| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (29)

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:08PM PR0F3TA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
*sigh* they all were great games to me (FO2 more specifically), kinda sucks when you see 2 gaming companies go at it... unless its Activision, them and their peripheral gimmicks
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:08PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
EA and Activision should both go at each other's throats, who ever loses, us gamers win.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
if one of them loses, one of them also wins.. tough call.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:08PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I would like to know how/why Bethesda gave Obsidian permission to develop Fallout: New Vegas.

I'm very excited for that game since some of the developers behind Fallout 1/2 (better than 3 IMO) are working on it. Show them how its done Obsidian!
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:19PM Courtney said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
From the article:

"Interplay claims Bethesda now only holds rights to Fallout 3 with options for a fourth and fifth game in the series."

If Bethesda has the license or rights to two more games in the series, I don't see any reason why they couldn't outsource one of those games.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I still like Wasteland better than any Fallout game.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:14PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
correction: interplay is not the father of Fallout, it was the step uncle in charge of publishing the game who ultimately pulled the plug on the franchise. now uncle interplay wants to come back in and make some more money now that Fallout is back on the sales charts. Huge surprise.
Reply

Posted: Oct 22nd 2009 12:31PM Courtney said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Correction: Black Isle was a wholly owned developer of Interplay, formed to specifically make RPGs for the publisher. Sticking to the family tree analogy here, Interplay would be more like the grandfather.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is really shady on Interplay's part. They're treating the IP sale like some jank real estate scam.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:19PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, Bethesda had the idea to make 3 far more mainstream, for the consoles and thus the reason for its massive sales success vs. 1/2/Tactics which are PC only and relatively niche.

Too bad you didn't have that idea Interplay. Wait, there was a Fallout game for the PS2/Xbox but it was utter garbage.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
It seems what happened was that Interplay thought that there was no financial value in the Fallout license after they bungled the last few attempts at creating a Fallout 3 (Brotherhood of Steel and the unreleased Interplay version of Fallout 3) and probably thought Bethesda's Fallout 3 was going to do mediocre numbers and my guess is they had no intention of developing the Fallout MMO. Once they saw the Fallout 3 sales numbers their jaws dropped and started to hack something together. I think at that point Bethesda was just trying to protect the Fallout license by revoking it from Interplay. If Interplay wasn't willing to put in the resources and time necessary to create a Fallout MMO (several years) then it likely would have been a bomb and hurt the brand. I also don't doubt that Bethesda has their own big plans for a Fallout MMO.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:40PM Aurailious said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That is how I took it. Bethesda has far better capabilities to develop and publish games than Interplay at this point and really have made what Fallout is today.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:38PM LaughingTarget said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Obsidian: Hey, we're the ones who actually made the game, but you Interplay jerks made us go to the courthouse to change our name from Black Isle.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 6:44PM Aurailious said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I expect Obsidian to do excellent work on Fallout: New Vegas. Perhaps if they well enough Bethesda will let them make all future Fallout titles as well.

I certainly hope so. And I know Bethesda will treat them better than Interplay.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 7:07PM finnith said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Less competing firms = consumers win?

I fail to see the logic there. More competing firms is always good, even if one of them is evil.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 7:30PM Sleepyperson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Personally I see interplay winning in this legal battle at least to still hold fallout 1,2 and tactics rights.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 7:56PM fredgaso said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
whatever
just give me

FALLOUT 3 "2"
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 8:39PM Dark Archon PSN Archonik XBL Dar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
To be honest I'd rather have Fallout 2 "2"...
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 9:33PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Bethesda has a LOT more money than Interplay. I'm not saying they're right (or wrong) but I'm pretty sure that fact is going to have a good deal to do with how this case washes out.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 10:26PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
As much as I love Fallout 3,
Interplay made Earthworm Jim right?
Therefore go Interplay!
Bethesda does have alot of money though.
Whatever happens (as long as it dosnt result in Fallout ending)
Happens.
Reply

Posted: Oct 22nd 2009 6:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Interplay is a publisher. PUBLISHER. they don't make games, they publish them. Shiny made earthworm jim.
Reply

Posted: Oct 22nd 2009 9:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sorry!
Dont read that much into things...
Downvoted on one of my first comments):
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 10:46PM F1 Basu Gasu Bakuhatsu said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
To win this case Interplay's going to need a lot of Mentats.
Reply

Posted: Oct 22nd 2009 12:25AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
+infinity.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2009 11:07PM Cptkrush said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"but Bethesda told it "for no apparent reason" that Interplay was no longer allowed to develop the game"

April 4, 2009 rolled around and you guys didn't have a game in development, there is your reason you retarded, money hungry whores.
Reply

Posted: Oct 22nd 2009 1:54AM Nanaya said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I say, they should let Obsidian do all the Fallout games from now on with Bethesda publishing them and split the income 3 ways. This way, everyone wins and loses! And we would still get a proper Fallout game.
Reply

Posted: Oct 22nd 2009 9:32AM jedimacfan said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
They'll eventually settle out of court for an undisclosed amount of bottle caps.
Reply

Posted: Oct 22nd 2009 10:33PM c247def6 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
You are all wrong, Interplay went bankrupt then just recently found financing in selling rights to their most successful franchise to another company.

Also, simply put, if Bethesda is overstepping their contract guidelines, then more power to Interplay. Bethesda's vision of Fallout was not true to the story, it's hard for me to even consider it canon.

Where is the child killing and forcing everyone you meet to hate you? When you became a slaver in Fallout 2 you got a tattoo on your forehead that let everyone know. Sulik would try to kill you for it. There are simply no far-reaching consequences for your actions in Fallout 3 (Choosing the starting city doesn't count, it has to be lasting social consequences, not eliminating a group that would hate you altogether.) If you attacked a city in Fallout 2 you had to fight them every time you went back until EVERY SINGLE ONE was dead. If you attacked someone in Fallout 3, you just had to go somewhere and rest for 3 days before you could go back.

Also, cptkrush, outlining plans of a game is the first step of making a game. That means that Interplay fulfilled their end of that deal. You can't start the coding unless you have ideas to code around.

Also, as with the console argument, the technology simply wasn't around then. There was no way a Fallout 3 like we saw could possibly be released on the ps2 or xbox.

Lastly, I would rather see an updated isometric Fallout than the first person garbage that Bethesda released. Quicken the turn-based combat from the original instead of some jank ass first person AP recharge bullshit like VATS is what I want to see.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

WRUP: All the Reckoning

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 11:45PM

Xbox Live Indie Gems: Nyan Cat Adventure

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 10:15PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW