Bethesda suing Interplay over Fallout MMO

by David Hinkle { Sep 11th 2009 at 8:30PM }

Things weren't looking good for Interplay earlier this year and, uh, much hasn't changed since then. Even though the company had virtually no money, it still wanted to make the Fallout MMO, Project V-13. Well, Interplay's got another hurdle now: Bethesda. The Oblivion and Fallout 3 developer claims that Interplay infringed on its trademark, court documents show. Interplay disagrees, obviously, and says it still holds the rights to develop the title with Masthead Studios, even though it failed to commence the stipulated full-scale development by April 4, 2009.

Gamasutra has more info on the lawsuit, which also mentions Interplay's licensing of the original Fallout games for digital distribution through services such Steam, GOG.com and GameTap. Bethesda says this has caused "immediate, substantial, and irreparable harm." But, hey, it's not all frowns and sad faces. Above this text is a neat piece of concept art for Project V-13 from Natiq Aghayev. Man, we never thought post-apocalyptia could look so good.

Source - Court documents [Via VG247]
Source - Gamasutra

[image credit]

Tags: bethesda, fallout, fallout-3, fallout-mmo, interplay, lawsuit, mmo, project-v13

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

MechaGamerX @ Sep 11th 2009 8:38PM

DEV FIGHT!!

SpyderTaco (PSN: Ar4chNova89) @ Sep 11th 2009 9:05PM

Saw this coming a mile away, just expected it to be sooner.

The Baron @ Sep 11th 2009 8:41PM

So Bethesda are suing the original creators (or publishers) for infringing on the trademark that THEY originally made?

goboColossus (LIVE, PSN - gobopop) @ Sep 11th 2009 8:45PM

Total dick move. I enjoyed Fallout 3, but if this kills my chance of playing a new traditional Fallout game (even if it has to be an MMO), they'll lose my respect - which carries about as much weight as an internet petition, but it's the principal of the matter!

Ultron @ Sep 11th 2009 8:46PM

Noo... reread the article, will you? The agreement was that they'd have access to the IP for an MMO as long as they started development on it by April. They haven't, so they forfeit the IP.

AoE @ Sep 11th 2009 9:16PM

the creator of the IP doesn't matter, only whoever owns it. Interplay, btw didn't have to sell the IP to Bethesda, they chose to.

Massmass @ Sep 12th 2009 12:48AM

Interplay is not what they once were and should just disband already. If anyone thinks they will magically rise from the ashes, they are sorely disillusioned. Their time has come and passed.

Plus, total dick move by Interplay to make contracts and not follow through. I'm sorry but as annoying as it is to do court battles, Bethesda is in the right here, and im sure they tried to sort matters out with Interplay before filing, it is cheaper that way after all.

Dirk Dorkelson @ Sep 12th 2009 7:48PM

So it's a dick move to buy the rights to something, then be mad when the person who sold you the rights continues to act as if it owns them? I guess Bethesda should have just given Interplay a huge pile of cash to keep it afloat and expected nothing in return.

Now, I'm sure there's legal fine print here, but the whole point of buying something and negotiating a deal is that both sides are supposed to abide by it. Clearly, at least one of the two parties involved with this deal aren't abiding.

Longhorn Slim @ Sep 11th 2009 8:46PM

Go Bethesda

Discotheque @ Sep 11th 2009 9:03PM

You're one of the most insufferable posters I've witnessed in this place.

Adam @ Sep 11th 2009 9:15PM

I'd more readily propose that of you Discotheque

Discotheque @ Sep 11th 2009 9:28PM

On what grounds my good man?

Adam @ Sep 11th 2009 9:38PM

Ohhhh... I don't know, I'm just being a pain, I will proceed to down-vote myself. I have been shamed.

Jinsenken @ Sep 11th 2009 9:45PM

Now now Adam and Disco, let's not get a brawl going in the courtyard.

Settle this like gentlemen: A chivalrous duel with fencing rapiers.

Discotheque @ Sep 11th 2009 9:51PM

Now now Master Jinsenken. The gentleman has apologized. All is well now.

Now if you two would be so kind as to join me in the smoking quarters, bring your pipes and tobacco of course.

Tiptup300 @ Sep 12th 2009 12:42AM

If you ignore the trolls they'll get bored and fall asleep.

Dwemer Schematic @ Sep 11th 2009 8:54PM

-Complete- dick move by Bethesda. They didn't even get fallout 3 right. Can't wait for New Vegas, which goes to show that at least Bethesda does one thing right: Pays another company to make a good game for them.

Also, big LOL's go out to:

"Above this text is a neat piece of concept art for Project V-13 from Natiq Aghayev. Man, we never thought post-apocalyptia could look so good."

Yeah, that's what a real PA game looks like, not Bethesda's regurga-tron-3000.

cknblade @ Sep 11th 2009 9:05PM

How did they "not get fallout 3 right?" Fallout 3 was a brilliant game, and one of epic proportions at that (I'm playing through my third time, and STILL finding new and interesting little details and areas. And I fail to see how this is a dick move. Bethesda legally owns the fallout license. Interplay messed up, they missed their deadline, and forfeited their rights. There is nothing arguable about this; this is numbers and laws.

Burns11 @ Sep 11th 2009 9:17PM

Falout 3 wasn't a bad game, it just wasn't Fallout.

Special Agent Steve @ Sep 11th 2009 10:40PM

"Falout 3 wasn't a bad game, it just wasn't Fallout."
I disagree, I saw it more as an evolution of Fallout. Fallout 3 couldn't exist without Fallout 1 & 2- the story, mechanics, and themes were all in it. It was just first person.

RKN @ Sep 11th 2009 10:49PM

No I agree, Fallout 3 was not as good as 1 and 2. I really wanted to see Interplay's version of Fallout 3 before it was sadly canned and Bethesda took this franchise.

The majority that say that 3 is brilliant have never played the first two games, I'd like to hear from those that played the first two games and see what they think of 3.

I really want to see New Vegas as its being made by some of the original team of 1 and 2, show Bethesda how its done!

Murtaug @ Sep 11th 2009 11:03PM

I am a huge fan of Fallout and Fallout 2, never really got into Tactics much, I even played Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel on the PS2, which is a really good example of a bad Fallout game.

I personally LOVE Fallout 3. It has the tone and feel of the originals in spades. I always have Fallout 2 installed and play it constantly, but Fallout 3 is a fantastic evolution of the series. It may take away the third person isometric view and replace it with first person, but I am playing the game for the story, people and locales. There are things I would like to see done better, but I think Bethesda has the respect for the series to carry it forward, hiring Obsidian to do the next installment was a good idea and I look forward to that as well as the next "full" game.

Frenzy @ Sep 11th 2009 11:25PM

@RKN: I played through both Fallout 1 and 2 when they were released 10+ years ago, and I loved them. However, I thoroughly enjoyed Fallout 3.

I don't think it would have been realistic to expect 3 to be anything like 1 and 2, considering the RPG genre has changed a lot since that type of isometric perspective (although Fallout: New Vegas could bring that back).

Fallout 3 suffered from becoming way too easy and not taking advantage of effects of radiation levels, broken bones, etc. (of course the mod community soon remedied all that for the PC, thus making it an even more incredible game. That and the Cube DLC from SureAI is the best DLC mod I've ever played).

Anyway, you asked so I answered :).

RKN @ Sep 11th 2009 11:08PM

I personally wanted to see a continuation of Fallout 1/2's settings in California, the West Coast. I am very disappointed by the lack of towns in 3 (Megatown and Rivet City pretty much it) when 1 and especially 2 had many to explore. It takes place many years after 2 and yet your setting makes it look like the nuclear war just happened a short time ago, there is much less development and life in the Capital Wasteland than California.

Fallout 3 and Broken Steel also had a bad ending, not much closure, what happened with the Mutants, Talon Company, etc? I liked the closure of when you defeated the Master and mutants in the first game and they just come back in 3 via a Vault experiment and are much more stupid and backwards than in 1/2?

Fallout 3 is not a bad game, I have wasted many hours of it, but it fails to have the magic of the first two. I cannot wait to see what Obsidian will cook up. I personally feel that Bethesda should stick to Elder Scrolls and let someone else do Fallout, just my opinion.

Jose @ Sep 11th 2009 8:58PM

I hope Bethesda loses the case and has to pay a bunch of money to Interplay, simply so they don't have so much of my money, which I willfully handed over to them for a lunch box and DLC, and that money I intend to give them when I want the rest of the DLC I haven't yet purchased.

Cheesus(Crust) @ Sep 11th 2009 9:00PM

They deserve it for not bringing it over to PS3.

Jose @ Sep 12th 2009 12:44AM

I shouldn't take it personally because you guys have proven yourselves, time and time again, to be complete morons, but to thumb me down for making a bad joke about giving Bethesda all my money... right.

Destron @ Sep 11th 2009 9:02PM

"If Bethesda prevails, Interplay would lose the rights to develop the Fallout MMO."

Are they actually truly SUING Interplay (for money), or is this more along the lines of a cease-and-desist?

Uncontrol @ Sep 11th 2009 9:07PM

Not all lawsuits are about monetary exchanges.

Silicon Siren @ Sep 11th 2009 10:43PM

"Not all lawsuits are about monetary exchanges."

I lol'ed.

Seriously dude, you're diluted. Yes they are. Money is ALWAYS the reason for lawsuits. ALWAYS. Period. Even if they aren't the supposed main reason they will still seek money damages to cover attorney fees and wet their beak.

Sad to see Bethesda bulling an old weaker developer. Bethesda is full of a bunch of lazy arrogant twats. They have the nerve to blame their half assed animations on the game engine they licensed when MMO’s using the same game engine have better.

Aurailious @ Sep 11th 2009 11:54PM

Bethesda is not seeking any monetary gains from this lawsuit, only to strip Interplay of all rights to Fallout.

I repeat, Bethesda is not seeking any form of monetary gain from this lawsuit.

fred @ Sep 12th 2009 12:23AM

"Seriously dude, you're diluted."
Well you're damn near homeopathic!

Z (uburi) @ Sep 12th 2009 12:40AM

"Seriously dude, you're diluted"

I lol'ed, too.

Z (uburi) @ Sep 12th 2009 12:41AM

Whoops. Serves me right for going afk and not hitting "refresh" before I posted my comment. I got scooped!

tmacairjordan87 @ Sep 11th 2009 9:03PM

Bethesda has made two of the best games this gen, so I side with them for almost everything. Now that they have id, they can fix the few problems with their games and be next to perfect. So go Bethesda!!

Charades @ Sep 11th 2009 9:14PM

I agree, with id Software maybe Bethesda can fix their choppy animations.

On topic: Sounds like Bethesda is right.

AoE @ Sep 11th 2009 9:17PM

They can't fix the generally ugly texture issues... ID has the same problems. Both devs need better texture artists, and modelers.

LegendaryRedass @ Sep 11th 2009 9:34PM

It's the gta effect. You're not gonna get top notch graphics with as much going on technically as these games have. That's why technically simpler games like fps' and racers tend to have better graphics. And that's ok by me.

AoE @ Sep 11th 2009 11:09PM

@LegendaryRedass,

I take it you've only played Bethesda games on consoles then? There are modders who have retextured their games on PC and they look astounding. Not new models, and I believe the textures are even the same size as the originals... they just don't look crappy.

There are also modders who have done model replacements in addition to retexturing, and some of those look absolutely phenomenal. No, your reasoning might be an excuse from the developers, but it's a bullshit answer.

Also I should note that I'm a longtime Bethesda fanboy, and never once have they been noted for texture skills; it's been a problem for them as long as they've been making games.

NintendoJunkie @ Sep 11th 2009 9:19PM

After reading a similar arcticle on Big Download, it seems that a few months ago when Interplay re-released Fallout 1, 2, & Tactics it was ok as per their agreement w/ Bethesda, however what was ALSO an issue is the fact that they didn't contact Bethesda to APPROVE the graphic design on the packaging. Bethesda also didn't want anyone to confuse the packaging w/ Fallout 3 on retail shelves & buy it instead of FO3.

Although it may seem that Bethesda is being unreasonable about it, if Interplay broke any contract/agreement, Bethesda has every right to do what they did. Interplay sold the IP to Bethesda. It's THEIRS now. Bethesda could have made a game about candy canes & lollipops & still could have called it Fallout 3.

sleepypersons @ Sep 11th 2009 9:29PM

So even though they didn't have it approved it's really up to the customer not to be a idiot and read the label.
If that really was the case the judge would most likely say no that's not a good enough reason to sue.

Joey @ Sep 11th 2009 9:23PM

I don't care who sues who, someone here needs to stop whining and give us a good Fallout MMO...

Discotheque @ Sep 11th 2009 9:33PM

Although the gameplay is hard to get into these days (I didn't enjoy it that much), Interplay's work on the story and moral choices easily eclipsed Bethesda's work. Much more deep and disturbing. In a perfect world we would get Id doing the shooter work, Bethesda doing open world (with somebody polishing animations and bugs out), and Interplay in charge of all story and character aspects.

Because if there's one thing that Bethesda is heavily flawed in (bugs withstanding) it's the damn story aspect of their games. Also their characters. So shallow and boring.