Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Role Playing (Games)

Interplay Developing $75 Million Fallout MMOG 132

Posted by Zonk
from the a-plan-with-money-hats dept.
Next Generation has very, very good news for RPG fans. Interplay is going to be developing a Fallout Massively Multiplayer Online Game ... and they're in it for serious. The official announcement says that they're going to be throwing $75 Million (dollars!) at development for this thing. From the article: "Production is proposed to begin as early as 2007, with a launch slated for Q3 2010. The company's proposal expects 1 million subscribers during the first year, and projects profitability in year two, revenue of $160 million annually after its first year and net income of $50 million annually starting in year three." Those are fighting words, and the 1 Million club they're aiming for ... maybe not so easy to get into. Also, didn't Interplay go out of business?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Interplay Developing $75 Million Fallout MMOG

Comments Filter:
  • Also, didn't Interplay go out of business?

    Yes. Yes it did. [penny-arcade.com]

    But I guess Gary didn't buy the rights to Fallout after all. Maybe he went for the jar of spit instead.

    • by Lex-Man82 (994679)
      According to the article there parent company Titus Interactive went broke. They go on to say that Interplay managed to stay afloat by licensing the rights to Fallout three to Bethesda.
  • Next Generation has very, very good news for RPG fans

    So now we are hyping things before they even start production. Wake me in Q4 2009 when we have proof that it might not suck.

    • by Arker (91948)
      Even if it wasn't hype, it appears to be a non-sequitur. MMOG != RPG. Not even close.
      • Exactly. This is horrible news, because it just means that it'll probably be even longer until I get to play another single-player Fallout game.

        A non-trivial portion of the gaming market HATES hearing of a new MMO game in a francise that they like, as it means a lot of dev time going to a game that we'll NEVER play, rather than towards one that we almost definately would. The mixed (OK, in America at least, almost totally NEGATIVE) reaction to FFXI is a good example of this.

        Also, it seems like about 1/2 o
  • Potential? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Das Modell (969371) on Wednesday December 13, 2006 @06:55AM (#17220690)
    Basically a Fallout MMORPG would be unquestionably cool, but how would they implement combat with firearms? I'm not familiar with any of the MMORPGs that have firearms, so I don't know how it's been implemented in the past. I don't really see how it would work. Fallout's combat is tactical, so that's what they should aim for (no pun intended).

    They'd also have to balance the character building system (if they scrap it and make an entirely new one, it isn't going to resemble Fallout too much), and they'd have to find a way to keep players hooked. I'm having a hard time imagining WoW-style items and stat increases in Fallout. Now that I think about it, I'm having a hard time imagining Fallout as a MMORPG. Maybe I'm just trying too hard to imagine it like Fallout, but with 3D graphics and other players.
    • Check Anarchy Online (Score:2, Informative)

      by Tei (520358)
      Firearms are simple like bows and crossbows. Nothing complex on a MMORPG. It feels Ok. You can simply download and play Anarchy Online to test how feel.
      • Anarchy Online combat is boring. Target, click attack and wait. Why not aiming like in a shooter?
        • by grimwell (141031)
          Ok, try Endless Ages [endlessages.com] if you want MMORPG + FPS shooting.

          • I think you guys are missing the point of Fallout's combat.
            I love Fallout. It's great. I fail to see it working in a current MMO mold, though, because of the combat. In Fallout, most of the time you go down in 1-4 hits. What that means is that you have to effectively use cover, distance, sharpshooting skill, explosives, manage your action points, and make sure you have the correct weapons on- and off-hand. Fallout combat is brutal and unforgiving. For Fallout to work in MMO format, they're probably going to
      • Eh, sounds pretty lame. Fine for World of Warcraft, but imagine playing it with nothing but ranged weapons. You'd just stand there and exchange projectiles until somebody dies. Fallout is all about firearms, so it would be boring.
        • by tbannist (230135)
          Fallout has a healthy selection of melee weapons... Like sledgehammers, knives, and powered sledgehammers! Heck, you might be able to play as a Deathclaw and then you can't even use guns.
          http://www.falloutvault.com/index.php?title=Deathc law [falloutvault.com]
        • by KDR_11k (778916)
          Isn't that the way combat works in all MMORPGs? With firearms you could at least use things like cover, movement (when moving yu hit less but take less hits, too), effective ranges, etc. Of course ammo plays a role too and I don't think you'll be able to beat it out of scorpions or rats.
        • As another poster said, Fallout had a plethera of melee weapons. Combined with the appropriate character competencies (Ninja, Brawler, etc), melee weapons were just as viable as ranged weapons, and usually more effective than other end-game weapons like miniguns and automatic shotguns.
    • There have been several MMO-FPS hybrids [wikipedia.org], though none have been able to compete with the big MMOs, as far as player-base would go. It is unlikely that a Fallout MMORPG would be able to achieve as many as 1M subscribers, especially in a year. Even 100,000 subscribers would be an accomplishment.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by montyzooooma (853414)
      "Basically a Fallout MMORPG would be unquestionably cool"

      What about it would be cool? What was cool about Fallout was the non-linear nature of the map, random encounters, NPC party interaction etc etc. The tactical combat had its charm (though I preferred FO Tactics version that gave you more control. One of my favourite games that and I don't care what people say.) Above all the feeling that what you were doing had an impact on the gameworld. You'll have none of that with an MMO. This may even be a MMO in

      • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

        by thesandtiger (819476)
        You forgot to add "for me" in there, as in "what was cool about Fallout (for me) was..."

        I liked the environment, the whimsical humor mixed with the emotionally engaging stories, the fun of figuring out how to accomplish various little tricks and puzzles, the "What happens if I do this?" questions.

        In an MMO setting, I think all the things I really loved about the Fallouts could survive more or less intact. At the very least, it'll be nice to have more non-fantasy options out there.
      • by kalirion (728907)
        What was cool about Fallout was the non-linear nature of the map, random encounters ...snip... You'll have none of that with an MMO.

        I'd say at least a couple of the things you mentioned are rather easy to do in an MMO.
      • Er, don't forget the backstory, the characters, the style, the humor... there was a lot to like about Fallout beyond the gameplay mechanics.
    • Lets see:

      World of Warcraft
      Anarchy Online
      Star Wars Galaxies
      Planetside

      That runs the gamut from firearm-is-the-same-as-sword (AO) to MMOFPS (Planetside). I don't think guns are going to present any special technical challenge.

      I think there is a lot more room for a challenge in a real technology system, for example, where your Science/Repair skill actually has some utility beyond a standard crafting system.

      I think I'm kinda burned out on the idea of "New innovative MMO's!"...I'd really like to see something coo
    • by Ihlosi (895663)
      I'm not familiar with any of the MMORPGs that have firearms,



      World of Warcraft

      City of Heroes

      Star Wars Galaxies

      Earth and Beyond (defunct) - Spaceship combat

      Auto Assault

      etc.

    • I remember the first levels of Fallout being very challenging from a combat perspective, and things becoming much easier as I finally scraped together enough cash to buy a real weapon. Powered armor was just icing on the cake. I hope they preserve the feeling of wandering in the wilderness. One of my favorite things was to just wander off across the map waiting for random encounters (this was before I memorized where everything was of course.)

      My main point when I started this was to point out that Fal
    • by brkello (642429)
      I guess I don't see firearms as being any different than a hunter would be in WoW. Each gun has a certain range, a rate of fire, and potential damage. You buy ammo for your weapons that have different statistics on it. I just use WoW as a comparison since it is currently the hottest MMORPG out there. But it doesn't seem like it would be too hard to translate. Levels don't really have to give stats...but they could at least give health and skills. Make leveling fast and fun like in WoW and have tactica
    • Both CoH and CoV have firearms, although they are part of "power pools" and not really loot/equipment based like some others such as Star Wars Galaxies, the Matrix Online, etc. Alternatively also there are games that are MMOs that aren't RPGs that have guns such as Planetside. Nowhere does it state that fallout online is going to be an MMORPG like others out there, so it could be something slightly different.
  • Interplay's main website made my geocities website look professional. There's no links to careers though. Anyone have a link. I'd like to be one of the people who made Wasteland online.
    • by myspys (204685) *
      whois interplay.com gives:
      INTERPLAY ENTERTAINMENT CORP.
      100 N. Crescent Drive
      Beverly Hills, CA 90210
      US

      mobygames.com gives:
      Location and contact information in Dec. 1994:

      Interplay Productions Inc.
      17922 Fitch Avenue
      Irvine, CA 92714
      Tel: 714-553-6655

      but wikipedia says:
      Under "Contractual Obligations" it is revealed that Interplay does not have a headquarters at present because Interplay, in 2004, forfeited its lease and vacated its office space in Irvine, California.[4]

      good luck!
  • by trawg (308495) on Wednesday December 13, 2006 @07:04AM (#17220756) Homepage
    ...or, how to get investors to give you a dumptruck full of money:

    1) Show them the statistics that explain how video games are now bigger than the movie industry.
    2) Show them Blizzard press releases announcing the number of million subscribers (we'll call this x.
    3) Explain how each of those people not only shelled out for the game, but pays per $y month for playing.
    4) Create a PowerPoint presentation which shows xxy (ensure your projector screen has enough room for all the zeros that come after the $ sign.
    5) Let investors know where the dump truck is parked.

    In all seriousness - I can't believe Fallout has the brand awareness that the Warcraft brand does. Whoever managed to scrounge together $75m should get some sort of medal. These guys are going to have to be in it for the long haul, but I wonder how much of that cash is going to be allocated towards the marketing budget to try to get WoW players to switch teams.

    Not only that, they've got a three year development window to compete with. Who knows what other massive mass-market brands are going to get their MMOs out the door in that time, further chewing away at the potential player base (I'm waiting for the Harry Potter MMO to come out and rule the world - hell, if they make it kid safe and put in enough decent content...).
    • I believe the exact sales figures haven't been published but the Fallout series has sold millions of copies worldwide. This squarely puts Fallout into the "well known game" segment.

      And hey, I don't care. Fallout 1 & 2 are my all-time favorite adventure games. I'm seriously worried about my life going down the drain if a Fallout MMO ever comes out. :)
    • There's this strange idea that the MMORPG market has a set number of people, and that in order to have anyone you need to steal customers from an already existing MMORPG. While attracting players from other MMORPGs is hardly a bad thing, such logic would have dictated that there would only ever have been less than a million players in the days of EQ.

      MMORPGs are a market with a large potential to grow, especially sci-fi themed games. We are already up to our necks in present and upcoming fantasy games, while
      • by NeMon'ess (160583) *
        The gameplay has to differ if a new MMO is going to expand the total of MMO players by very much. WoW's gameplay attracted millions of new players. If Fallout copies WoW or an existing MMO, the additional playerbase will be basically limited to anyone who hasn't given those MMO's a try. A Fallout MMO needs to differentiate in fun ways to get new players who have their reasons for not already playing an MMO.
    • by drsquare (530038)
      To be fair, Warcraft wasn't that widely known before World of Warcraft. I'd estimate than less than 10% of the players of the latter had played the former.
      • Oh, really? [gamearena.com.au]:

        WarCraft 3 has been in steady development for the last few years, and has lured strategy fans with its impressive feature list and lush graphics - but probably more alluring, just the sheer thought of another Blizzard title in the WarCraft strategy universe. Millions of gamers around the world have been drooling at the mouth for this title, to such an extend that it prompted an unprecedented pre-sales figure of over 4.5 million copies.

        This doesn't necessarily mean that more than 10% of WoW pl

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by brkello (642429)
      If it is better than WoW, people will switch. If the market was based on brand awareness, then SWG would be the most popular MMO. It's not like Everquest was something anyone heard of when it came out. I would worry about making the game fun for casuals but still giving content to the hardcores (like WoW does but do it better somehow - if I knew how I would be working in the industry).

      You are right that branding can make a difference...but I honestly believe that if the build it bigger and better, the p
  • Ahem, what? I thought Bethesda bought the fallout franchise. http://www.bethsoft.com/news/pressrelease_071204.h tm [bethsoft.com]
    • by LarsWestergren (9033) on Wednesday December 13, 2006 @07:30AM (#17220914) Homepage Journal
      Bethesda bought the rights for everything EXCEPT a MMO in the Fallout universe, if I understood it correctly.

      • by Tei (520358)
        Is amazing how we are stuck on 3 letters style of games. I remenber the old god times, on the 64 bits, most games are widly different each another. Yes nowdays all seems 2D and mostly platform based, but that whas not trued then. I blame the inventation of RTS and FPS nicknames for two gameplay styles :(
        • Don't blame three-letter acronyms for the demise of computer games- blame the corporate need to "build" games faster and cheaper, stifling the creativity of potentially brilliant designers. Same goes for lots of products- everything today is about advertising, which means it looks nice* but doesn't necessarily work well.

          * (have you seen any WOW commercials on TV? They only show the trailer to attract customers- I wish they would show me what playing is like, since the installer crashes on me and I'm not up
          • by prator (71051)
            Imagine sitting in front of your computer for hours on end performing the same mind-numbing tasks over and over again while occasionally receiving an incremental reward. It's a lot like work except you have to deal with anonymous foul-mouthed morons everywhere you go. Maybe that is exactly like work for some people.

            Actually, the Office Space commercial works a lot better than I thought. You could swap out your normal job with WOW and hardly notice the difference.
    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Everything except the MMORPG rights.
    • by afidel (530433)
      What I want to know is what Bethesda has DONE with the rights to Fallout 3, there's nothing available from a quick google search other than the 04 press release.
  • by Wilson_6500 (896824) on Wednesday December 13, 2006 @07:34AM (#17220936)
    I can't remember if Bethesda is developing or publishing Fallout 3, but it really doesn't matter. Judging from their latest releases on both fronts, I'm not enthusiastic. Oblivion was a travesty next to Morrowind. ST:Legacy was a badly-done console port.

    Back on the subject, though, the news of a Fallout MMO is not heartening. The last MMO I enjoyed was FFXI, and that was because it was (sorta) Final Fantasy. And it had mithra, too. Fine. I admit it.

    It's my opinion that this doesn't really bode well for the Fallout series. Tactics was lackluster at best. I only hope a successful Fallout MMO would generate more interest in making a new Fallout game in the more traditional vein we're used to. It has only a slim chance of "beating WoW" and thus being noteworthy in the modern MMO market.

    My real fear is that we'll end up with a NWN2-style sequel--"better" graphics, linear plot, and some fixes for some annoyances from the previous entries in the series.
    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "Oblivion was a travesty next to Morrowind."

      Yes, heaven forbid they bring back armor that actually looks like armor, quests that aren't boring as hell, and the ability to not have to spend three RL hours walking between quest steps.

      Oblivion is a return to Daggerfall, and I thank god for it.
      • by SScorpio (595836)
        Amen, I find a lot of the people who hate Oblivion started the series with Morrowind. I could get into Morrowind as it bored the hell out of me. Spending 6 hours crawling around a dungeon in Daggerfall was a blast though. I am happy for the compass in Oblivion though as it helped to streamline the game since I do longer have the time I did back when I played Daggerfall and Arena.
        • by Creepy (93888)
          I liked both Oblivion and Morrowind to a point, but my main dislike was the leveling monsters in Oblivion. I'd rather have the easy areas stay easy and the game keep pushing you into harder areas by giving you 0 experience for the easy stuff. Even better, have the monsters just run away when you come near.

          I found it odd that they removed some of the gameplay (like levitation puzzles) and to be quite honest, the oblivion towers were very repetitive by game end.

          Morrowind had a hideously slow pace at the out
    • by Xugumad (39311)
      So far, the only thing that's impressed me from Bethesda is their designs. Their implementation of those designs tends to be appalling. Oblivion was painfully bad in places; I once fought my way through one of the Oblivion gate areas, finally dragged my broken body back to town, rested up, stepped outside down and was promptly chewed to death by a passing wolf. The entire idea of assuming that characters are leveling up because their combat skills are going up ignores half the classes you could play in the
  • Fallout is a BIG name. And with such a budget, if spent even fairly wisely, it will easily be an alternative to wow. in gaming-sense of course, as they are in seperate fantasy settings. however it would be nice to have. even i might want to maintain 2 accounts one in wow and one in fallout, and get a bit of a change of air every now and then by going into one and the other.
    • by JavaLord (680960)
      World of Warcraft will be long gone by 2010. They would be lucky to have 250,000 subscribers at that point. We've seen 'big name' MMO's fail before, such as star wars galaxies. I'm hoping fallout online will be a hit, I've played it all the way back to wasteland on the Apple2c.
      • by unity100 (970058)
        i was there right from the start. swg was handed to sony. sony messed the hell out of the players - they treated it like scum. to milk more money, they have introduced axeman, swordsman, PIKEMAN, FENCER into the game, and these were more powerful than people with a blaster. people complained, they did not listen. then swg broken the account cancellation rate records.

        im at wow at the moment. blizzard, as we know from starcraft, still takes much care in production and implementation. and they actually take
  • Maybe I'm alone, but whenever something is being built / developed / undertaken, and the first you hear about it is a boast about how much it will cost, it gets on my nerves. It's like thsoe roadworks that cause you huge inconvenience that say "2 million pound bridge widening project".(especially there, as thats 2 mill of MY money they are wasting).
    I don't actually *care* how much ANY game / book / movie / play / tv show costs to make, all I care about is if it's actually any good. The only people who get
    • by kasek (514492)
      They (Interplay) are not boasting about the cost of development. The 'announcement' is a nothing more than a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, outlining plans to sell common stock in order to raise funds to develop the game. That would explain why there is a lack of detail regarding features, and plenty of detail regarding dev costs, return on investment, etc.

      Read the articles.
  • by Lonewolf666 (259450) on Wednesday December 13, 2006 @08:24AM (#17221240)
    Fallen Earth (http://fallenearth.com/ [fallenearth.com]) might be interesting too. And since they have already shown a playable demo in an interview, it might be ready a lot earlier than the interplay game ;-)
    • Twilight War was looking very promising too, though there hasn't been too much news since it got sub-licensed out...
      • "Sub-licensed out" is a nice euphemism for the bankruptcy of Smiling Gator, the company that was developing Twilight War. Some Chinese company has acquired the work-in-progress and tries to complete it. But things seem to go a lot slower now.
  • by DoctaWatson (38667) on Wednesday December 13, 2006 @08:29AM (#17221274)
    MMO's have a tendency to, how should I put this, erode their source materials.

    There's few things worse than seeing a world or setting that you've loved for years suddenly inhabited by psychotic idiots. One of those few things is when the people in charge of managing that world start changing it to cater to said psychotic idiots.

    For reference, see Ultima Online or Star Wars Galaxies.

    Fallout deserves better.
    • by Imaria (975253)
      As I loved Fallout, I took this as very good news... until I read this comment, and realized you're completely right. Damnit.

      I really don't want to be traversing the wasteland when I come across BigCokz439,
    • by RexRhino (769423)
      But see, it is a perfect concept! The post-apocolyptic world would probably really be inhabited by psychotic idiots!
  • 2010? (Score:4, Funny)

    by aapold (753705) on Wednesday December 13, 2006 @08:29AM (#17221284) Homepage Journal
    That's like so far off! Civilization could be in ruins, a radioactive wasteland by the time it comes out..... Seirously though, it is a setting that needs an MMORPG.
    • Post-apocalyptic desert is definitely an undertapped setting for MMOs, but for a reason - they're depressing. I really like the Fallout games but the setting doesn't have the mass appeal of lush forested fantasy realms. I fear this game may go the way of Auto Assault - a rather good MMORPG in this setting. Hopefully the masses will be bored of swords and sorcery by 2010.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by crabpeople (720852)
        "they're depressing"

        A wild west fallen society libertarian dream is depressing? Man.. Depressing is if I have to sit at this desk for the next 50 years paying off debt, acomplishing absolutely nothing, and never having the thrill of driving battle hardended muscle cars over the sun parched alkali flats hearding brahmin, or possibly a zardoz-esque population of sub humans.

        Do you even know what happiness is?

        • by bckrispi (725257)
          ^ Agreed entirely. Part of the charm of Fallout (and it's spiritual predecessor, Wasteland) was the type of society that sprung up after the bomb. You had the isolated-yet-comfortable vaults, the shanty towns built out of the skeletons of remaining buildings where people struggled, but somehow survived, and military groups like the Brotherhood of Steel armed with the pre-holocaust state of the art weaponry. You could look at it as anarchy, or as a 'Libertarian Paradise', or as a wild west land-to-be tame
      • by aapold (753705)

        I fear this game may go the way of Auto Assault - a rather good MMORPG in this setting.

        The thing that killed Auto Assault for me (in the beta, mind you) was that the setting didn't have the post-apocalyptic feel to me. The part about never running out of fuel or bullets (guns overheat and need cooldown, but don't run out). That just wrecked it immeidately for me. Scarcity of resources is a hallmark of the setting, the whole intro piece to "mad max" about killing each other for gasoline...

        What I wanted would have been some thing like "Interstate '76" online.

  • it's not a huge popular name like other successful MMO's. It's popular with the critics, but not with the general gaming public like Blizzard was with World of Warcraft, Sony was before Everquest, and SquareEnix was before Final Fantasy XI. Urqhuart (sp?) is better known in the current community for Planescape, KOTOR 2, and now NWN 2 than for Fallout, and it looks like he won't be involved. I worry it's just been too long. Fallout: Tactics didn't help the situation, either.

    I know other MMO's have be
    • Feargus Urqhart is running Obsidian these days, and there is plenty of bad blood between him and Interplay. There is no way he is going to touch this. From what I understand, Obsidian made their bid for the Fallout 3 rights, but got outbid. And they did buy some licenses (I think Icewind Dale) from Interplay during the firesale, but they'll never work for Interplay again after the Fallout 3 (Van Buren) and Baldur's Gate 3 (Jefferson) fiascos.
  • Personally I though that Fallout 1/2 (and Wasteland before) had one of the best Sci-Fi athmospheres in a game, ever. If they can make this work multiplayer, I am all for it!
  • Dollars? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Blakey Rat (99501) on Wednesday December 13, 2006 @09:48AM (#17221994)
    $75 Million (dollars!)

    Oh thanks. I'm always confused by that symbol that looks like an S with a line through it... I could have sworn it stood for "miles-per-hour", but this article submitter has made it clear!
    • Canadian Dollars?
    • Your confusion is understandable as most slashdotters insist on putting the dollar-sign after the number.
       
      Let the healing begin.
    • by rk (6314) *

      No, silly. The $ sign means "snake on a stick." They're throwing 75 million snakes on a stick at it.

      Cue the Samuel L. Jackson "snakes on a..." jokes.

  • This 'news' cropped up at about the time Interplay went into bankruptcy, there's nothing new about it. It's nothing more than a desperate attempt to get re-listed on the stock market and to squeeze that seventy-five million out of gullible stockholders-- at the moment, they're little more than one of the penny stocks that clog inboxes these days.

    At best, Interplay has four or five guys in an unheated room, doing this out of the goodness of their hearts and the vacuity of their heads. When there are employ

  • As the original Fallout or Fallout 2. It's basically a pure moneymaking scheme by Interplay to capitalize on the cult status of the Fallout franchise. Basically, all the stuff that made Fallout really fun and entertaining, probably won't be there. Instead, you'll probably see some weak attempts at trying to recreate the humor and the experience...but ultimately it will be toned down in an attempt to appeal to a broader base of users.

    In any case, expecting Betheseda, who now holds the Fallout single pl
  • IS it just me, or am I the only one who doesn't like today's model of MMOG? It's not the online part so much as the additional subscription cost to play the game online. I just don't have that much dedicated time to spend on a game while I am at home. I thought games like Diablo 2 and Half-LIfe were the perfect examples of a good solo game which had a great multiplayer interface. I have only played one of the Fallout games, and I enjoyed it quite a bit. However, if they make this game an online game strictl
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      I think you aren't clear on what MMOGs are. That's Massively (as in huge) Multiplayer (as in many people) Online (as in the internet) Games (as in fun).

      These games weren't designed with single player in mind. FFXI and WoW are clear evidence in this. Both require parties for much of their content. If you're looking at MMOGs and thinking "I wish that were single player" I recommend avoiding the genre as a whole. To want an offline, single player experience from a game designed for a massive number of people o
      • by stewbee (1019450)
        I know what the acronym stood for. Thanks for elucidating that for me.
        I guess my point is why do they need to be seperate? Would it be possible to make a single player game and have a multiplayer aspect to it? What about bundling the game as a single player game, and if you want to play the game online, then you could charge a subscription fee?

        I know that these games are getting larger and more expensive to produce. The best way to get a return of investment is to charge a monthly fee to recoup these c
  • Production is proposed to begin as early as 2007, with a launch slated for Q3 2010.

    Cool, I think I'll pick this up along with Duke Nukem Forever 2.
  • $75 Million (dollars!)

    Oh, DOLLARS.. Good thing they specified, because that $ symbol can also denote peanuts.

    At first I was thinking "Holy swashbuckling legumes, Batman! That's a lot of peas!"

    It's good that they specified, to avoid any confusion.
  • First that's not an official announcement, but a SEC filling reporting the will by Interplay of raising at least 50 million (to 75 million) dollars from overseas investors to create a Fallout MORPG. Interplay today is one person, Herve Caen, and a couple of lawyers and a webmaster that do the odd job here and there. They have millions in debts to companies like Warner Brothers and their former employees, which they aren't paying, so this is an attempt to raise some money from overseas investors just to sta
  • The company hopes to gather a whopping total budget of $75 million

    (from the linked article)

    They hope to gather $75 mil? Based on what? A kiss and a promise to deliver a smoking hot MMO?

    While there is a sucker born every minute, are there enough to generate $75M for Interplay? After the whole Titus fiasco, do these guys actually have any credibility at all?

    I love Fallout. Fallout 2 is one of the best games ever made. I would love to see more fallout games. But I'm not going to hold my breath. This

  • Personally, I'm cautiously skeptical. The thing that made Fallout great is something that doesn't translate to an MMO - namely, the tactical combat. The story was entertaining, but I think the battle system is what really floated it. So Interplay is going to have to take the WoW tack and create a completely different game that is only tangentially related to the rest of the franchise. While that could certainly be a good game, it doesn't have any better chance of being a good game than a completely new
  • Assuming, of course, that they actually get it out the door.
    • SPECIAL and the skills/traits/perks system is awesome, but it is kinda meaningless when people get up to level 50 or so and have every possible skill maxed out and obtain every perk possible.
    • Tactical combat will be a bitch. What are you going to do - make every person in the world take turns?
    • A "wasteland" isn't a wasteland with 1 million people running around doing the same damn quests as me.

    With those three points alone, everything I

    • by xantho (14741)
      1. Make character levelling model human development.

      In childhood, all sorts of really basic skills are learned at ridiculous speeds (walking/motor control, language/speech/reading, arithmetic). In adolescence, a smaller number of more specialized skills are learned (social skills, better math, another language, brute strength, dexterity). In adulthood, few skills are learned and only slowly (how to spot good stocks or analyze companies, how to hit a 90 mph baseball over a fence, how to repair an automobile)
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Mondoz (672060)
      You make some good points here.

      Some of my favorite Fallout moments were completing quests that actually made a difference.
      Go kill the thugs terrorizing a town and the town gets happy.
      Go blow up the outhouse that leads down to a cave, and you have crap all over the place forever.
      Take out one of the major factions in town and things change...

      One thing I hate about typical MMORPGS is that everything is infinitely repeatable. It has to be. If I can do a quest, then you have to be able to do the same quest. F
      • Exactly. For an MMORPG to not have this problem, it needs to do two things that I don't see happening anytime soon.
        1. No NPCs.
          • Leveling NPCs aren't needed.
          • Training can be through experimentation, books or other in-game items, or learned from other players. The first players can learn from GMs.
          • Especially no random NPCs waiting around to ask you to kill 10 rats for them. Have some rats in a house/sewer/whatever. If you kill some, that's cool, get exp. No arbitrarily given exp for getting that 10th rat.
      • EXACTLY.

        Part of what made the Fallout games great was that you are THE WANDERER. You a one of very few people who are willing to brave the wastes, to see what's left of humanity. You're the outsider who steps in and kicks ass until the town's problems are solved (or made much, much worse, if you want to be that way :) ) and then you move on to new territory.

        I don't know how you can capture that feel in an MMORPG. Sure, you're THE WANDERER, but so are the other 30,000 players on your server.
      • by brkello (642429)
        I think FFXI did the best job of integrating the feel of making a difference in an environment where single players making a huge difference would ruin the game. The way they did this was cut scenes for special quests. Yes, other people have done the quests before you, but with the cut scene, it makes it seem like you are an important person who saved the city from destruction (or whatever).

        WoW has some of this too where single players triggered certain event that changed the game. But these were inte
    • by RexRhino (769423)
      Tactical combat will be a bitch. What are you going to do - make every person in the world take turns?

      Have you played Fallout Tactics? It had realtime tactical gameplay that worked very well.
  • This game now takes the budget crown from Sega's Shenmue and its massive $70 million budget. Of course, back in 1999, it was even more outrageous for a game to cost that much.
  • 1 Take $75mil to make a Fallout MMO.
    2 Spend $1mil hacking together a Fallout MUD.
    3 ...
    4 Instant $74mil Profit
  • as long as I can make a character that's all ST and no IN and have my in-game text mangled to at least 1st-grade level, I'll be happy.
  • i've said it before and i'll probably say it again, not another MMORPG. I don't want to play a game that basicaly has no story, i dont want to play a game with a bunch of idiots i dont know, i dont want to be forced into guilds to get things occomplished and i don't want to pay a monthly fee for the game i just spent 60 dollars on. it's really sad to see the state of the single player rpg scene on the pc. sure we just had two recent big releases but prior to that there hadnt been anything big in quite some
    • by SScorpio (595836)
      You'll be happy to know Bethesda (Elder Scrolls Series) bought the rights to the Fallout IP and is making Fallout 3.

      As for no stories, Final Fantasy XI had a larger over lying story which contained three points of views from the different nations you could be a citizen of. The biggest issue was forced grouping and needing coordination with a large amount of people to advance the story. Guildwars also has a nice story; however, hardcore players can beat it in one or two days. And casual players can easily
      • by bckrispi (725257)

        You'll be happy to know Bethesda (Elder Scrolls Series) bought the rights to the Fallout IP and is making Fallout 3.

        This announcement was made about two years ago. All we have so far is vapor.

        Guildwars also has a nice story; however, hardcore players can beat it in one or two days. And casual players can easily finish in a month or so which isn't good for recurring monthly payments for the developer.

        Guild Wars is an (only?) MMORPG that doesn't charge a monthly subscription fee. They offset this by

        • by SScorpio (595836)
          Which is my point. The way Guildwars works, works well for them. Also the $50 price of the games is highly offset by not needing to pay monthly. Guildwars' model for story would not work for a company attempting to make money by monthly fees.

          The point I'm trying to make is the difficulty of making an MMORPG with a good story. Guildwars has a good story, but the game is over very quickly. Something like Final Fantasy XI also has a good story, but it requires an large amount of work by the gamer approach
      • So it'll be be a ultra wide but ultra shallow game with some pretty pictures and a byzantine story full or people you have a hard time caring about. and it will have boobs... damn I'm not lookign forward to that.
  • The story makes it sound like someone's actually developing this. In actuality, a few guys are taking this piece of paper and a short pitch around, saying, "hey, make this $75 million Fallout MMO!". People will give money to Infinium before they fund this. ... Wait, what's that? Infinium just got another round? Sigh....

It is better to give than to lend, and it costs about the same.

Working...