Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Bethesda: Why Fallout?

Elwro

Arcane
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
11,747
Location
Krakow, Poland
Divinity: Original Sin Wasteland 2
Tags: Bethesda Softworks; Fallout 3

There's a nice <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=854">article</a> at <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/">Rock, Paper Shotgun</a>, in which Kieron Gillen discusses possible goals Bethesda might have had in mind when buying the Fallout IP. Why would they do it?<blockquote>I’ve said this before, but the nagging question is why they’d take up this particular poisoned chalice of post-apocalypse role-playing anyway. “A new game by the makers of Oblivion” is a much bigger story to the gaming mainstream than “Sequel to old PC game you haven’t played”. Hell, the “3&#8243; even risks alienating people who’ve never played (or heard of) the original, dismissing it out of hand - there’s eighteen year old PC Gamers who’d have been six when the thing comes out.
<br>
<br>
(...)
<br>
<br>
Thirdly… well, one of the major worries about Fallout 3 from even less fanatical fans is that they don’t believe Bethesda are capable of wrestling with the actions-and-consequences aspects that have traditionally been involved in a Fallout Game - they’re fine with multiple mechanisms (Assuming they get the experience system right), but the payoffs are limited. Just as key is their limitations as creators of fiction - while they’re good at verisimilitude and a sense of place, the fiction - dialogue, plot, whatever - of the Elder Scrolls have been merely acceptable at best throughout. This has lead some people to think that Bethesda, by definition, can’t do it. Thing is, by buying Fallout 3, they cover their weaknesses. They don’t need to create a world from whole-cloth - they have an inspiring world. They don’t need to work out how people act and talk - they have a game which shows the interactions between individuals and whatever. Buying Fallout actually acts as a crutch for Bethesda’s traditional faults.</blockquote>I'm not sure about the last part. Just because they bought rights to a game which includes good dialogue doesn't mean they will be able to prepare something of similar quality themselves. Buying the IP has no impact on "working out how people act and talk" - any developer with a brain and without the IP should be able to do this himself. Still, the article definitely offers some food for thought, so be sure to <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=854">read it</a>.
<br>
<br>
Thanks, <strong>baby arm</strong>!
 

Xerxos

Novice
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
72
Hm, I never noticed until now, but he's right - Fallout shines exactly where Oblivion fails miserably... Coincidence? I don't think so!
 

kris

Arcane
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
8,844
Location
Lulea, Sweden
Elwro said:
Hell, the “3″ even risks alienating people who’ve never played (or heard of) the original, dismissing it out of hand - there’s eighteen year old PC Gamers who’d have been six when the thing comes out.

an incredible overrated target group for the PC market, also a weak group in purchasing power. I am also not exactly sure why they would be "alienated".
 

Gay-Lussac

Arcane
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
7,563
Location
Your mom
Would you guys prefer bethesda makes a good game for you to play (as unlikely as it may seem) or a bad one so you can bash it even more?
 

The Exar

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
259
Location
Smoldering Corpse Bar
Marcelo21 said:
Would you guys prefer bethesda makes a good game for you to play (as unlikely as it may seem) or a bad one so you can bash it even more?

Though I prefer to be optimistic, people around here usually see only one possible outcome.
 

psycojester

Arbiter
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
2,526
I'd prefer Bethesda to make a quality sequel that does the fallout brand justice, but then i'd also enjoy it if the secret to ever lasting life and good health was to sleep with as many random sluts as possible and then steal their stero in the morning, but unfortunately we've gotta deal with whats plausible here.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
kris said:
Elwro said:
Hell, the “3″ even risks alienating people who’ve never played (or heard of) the original, dismissing it out of hand - there’s eighteen year old PC Gamers who’d have been six when the thing comes out.

an incredible overrated target group for the PC market, also a weak group in purchasing power. I am also not exactly sure why they would be "alienated".

Just that "3" suggests that it builds on 1 and 2. A rational person would see 3 and think "I haven't played 1 or 2, so I would be confused in 3". Unfortunately, console gamers are more likely to think "well it was good enough to make sequels, so it must be good."
 

Texas Red

Whiner
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
7,044
obediah said:
kris said:
Elwro said:
Hell, the “3″ even risks alienating people who’ve never played (or heard of) the original, dismissing it out of hand - there’s eighteen year old PC Gamers who’d have been six when the thing comes out.

an incredible overrated target group for the PC market, also a weak group in purchasing power. I am also not exactly sure why they would be "alienated".

Just that "3" suggests that it builds on 1 and 2. A rational person would see 3 and think "I haven't played 1 or 2, so I would be confused in 3". Unfortunately, console gamers are more likely to think "well it was good enough to make sequels, so it must be good."

When I was still mostly playing Sega I was often faced by choosing a game in a series. I always went for the higher number since I automatically assumed that the mistakes would be corrected and the good sides improved.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,137
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
tombstone.jpg
 

Gnidrologist

CONDUCTOR
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
20,857
Location
is cold
The Exar said:
Hory said:
Elwro said:
Fail 2008.
Fixed.

:lol:

I always thought a good game can't be made in such a short amount of time, especially Fallout. Now they are going to prove it.
The game was revealed as being in pre-production state somewhere in the middle or end of 2004 if i'm not mistaking (remember the shitstorm in TES boards?).
3-4 years isn't a short developement period even for a game, that tries to be next-gen shiny grafixxx.
 

Morbus

Scholar
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
403
The Exar said:
I always thought a good game can't be made in such a short amount of time, especially Fallout. Now they are going to prove it.
They did Fallout 2 in one year. And it wasn't all that bad.

Marcelo21 said:
Would you guys prefer bethesda makes a good game for you to play (as unlikely as it may seem) or a bad one so you can bash it even more?
I'd prefer a good Fallout game, but if we can't have that from them, then it would be much better that their spinoff fails miserably in being a good game. Because that's the nature of spinoffs. They are the dread of the series. If they are good games, then there will be a spinoff 2. If they fail, they will drag the whole series down along with them. The later is preferrable, though, because there's always hope that the developers will learn from their mistakes...

...and try to make a decent spinoff sequel? NO!!!!

Shit, we're screwed.

The Walkin' Dude said:
When I was still mostly playing Sega I was often faced by choosing a game in a series. I always went for the higher number since I automatically assumed that the mistakes would be corrected and the good sides improved.
That's very smart of you. I bet that, by then, games couldn't possibly have storylines...

The Walkin' Dude said:
Fallout was raped much more massively by Interplay.
Indeed. Bethesda is just raping its corpse now...
 

Gay-Lussac

Arcane
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
7,563
Location
Your mom
The Walkin' Dude said:
Fallout was raped much more massively by Interplay.
Indeed. Bethesda is just raping its corpse now...[/quote]

Necrophilia ftw. I never got to playing fallout so maybe I still have a chance of enjoying this if they don't pull another oblivion.
 

OSK

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
8,017
Codex 2012 Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire
Marcelo21 said:
The Walkin' Dude said:
Fallout was raped much more massively by Interplay.
Indeed. Bethesda is just raping its corpse now...

Necrophilia ftw. I never got to playing fallout so maybe I still have a chance of enjoying this if they don't pull another oblivion.

What the hell are you doing? Play Fallout. Now.

Edit: Fixing the broken quote
 

1eyedking

Erudite
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
3,591
Location
Argentina
RPS said:
<blockquote>Hell, the “3″ even risks alienating people who’ve never played (or heard of) the original, dismissing it out of hand - there’s eighteen year old PC Gamers who’d have been six when the thing comes out.</blockquote>
2008-18=1990+6=1996≠1997

Solid math & language skillz.
 

TheLostOne

Savant
Joined
Sep 5, 2007
Messages
770
Location
Limbo
They could have a late birthday. :wink:

Also, it's a small percentage of games whose sequals are direct continuations of the storylines of the previous.
 

Marsal

Arcane
Joined
Oct 2, 2006
Messages
1,304
1eyedking said:
RPS said:
<blockquote>Hell, the “3″ even risks alienating people who’ve never played (or heard of) the original, dismissing it out of hand - there’s eighteen year old PC Gamers who’d have been six when the thing comes out.</blockquote>
2008-18=1990+6=1996≠1997

Solid math & language skillz.
Here we go again :D

Maybe he meant when they see the game in the store (assuming Fall 2008 is correct)?
 

Jeff Graw

StarChart Interactive
Developer
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
803
Location
Frigid Wasteland
This is the same dude who wrote the MoTB review at Eurogamer.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom