Zenimax wins lawsuit against Interplay.

Click here and disable ads!

I don't even blame Bethesda for ruining the Fallout franchise. It was interplay that cancelled Van Buren. It was interplay that greenlighted Fallout Tactics and Fallout: PoS. Nothing Bethesda could say or do will rival that in terms of fuckery.

So they finally staked Fool in the heart? About time.

I wonder how likely another post-mmorpg from interplay is? Using the already done work (if there is such a thing) and removing the Fallout references, maybe they could some funding. A brig maybe.

Right now Iron Tower Studios have more effective assets, conditions and resources for game development than Interplay. Only difference is that VD isn't preparing to line his pockets with 2 millions and leaving his game business to bankrupcy and remaining debts to never be settled.

I don't think I'm exaggerating.

Cas, even you and me have more effective assets and resources for game development than interplay. It's because we're not filthy money-swindling douchebags that don't even intend to make a game.








....yet

No. Dialogue is average on its own. Not when compared to other RPGs. Other RPGs either don't have dialogue at all or have it abysmally bad.

I still find it amazing that Bethesda commissioned a Fallout game to Obsidian at all. Where did that even come from? It's not even a common practice for Bethesda. If anyone suggested something like that when FO3 came out, I'd laugh at the idiot. We are very lucky it happened at all and turned up great.

Maybe if you're comparing it to the Diablo or Ultima series or something. But those series' are so different from Fallout that they shouldn't be considered valid comparisons at all. It would be like comparing Europa Universalis with Command and Conquer.

When I say it's average in comparison with other RPGs, I mean Black Isle games, Bioware games, Troika games and any other games that share the same general style. Out of those comparisons I'd say Troika's dialogue writing is vastly superior to all others, with Planescape coming in second, Fallout in third and Bioware in fourth. So yeah Fallout is about average when compared to it's rivals.

They probably felt a little genuine compassion for Fallout's original creators and then rationalized throwing a F3 spin-off Obsidian's way on the grounds that it would be profitable for all parties.

Bioware games have terrible writing. Troika games = 3 games. Hardly of statistical significance. I'm not seeing the comparison.

: Hey Pete, there is one thing about Fallout 3 that bothers me... how happened we succeeded on selling it to everyone but the Fallout fantard market base we were supposed to sell it in the first place?

: Simple, Todd, they hate everything which doesn't have some Black Isle alumni's name slapped over it.

: So what if we find some ex-Black Isle guys and repackage Fallout 3 slapping their names over it? Speaking of which, the new Fallout 3 fanbase will be happy to buy it a second time too.

: GJ Todd. *dialing*

: Will work for food!

: We've got our real Fallout back! With dialogues! Nevermind it's the exact same shooter as before...

: Bingo!

Well it's a good thing we're not analyzing statistics.

Bioware dialogue is usually only terrible when Gaider's involved. Otherwise I'd say it's passable and while generally inferior to Fallout, not totally outclassed.

And which ones DON'T have Gaider that are worth mentioning dialog wise?

Yeah I'm sure that's the reason, an insignificant niche of the market. But I'll let this one slip because:

Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2

Also Baldurs Gate 2. I forget whether or not Gaider worked on that one, although if he did I'm pretty sure he wasn't lead writer like he is now.

Those games actually have superior dialogue to Fallout. Characterization is present in them for one thing. And in the cases of Mass Effect 1/2, there's also a good effort at making the dialogue sound natural. Fallout has shit dialogue in comparison because it's just a means of giving the player directions or brief exposition. All of the characters in Fallout (as presented through dialogue) are forgettable and can be summarized in two sentences at the most. That's not true for a character like Irenicus though. Irenicus >>>>> The Master.

Eh, that part is questionable. Both are pretty memorable but for different reasons.

Irenicus is memorable for taking the villain cliches and executing them well.

The Master is memorable because of his motivates AND the fact that you can actually reason with him. You can also resolve the conflict with the Master in more ways than with Irenicus.

Most of The Master's backstory/motivation is presented through those journal entries, not through the dialogue. Otherwise I agree.

You have got to be kidding me. There is nothing natural in Mass Effect dialogue, except for the gag reflex that its reading induces. The whole game is an exercise in bad writing in addition to bad gameplay.

I find this hilarious because Gaider wrote Irenicus. You fucking fuckers.

Also Fallout dialogue could get really bad at times.

And then there's initial BoS stuff and the horrible things it does with punctuation...

Gaider wrote Irenicus? Now that I think of it, he does exhibit one feature common in Gaider's writing: over-the-top love story. But anyways, I said it's usually only terrible when Gaydar's involved - Irenicus is an exception. And it's not like I have a boner for Irenicus or anything either, I just think that he's average and has more depth than pretty much all Fallout characters, which isn't hard considering Fallout characters have little depth other than what's found in the occasional pip-boy log.

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/13/index/7637945/3#7659388
Lukas was there since BG, he'd know.

The biggest question is what was so good about it?

The voice acting and the look were good. I can't even remember anything else without stopping to think, except I always thought that they never explained why Irenecus went all crazy very well. The whole obsession with the elfin queen seemed like really shitty writing. Being stripped of his elf heritage and not looking like an elf seems kind of convoluted and pointless.

There's just no meat there. Take away the voice acting and the cool look and it doesn't even make any sense, let alone hit all the notes a good villain should hit. Even a simple villain whose motivation is "because I like it" would have been better. We really could have skipped all the emo shit.

Like I said, Irenicus did a good job of taking the villain cliches and not making them suck too badly.

It's not emo. It's something emo people might tend to write, but it's not inherently emo itself. Just kinda overdramatic.

I also don't think being stripped of his soul is convoluted or pointless. His story is that his sister was a bad influence on him, appealed to his arrogant nature and convinced him to endanger his society in pursuit of power. It didn't work out so well, so his soul was taken as punishment and he was banished, where instead of seeking to atone for his crimes he devoted himself to revenge instead. It's not convoluted at all.

He isn't the greatest character ever, not even close. But he is good enough, and he has actual backstory that's presented in various ways asides from just journal entries (unlike The Master). He also has a strong personality (and that's not only because of his voice acting).

My point was just that the writing is not what makes him good.

As Drago pointed out they (gaider?) pulled out the stops with the cliches. The lab, letting you go on purpose, the betrayal, the kidnapping, letting you go a SECOND time, on and on.

All of it seemed to be ok if overdone until suddenly you find that you are back on the mainland and going to the elfin city to fight aphids as the final battle. Stealing your soul seems logical enough but suddenly the motivation comes out and it just seems very lame, all this crap coming from nowhere that I just didn't care about. Revenge is to be had, for something I didn't know about until two seconds ago, which no one really seems to know or care about except him. Irenecus had a bad childhood so the world must pay. Now go to the elf city to save some people you have had no interaction with until now, and probably your soul.

Ok, I guess I'll go to the place to do the thing or stop the thing or whatever it is I'm doing, game. Thanks for the red herring back story to explain the cliched villainous villainy I've been dealing with for the last 40 hours. I now feel like this wasn't all just an excuse to kill stuff and level up. Oh hey let me check those drawers. Neat a magic item.

I don't see the problem with any of this... you're just portraying the story in a snide way. "You wake up on a slab when immediately a talking skull reads to you the lines written on your back (I guess because mirrors don't exist) which conveniently tell you exactly what to do to advance the plot. Buncha stuff happens, you're directed to find Ravel Puzzlewell, who lives in a maze and sends shadows to kill you because... well, whatever the reason, it's totally deep. Blah blah you find her, give her a lame generic vague awnser to her inane question, buncha stuff happens, then you get a pointless C&C and the game ends without telling you your crime"

I guess your criticism is that you're not given reason to care about the elves. Okay fair enough, but that's not a big deal. The criticism that they pull everything about Irenicus's past at the end of Spellhold is not true, they hint at stuff all throughout the game (clones of Ellesime, the pretty bedroom, various dialogues with Irenicus, cutscenes, Bhodi dialogue). So yeah, of course it's flawed, but you make it sound worse than it is.