Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Role Playing (Games)

Troika's Fallout 3 Pitch Prototype Showcased? 28

Posted by simoniker
from the many-fallouts dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The No Mutants Allowed website has gotten hold of some screenshots of a post-apocalyptic RPG that was in development at Troika Games - the news story claims: 'Due to recent developments, [the prototype has] currently been put on hold.' Did the recent acquisition of the Fallout license by Bethesda kill chances of a Fallout 3 made by the game's original development team?" A recent messageboard post at the Troika-based Terra Arcanum fansite also suggests: "According to several unconfirmed rumors... Troika were also in the bidding for the license. In the end though... Troika were simply out-gunned."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Troika's Fallout 3 Pitch Prototype Showcased?

Comments Filter:
  • Too bad... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Txiasaeia (581598) on Monday August 02, 2004 @11:07PM (#9866519)
    ...Arcanum and TOEE were *much* closer to Fallout than any of Bethesda's offerings. Imagine TOEE's engine with a new fallout game!

    But this is what happens in the computer industry - the people with the most money get the better licences. Too bad that Bethesda's going to make the game that we *don't* want - endless, repetitive, computer-generated quests in a desert with Pipboy.

    Arcanum had a great story but bad engine. TOEE had a terrible story but a terrific engine. Too bad they weren't given the chance to work with a brilliant francise using their TOEE engine - could have given us the game that us FO freaks wanted.

    • Re:Too bad... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by NeuroKoan (12458)
      Hopefully they can find a way to fully develop this game and release it under a different name, not related to the Fallout franchise.

      On the other hand, if it is related to the Fallout franchise, I would hope they could find a way to remove all the Fallout IP without either A) marring the game so badly its unplayable or B) make it an obvious Fallout ripoff (ie "this game includes your handy digital assistant Popboy!").
      • Re:Too bad... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Txiasaeia (581598)
        Agreed. This world really needs more non-fantasy based, non-IP RPGs (KOTOR was good, but how many star wars games do we really need)? Fallout was a breakout success in terms of originality and *fun* - let's see Troika develop some kick-ass intellectual properties that they can take to the bank!
      • Re:Too bad... (Score:5, Informative)

        by abandonment (739466) <mike@wuetherick.gmail@com> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @01:58AM (#9867168) Homepage
        which would be funny because fallout started as a gurps game, but they couldn't get the license so they created the fallout 'game system' and it's associated stats etc

        for it to move onto a 3rd game/world system now would be amusing - and proves that the fans don't care about the IP - they want good games
        • Except that Fallout would have been just as successful had it used the GURPS license/IP from the start, the point being that the story and the good game design sold it to people. The fans do care about the IP--the actual setting, backstory, etc., as opposed to any IP related to specific game engines like SPECIAL. So don't say that the fans don't care about the IP...
        • Ok, this isn't my recollection of what heppended. They (Interplay?) had the GURPS licence, and Steve Jackson Games was on board about them using it. There was alot of buzz at the time of it being the first "GURPS Powered" game on the market. Then, at the last minute, they hacked the GURPS stuff out of it. Anyone that's played the Fallout series and knows GURPS can tell that many of the game mechanics are very GURPS-like.
    • Re:Too bad... (Score:2, Interesting)

      TOEE engine? hah, graphically decent, TOEE engine is AD&D
      based, and AD&D for cRPG just sucks ass. AD&D has tons of rules
      that are originally left for the dungen master to enforce or not.
      Further more, AD&D rules are quite limited, especially since they
      are for pen & paper, minimizing calculations.

      For example, in AD&D you have charisma/likability. If you play
      as an ogre you get a penalty hit for charisma, I understand,
      ogre deals with humans, charisma is shot to hell, but same ogre
      charac
    • by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @05:05AM (#9867629) Journal
      Geez what is it with license. Fallout did not have a license when it was released. It created it.

      But you need a big licensed name to sell you game nowadays. Kindly explain Star Wars Galaxies to me then. Biggest license around and doesn't sell.

      If these guys got a nice engine for creating a post-apolyptical world then why can't they create their own story? Nobody "owns" hero must rebuild mankind. No law saying you can't create your own vault-dweller.

      Instead of whining let them release their own game set in their own world. It is not like we are being overwhelmed with RPG's set in the future.

      Arcanum and TOEE suffered both from one very simple thing. TO BLOODY BIG. There is no fun in walking around a landscape where a shed/building that is empty takes up several screens. Add the bugs to TOEE and they didn't sell because they were crap. It is sometimes hard to figure out why baldurs gate and its succesors worked. Just play some Arcanum and TOEE and it will become clear. Baldurs gate is smaller. Less gigantic areas with nothing to do in and far less walking involved.

      On a side note, when are RPG games going to develop some code that makes sure only items are dropped wich I can use. Especially sucks in single player rpg's. Wow, my wizard got a gigantic asskicking sword. Can't use it and is to heavy to carry back. Nice. Usefull. Would it have been so hard to add class specific loot. Tip don't play nevewinter nights as a monk. You will have more money then creoscote and nothing to spend it on.

      • Arcanum and TOEE suffered both from one very simple thing. TO BLOODY BIG.

        Actually, that's my wife is still playing it. She's finished it 5 times or so. She's even done the so-called "God's Quest". For her, it's like Morrowwind - she'll eventually finish the main story, but let's enjoy and wander around the world first. If you skip all the side stuff, it goes rather quickly.

        Oh, and there's a new TOEE patch, you might want to take a look. My problem with the game is that it's too slow, it takes too
  • Let's hope Troika gets a shot at this one in the end.
  • Temple of Elemental Evil was released and very clearly not done. If Trioka didn't have able to scrape together the financial resources to finish ToEE, why would they be able to scrap up enough to make another Fallout?
  • Both have made some of the buggiest games ever... But still, they have made some of the best games ever...

    Imagine them working together, will we see more bugs or a better game :)?
    • ...sure, Bethesda has made *good* games, but they focus on entirely different aspects of role-playing. Troika and its veterans put out games that focused on meticulously detailed interactions with the game-world and its inhabitants, with thousands of lines of written dialogue that branched out depending on the player's decisions. Bethesda's were more of an MMORPG randomly-generated randomly-distributed game mechanic. I shudder to think of what Bethesda's rendition of a Fallout game might turn out like.
      • Quick note: Morrowind did not have randomly generated characters, or randomly generated dungeons, or randomly generated quests. Daggerfall did, with an immense game world - for Morrowind they scaled the world back quite a bit in order to be able to hand design everything.

        Morrowind was all done ahead of time, with every little thing placed there specifically. Now, you could complain that they did not put enough thought into many of the NPCs, and failed to flesh most of them out properly, and you might ha
  • fallout 3 (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mmmjoy (666918) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @12:07PM (#9869291)
    Would anyone else not really mind if fallout 3 was released with the fallout 2 engine and graphics, as long as it had a long, diverse, and involving storyline?

    I think that the "original developers" company is a bit much, but maybe just some of the original writers?

    Fallout 2 was just Fallout with a few improvements and a new (much longer) story. fallout 3 doesnt really have to be much different to make the real fans happy.
    • Re:fallout 3 (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Kingfox (149377) *
      I'd still like to see a few minor improvements to the engine, like the changes made in Arcanum and Fallout Tactics. Waypoints, easy stance changes, and more fleshed out vehicles come to mind.
    • Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing Fallout 3 made with the Fallout Tactics engine. Aside from the mission-based storyline, and (imho) the horrible real-time combat system (I played through the game on turnbased), the interface and the ability to directly control the entire party were good improvements on Fallout 2. However, as the parent post says, the dev team, whomever is is, should focus on creating a top-notch story first, then worry about the interface.
    • Real fans will be happy, but Fallout 1 and 2 were not big mega sellers. A new release with a now seven or eight year old engine will only bring in the die-hard fans who have stuck with the game since the initial release. If its bargain bin, they'll pick up a few impulse/curiosity buys, and if its free, they'll get all the freeloader tryouts, but they still have to shoot for a profit, or risk submarining themselves for future releases, so they need to make the game look nice enough to draw in new players as

"Just think of a computer as hardware you can program." -- Nigel de la Tierre

Working...