Interplay Pitches Fallout MMO, Despite Dearth Of Cash 46
Thanks to Yahoo! for reprinting an Interplay press release discussing Interplay's latest financial results, ruminating on possibilities for the embattled publisher. Although "the Company reported a net loss of $.9 million" for the quarter, a relatively small amount, Interplay's detailed financial statement reveals: "We currently have no cash reserves and are unable to pay current liabilities. The Company cannot continue in its current form without at this time obtaining additional financing." However, CEO Herve Caen is bullish about prospects, explaining: "We are now pursuing several options to fund our entry into Massively Multiplayer Online Gaming with titles including Fallout", a positive step, according to "...initial feedback from our investment bank and ongoing dialogue with others in the gaming sector." We've previously covered Interplay's recent financial woes.
So your idea is... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So your idea is... (Score:3, Interesting)
A console RPG might work out well for them. Fallout seems like it could work really well for XBox or XBox 2, and the XBox co
Re:So your idea is... (Score:2)
FOOL (Score:3, Insightful)
"FallOut On-Line" aka FOOL
Part of what makes Fallout, Fallout, is its turn-based strategy. That goes away in a MMORPG.
--
The fallacy of government is that it assumes everyone needs to be told how to live.
When it passes more laws until it makes everyone a criminal it has made the mistake of placing the intent on the "Letter of the Law" over the "Spirit of the Law."
"The more corrupt the republic, the more numerous the laws" -- Tacitus, A.D. 55
ALL civilizations eventually collapse. Are you that ignorant and arrogant to assume that yours won't?
Re:FOOL (Score:2)
Of course, it won't be done properly.
Re:FOOL (Score:2)
Excellent story, on the other hand..
Re:FOOL (Score:3, Insightful)
Never having played a MMORPG in my life, I just have to offer my expert opinion:
MMORPGs cannot have a plot. A plot implies a clear beginning and end. MMORPGs, on the other hand, are built to go on indefinitely (or untill the cash flow dries).
Furthermore, a plot implies a dynamic world, which changes as a result of events. That, in turn, means that once a quest has been completed, it stays completed, instead of someone else starting it... This is unfeasible, since someone would constantly have to make ne
Re:FOOL (Score:1)
To give you an idea of how it works, imagine the first star wars movie. One of the "quests" was to fly down the trench and dest
Re:FOOL (Score:2)
No, they've tried to make every single player think they're the center of the universe and its most important person, which is easy in a single-player game but impossible in a multiplayer game because it leads to inconsi
Re:FOOL (Score:1)
No, they've tried to make every single player think they're the center of the universe and its most important person,
Some MMORPGs are like this, but most are intent on trying to immerse you in a world/universe. The best way I have heard
Re:FOOL (Score:3, Interesting)
Part of what makes Fallout, Fallout, is its turn-based strategy. That goes away in a MMORPG.
It does? How so? Fallout was only turn based during combat. I don't see why it wouldn't work in a MMORPG environment.
Besides, what made Fallout was the environment and the no-rules feel of the game.
Rats (Score:2)
Re:Rats (Score:2)
Amazing idea (Score:4, Insightful)
No, this could actually be good. (Score:4, Interesting)
The real problem with this kind of development would be if they went and tried to make it turn-based-MMORPG. Then we'd just have to kill them all.
If they do something similar to a City of Heroes environment, without the mind-numbing quest for items and other crap like you have in more traditional MMORPG places, it'd go over quite well.
FUCK THAT SHIT (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't have the cash flow (or capital up front) to sustain an MMOG. They don't have the trust of gamers any more. Hell, all their good employees have left the company (Troika)!
Herve, if you're reading this, YOU NEED TO MAKE FALLOUT 3. This will bring in the cash you so desperately need to keep your company afloat, respect from the industry, and a leaping point to resurrect Interplay. The market is saturated with up and coming MMOGs that are going to suck the online market dry - City of Heroes is here, Matrix Online and World of Warcraft are coming, not to mention EQ2, PLUS all the MMOGs currently ON the market. There's no room for you online, but there are some of us who have been waiting years for a proper and wonderful RPG. You've got the freaking goose that lays golden eggs - out with them already!
Re:FUCK THAT SHIT (Score:3, Funny)
Re:FUCK THAT SHIT (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:FUCK THAT SHIT (Score:3, Informative)
even if they overshot, it would be much less time to
finish fallout 3 than to do mmog, not to mention that
they would regain trust of the fans.
as per developers:
The first batch of developers, the ones responsible
for original fallouts did go to Troika
Others that stayed developed Icewind dale, a squad game
that stayed on heels of Buldurs Gate, and later LionHeart,
a game that was fantasy much like Icewind Dale, but did
use Fallout like Special system as opposed
Re:FUCK THAT SHIT (Score:1)
Re:FUCK THAT SHIT (Score:2)
I was reminded of a quote I saw a while back, to the effect that "coding is 90% complete for about 50% of the time". Which is not to say anything about the viability of Fallout 3 (I've never played any of the Fallout games) but just that I don't put much stock in such numbers.
And as you point out, the core engine is really just the start of the project.
Re:FUCK THAT SHIT (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, you don't get magicians traveling in trains, because magick screws up technology. No, the mighty mages have to either teleport or walk.
You know, the teleport spell is my only real complain about Arcanum (aside from it not working on Linux ;): you can't just select a place from the map, you have to target a location that has a "marker". It's annoyin
Fishing for Funding (Score:4, Insightful)
Great Idea, Now Show Me The Money (Score:2)
What we need is a 3d non turn based Fallout 3 (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What we need is a 3d non turn based Fallout 3 (Score:2, Interesting)
The 3d they have done, atleast from screenshots of Fallout 3
and from the xbox Fallout:BOS.
I dont have anything against the game being non turn based,
but give me the ability to play turn based.
I loved the idea that the game never really was a clone
of diablo where finger twiches are actually an advantage.
ofcourse this causes problems for the game to be MMO, but
then Civilisation / HOMM3 play online quite well, and
Fallout:BOS Tactics also did have a fake real time mode.
--
/apz, Far duller than a serpent's t
Oh shut up. (Score:4, Insightful)
But it would be fun.
Aren't we all sick of the current mmorpg's now? I could care less about elf's and dwarves, and wookies...finding a magic key, or collecting gold coins to by a new sword with a +1 bronze gem that makes me immune to the common cold.
I want an mmorpg where you don't fit things, you fight for survival. Imagine having clans of players, in a DANGEROUS, screwed up after-world, fighting each other just to survive. Imagine leading the warriors of your clans, in the night, to the other guys shack, killing or abducting they're women, slitting the men's throats, stealing they're necessities, ETC, JUST TO live another week! That would be thrilling. And? no/barley any computer npc's. Hell EQ, that warcraft thing (god I hate blizzard, make a Linux port you lazy sluts) starwars.. it's all coop doom with swords and a couple thousand space marines. Coop doom wasn't (that) fun! Dammit, these games remind me of the sims.
In Fallout Online, you band together, traveling the wasteland, salvaging useful scraps, not finding them in chests next to a dead gnome. I'm talking about a SAVAGE online experience, where you can get pissed off, angry, and travel the wasteland, sometimes solely on revenge. Or from an order from your clan leading. You can over through your clan leader (provided it's in the public favor, aka mutiny. You can start your own clan in a shack in the dessert, convert some homeless people, (not that you would start out homeless, but it's a possibility), arm them, and attack a nearby town, in the dead of night, kill a local shop keeper (think shady town), and turn the place into your own military-grade bunker. Advance, take your clan, make it into a battalion. Army. (think brotherhood of steel) Form legions, alliances, with common interests, secretly generated by the world. Forge new technological advantages. Advanced weaponry, hardened armor. Take over.
Or possibly form a neutral facility, helping strangers, in exchange for favors that will help the community etc.
I'm sick of wacking rats with sticks. Gimme a damn gun and shove me in a deadly world. Fallout Online.
Re:Oh shut up. (Score:1)
People who play MMOGs don't want to lose all their progress when they're not logged on overnight.
I think a good Fallout MMOG could be made, but they would have to be very careful with how they go about doing it. They'd have to avoid the problems that plague Lineage 2 (
Re:Oh shut up. (Score:1)
That's why most MMORPG's have a friendly atmos
"a relatively small amount" (Score:3, Insightful)
Well it couldn't happen to a more deserving compan (Score:2)
The first two were moderate hits, meaning they made a profit. So did they continue, No. Not hip enough.
Fallout 3 the rpg? Gone.
Companies that cancel modest earners for high risk games that never happen deserve to go out of bussiness. Both these games would have been bought by a steady fanbase, enough to ensure a profit and could have been small hits even large hits.
Turning Fallo
Re:Exploding Toilets (Score:1)
Dear sir, I strongly advise, urge, you run to nearest
store and rummage through the bargain bin. You should
find a dual-cd jewel case with both Fallouts for 5$.
If you are lucky, it might also contain Fallout:BOS Tactics.
There is no reason anymore for you, nor anyone, to
still have had not played the game
and yes, the game plays like a charm under Wine too !
--
/apz, If it's too loud, you're too old.
Valid points. (Score:1)
I'll bet someone else will make the MMORPG (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I'll bet someone else will make the MMORPG (Score:1)
Irrelevant (Score:2)
It's just the final death throes of a dying company. Let it go, already.
Bad idea right now. (Score:2)
Old times (Score:3, Interesting)
Given how they did with things like Engage Games Online, frankly I'm glad they said no. Interplay did manage to publish some very good games over the years, but their management was always kinda strange as far as I could tell. (Hopefully they don't have enough nickles left in the petty cash drawer to get a lawyer to sue me for saying they were strange. :X)
MMO = .COM (Score:1)
Once UO and Everquest hit it big, so many game companies drooled at the cash cow of MMOs. So they all scrambled to create their own MMOs to grab a piece of the market. I mean Motor City Online?
Browsing this list [rpgdot.com] of just RPG related MMOs to be released, it looks like too many companies are just grasping at straws. Is
Fallout !! (Score:2)