Just stating my opinion. My point: This whole thing is ridiculous and I think Interplay should just accept what they said they originally said they were going to do for Fallout Online.theklng said:
Bethesda Claims Interplay Wants to "Undermine" Fallout
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Thrilling legal drama, this. Should be adapted into a TV show, it's so intense.Andy Chalk said:
Hold on just a fucking second!Mackheath said:
Bethesda are claiming that Interplay want to undermine the "canon" set by "Fallout 3"...
Does anyone see the problem with that statment?
Seriously though? Nobody realises what's wrong with that?
Impressive.
The "failed to meet the required capitol" should had been a quote from the prospective of Bethesda, sorry about that. The original agreement is in the public domain ever since the first filings, you can look them up online. It's true they were not in chapter 7 when this started but that is completely irrelevant to the original filings. The agreement was always that Interplay would have development started and have enough money to do most of the MMO by a certain date.screwvalve said:
Also the point of this starting after Fallout 3 became popular is mostly coincidental as the date development for an MMO had to be secured had been agreed upon far in advance. The popularity of Fallout 3 only made Bethesda want the rights as soon as possible.
In the court filings Bethesda argued that the money needed for a regular game and the money needed for an MMO where very different amounts. Interplay pointed out the production costs of Nexon stupid spell check (Vindictus, Maple Story, Mabinogi) where much lower than the estimates Bethesda was submitting to show that they didn't have enough money.
After Bethesda failed to get the rights based on the MMO development clause they started grasping at straws, stating that Interplay could only use the name Fallout and none of the licensed artwork or establish canon, a real dick move, I haven't read the court documents for that second case but based on the current fillings the Judge must have sided with Bethesda in the second case.
This is going to keep getting uglier before we finally see a MMO make it to market.
Good for Bethesda. They own the intellectual property, it's theirs not Interplay's. Looking back, and doing back research on the Fallout games (Because I still haven't beat the first. I refuse to use a guide.), and what I've gleaned Bethesda could have handled three so much worse. They actually showed a high-level of competency (if not awesomeness) in handling the third game, and even more so with New Vegas. If Fallout continues to stay in the hands of Bethesda I see only good things for the future of the franchise.
Dick moves happened on both sides, starting with Interplay. They wanted to charge an absurd amount for a Fallout MMO compared to the rest of the IP they sold for $5.75 million. I don't know the exact figure, but I believe it was in the tens of millions.newwiseman said:
Regardless, Bethesda let Interplay keep the MMO rights knowing Interplay had neither the support to maintain an MMO (they still don't), nor the financial backing for one. Because of that, the rights to the MMO would ultimately default back to Bethesda. But since the success of the franchise since FO3, Bethesda wants the MMO rights now, and I honestly don't blame them despite them being dicks about it. Interplay hasn't had a real staff since the turn of the millennium.
The assumption that Interplay would release even a halfway decent MMO is about as laughable as expecting Activision to not release a sequel to a sequel year after year. Interplay is dead in the water and they have been trying to monetize the Fallout MMO in the hope they can get some investment dollars so they can keep their doors open for one more day. Basically, Interplay is acting like Tim Langdell.
Funny Fallout 3 was the reason some of the real canon(Van Buuren) got changed.Interplay should just quit tho.This is just weird.I kinda envision Interplay moving about like a dead person on strings.Sort of like a marionette.It's a really weird thought but the retarded dancing with joints moving in all directions is creepy and unnerving,but it also makes you wonder how is it still alive.
Minecraft is 3D. Fallout 2 is "2.5D," in that the game is presented in the appearance of 3D, but you really only move along two dimensions.screwvalve said:
Everyone saying "interplay sold the rights, bethesda owns everything now", sorry, you got it backwards. The arrangement went something like this.
If I'm not mistaken, the deal was that Interplay had to begin the MMO by a certain time, but also had to release it by a certain time. (from Gamasutra at [link]http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=16236[/link)
The agreement was signed on April 4, 2007. That means by April 4, 2009, they were supposed to be in full development with at least $30 million in funding. Allegedly, they entered into a contract with Masthead games (Earthrise) two days before the deadline... but there aren't really any signs they're in full development, and here it is June of 2011.
That means they have until April 2, 2012 to release or they are in clear breach of contract. At this point, it's likely that Bethesda is arguing that the last-minute funding miracle was not actually a good-faith attempt to begin development, but was rather a hollow stall tactic. Interplay's recent money troubles seem to reinforce that assessment.
I really don't understand where this "Bethesda's being dicks" thing is coming from. They have a strong case here, and this isn't some arbitrary control freak/cash grab thing.
Interplay is blatantly incapable of producing a quality game worthy of the Fallout name. They just gave what must be the most historically pathetic public financial statement ever. Bethesda is worried that they'll take the Fallout name, that they revived at significant cost, and run it into the ground. When gamers play this rushed, poorly financed MMO, it will reflect badly upon them and cause many gamers--who likely aren't aware that Bethesda didn't make it--to not buy future titles in the series.
It's a perfectly reasonable position.
Interplay is blatantly incapable of producing a quality game worthy of the Fallout name. They just gave what must be the most historically pathetic public financial statement ever. Bethesda is worried that they'll take the Fallout name, that they revived at significant cost, and run it into the ground. When gamers play this rushed, poorly financed MMO, it will reflect badly upon them and cause many gamers--who likely aren't aware that Bethesda didn't make it--to not buy future titles in the series.
It's a perfectly reasonable position.
Really?Andy Chalk said:
I think I might be able to keep my mind from being blown. But only just.
Am I the only one who feels insulted by this? I really feel like they're calling us morons.
This made me lol because although a bit exaggerated it is kinda true. If it was about Patrick Stewart and Oblivion respectively it actually would be true. Makes me hope they sunk a bit more cash into their voice acting cast when Skyrim comes round the corner...Grey Carter said:
Personally I had no idea about Interplay and the earlier Fallouts, although I have recently begun playing Fallout 2 on recommendation, but I have to say Bethesda's installments hold up pretty well so far, although they do feel rather dumbed down. I know, if games get more lavish in the graphics department there are corners need to be cut when it comes to gameplay and world size. I can see the difference in approach between the early games and the newer ones and I think Interplay has well and truly passed the torch. Granted, some parts of the game were weird to me; I never really saw what's the problem with radioactive water since obviously what's radioactive should not be the water but any impurities in it, which can be sieved out with as little as a sand filter to make clean, drinkable water, and there should be plenty of sand around in a nuclear wasteland, for shame. But Fallout's science has always been remarkably soft for being a land where people use scavenged war time machine guns and everything but the most advanced compounds still runs on simple old punch cards and vacuum tubes and typewriters disguised as computers. It's a shame they can't get along and maybe collaborate to make something good, although I don't think Bethesda's favor for mod communities lends itself particularly well to managing a MMO. If Interplay wants to make a post-apocalyptic MMORPG then why not be smart and change the title and setting, thereby avoiding expensive lawyers and the backlash from a lost law suit, or better yet, make a regular single player game they can cash in on before trying a more ambitious venture?
2 is only sort of an opinion. Bethesda is acting in the interest of protecting its IP.mjc0961 said:
4 is not really speculation. There was a nearly decade gap between Brotherhood of Steel and Fallout 3. Interplay didn't produce anything in the franchise during that time. After Fallout 2, the two subsequent games were of sharply decreasing quality, in terms of faithfulness to the setting. While devs from 14 Degrees East has gone on record and said they fucked up, and wouldn't make the same mistakes again, Brotherhood of Steel was a body blow to the franchise. So while 4 isn't an absolute fact, it also isn't uninformed (or unreasonable) analysis.
5 is speculation, but the pattern of behavior from Bethesda, when weighed against the pattern of behavior from Interplay, in published property from the franchise, does tend to bare it out.
6 is what it is. A zombie company.
Yeah... no. So, Interplay and Bethesda originally worked out an agreement for Bethesda to take the property for the next three (not five) games. As work on Fallout 3 progressed, Bethesda went back and renegotiated Bethesda buying the property outright for a large sum of cash with Interplay having the rights to make an MMO.Elementlmage said:
As to your "either one of them could be telling the truth"? Yeah, that's not how this works. You see, you lie on court filings like this and get caught that's a contempt charge. This isn't an automatic "you loose the case" but it will do an absolute number on your credibility from there on out.
So lying and saying the agreement is for five games, when it was actually buying the license outright? Yeah, that is not going to happen in court. Why? Because the people involved actually read the fucking agreements.
It's not actually that. This isn't about an argument over continuity, this is about keeping a clear and coherent brand identity. Something that would get incredibly difficult if you had two separate companies advancing separate plot lines at the same time.craddoke said:
The issue is the average consumer. This is the consumer who doesn't know or notice that the MMO and Fallout 3 are by different companies, and only cares when it makes the MMO difficult to understand. They chalk it up to the writers being crap, and god forbid that the game itself is a trainwreck, which is entirely probable given Interplay's solvency issues.
Remember when Interplay turned out a "Fallout Trilogy" pack a couple years ago? This is an example of that problem in motion. The package was pulled and replaced (with, I think the "Classic Fallout" pack) because the average consumer would mistakenly believe that the Fallout Trilogy would be 1, 2 and 3, not 1, 2 and Tactics.
People who got sucked into this aren't going to blame Interplay, they'll blame the Fallout name, and damaging the property. And, unfortunately, this kind of thinking actually happens in the general population.
Ok correct me if I am wrong, but during the fallout of old Interplay... god save me from the anti-pun lightning... Bethesda was given ONLY the rights to the Single Player Fallout IP and Interplay was given and still has every right to make the MMO they always wanted too, unless Interplay recently sold off said rights then Bethesda has no ground to stand on, Bethesda agreed to this deal long before Fallout 3 was made and now they are crying foul because they don't have every bit of the IP rights.
Now though Interplay does have the MMO Rights to the Fallout Universe do I think it should be made? Hell no, Interplay is not a company that can back a project like an MMO, it requires huge amounts of money and a large team to keep it running properly.
Now though Interplay does have the MMO Rights to the Fallout Universe do I think it should be made? Hell no, Interplay is not a company that can back a project like an MMO, it requires huge amounts of money and a large team to keep it running properly.
Interplay intends to [redacted]?! How dare they!
Seriously, though- how could you expect anyone to make any kind of Fallout game without access to Pip Boy? If all you're getting out of the deal is the ability to use the word "Fallout" in the title, jeez, you might as well make an MMO out of Wasteland.
And I would so not want to be the Interactive Game Group, whoever they are. "Hey, thanks for the funding! Now if you'll excuse us, we're going to tie all your 'development' funds up in legal wrangling, m'kay?"
Seriously, though- how could you expect anyone to make any kind of Fallout game without access to Pip Boy? If all you're getting out of the deal is the ability to use the word "Fallout" in the title, jeez, you might as well make an MMO out of Wasteland.
And I would so not want to be the Interactive Game Group, whoever they are. "Hey, thanks for the funding! Now if you'll excuse us, we're going to tie all your 'development' funds up in legal wrangling, m'kay?"