Sucal said:
I wanted to write a long thesis style response (yes this is me keeping it brief), but I lack the energy to put vigor into it especially considering that if you can write a post that way off base and missed even my most obvious points then there is very little hope that this post will fare any better.
However, I will say this.
Many people make settlements in the law every day even when they are in the right, because of external reasons to right or wrong in the law. I know because I am one, and I am certain I am not the only one. Interplay could easily be in the right, but choose to settle the agreement because they know they cant continue paying the lawyers to keep the fight going as just one of MANY examples of how people will willingly give up being right in the law in exchange for what is logical or practical. Interplay was in the right. They were moving along with the MMO just as the agreement had stated, until Bethesda started to interject into it wanting the rest of the IP for themselves that they had no claim to, and started using litigated force to break down their resistance and take it from them.
Oblivion, Fallout3, New Vegas, Skyrim, are all using in essence the same engine, and in some cases reuse the same assets paired into twos. They all four use the same narrative tropes, and exhibit the same gameplay mechanics. Dont forget that from development standpoint, building an engine, creating assets, are the hardest developmental stages. writing the narrative, scripting it out are fairly easy (just look at how quickly any company can pump out narrative driven DLC once the toolset has been created, or how quickly amature modders can craft their own with small teams) Or for that matter how long it takes for an establish IP to get its next installment released on a new console and how quickly the next installment after that is ready to go. Or, yeah, just look at how the industry works. its all right there.
They are not sequels in a narrative context, but in gameplay they are the same thing, so perhaps sequel isnt the best term, but would Regurgitated installment been preferable?
Seriously. What exactly can you point out thats unique to any of these 4 titles? Cause anything you can point to as "keeping it different" I can point to something showing where its been done before or its an irrelevant factor. (Irrelevant as in Obsidian being the "developers" of New Vegas considering the oversight was done by bethesda, the tools belonged to them, and many of the early assets are directly pooled from Fallout 3)
I purposely portray Bethsda in the same light as Activisions developer teams because Bethesda is trying to become the activision of RPGs. Their Standard operating procedure is mirroring them, the time tables they are working on mirrors them. Their level of sphincterocity in dealing with customers and or the industry mirrors them. Hell they might as well be them and drawing that comparison is a fair comparison to make because they are both guilty of the same things. Only difference is Bethesda is just later to the game Activision and EA have been playing, in part because they had to first set the precedent, and in part because an RPG, even a copy pasta one, takes longer to copy pasta than a FPS or Madden title as there is simply more content at the base level.
So is there anyone who does open worlds better than Bethesda? Yes, basically anyone who tries, because honestly what you get out of any Bethesda title is literally like scraping the bottom of the barrel with modified decade old engine and a constant stream of unimaginative, bland and regurgitated narrative expositions that play out like they were slightly modified from files found on tvtropes and a gameplay mechanic that was pretty unimpressive back in 2004. Couple all that with an often rushed and extensively buggy release and you find yourself with a very subpar product that rabid fanboys blind themselves to all the glaring flaws present.
But you know what.. you wont see any of this. Ive just wasted my time because surely nothing I just said made any sense, and it must be blatantly wrong with absolutely no bearing in reality. Yep, that must be it. Sorry for that. You were right. Just ignore this post all together.
EDIT: Also, the assessment that Bethesda ever owned the IP is blatantly incorrect. Go back and read the actual terms of the agreement. Interplay licensed the franchise to Bethesda and it was set to return to Interplay after Bethesda made 3 installments in exchange for Interplay being able to make the MMO. So the other assessment is correct. Bethesda used their overwhelming monetary clout to strong arm interplay into conceding any and all claims to the property. Really it is completely irrelevant if this incarnation of Interplay has nothing to do with the orignal interplay. What this is about is a company, who has made more profit than they know what to do with, utilizing it to buy out companies, and use litigation to crush competition so they can make even more money and expand that even further.