played it, just because of his experience with BioShock.RuprechtMonkey

Except that BioShock was a virtual carbon copy of System Shock 2. If someone plays and loves Fallout 3 without having played Fallout 1 or 2, then if he goes to Fallout 1 or 2 he's more likely to be disgusted than amazed.

If that's death to you, well, so be it. There isn't any reason in your position, but.... whatever eases your mind. I suppose that's your version of death.RuprechtMonkey

It's not "death" to me, but it's also not what's going to happen to Fallout. What will happen to Fallout is much more inline to what happened to Rainbow Six.

It's also so silly to think these new fans are somehow "ruining" something by enjoying what Fallout has become. How what they feel affects you is beyond me... how elitist.RuprechtMonkey

Of COURSE how they feel will affect me. They're the community I converse and interact with. How can you NOT be affected by the community you're a part of?

The old Fallout games will play just as they always have after this game's release. That is a fact. Interplay was dead and thus so was the Fallout IP before Bethesda stepped in, that is a fact.RuprechtMonkey

And it should have stayed dead. Like Godfather III, Fallout 3 is not needed.

Doom (2, Final, etc.) was a very simple dime a dozen enemy FPS that revolved around overwhelming the player with sheer enemy volume with raw firepower being the only remedy, Serious Sam is very similar. I appreciate you being a condescending dude, but I'm pretty sure you caught the gist of what I meant.RuprechtMonkey

And yet, your comparison of Doom->Doom 3 = Fallout -> Fallout 3 is NOT valid for the reasons I specified. First: Doom 3 was created by the creators of Doom, while Fallout 3 is being created by hijackers. Second: The original Doom games were skeletal templates, and could easily be modified to either format (Serious Sam or Doom 3), whereas Fallout 1 + 2 had very defined, VERY complete gameplay designs.

YOU haven't answered those points. Which means YOU are the one avoiding the argument here, buddy.