Bethesda vs Interplay on Fallout Online

[Unfitg0d0fwar]

No what they need to do is do what they did with the games forget jail time just add that every guard/npc attacks whoever broke the law so its just like the other games also one thing that in the interplay forums there has been discussion about factions and thats 1 thing im sure they will be focusing on because there were 3 main factions based in fallout 1,2,tactics.

does not work in MMOs, people who pk/evil all the time just create a neutral/good char as well to do all their shopping and using some method such as houses or whatever drop what they want/need from town and then have a friend pick it up to xfer it.

net result: no actual penalty to the pk/evil person. they still get the benifits of town without having to be good/neutral.

try again.

How about sending in an amount of level specific guards to attack the player that is doing evil deeds its not an rpg if you can't be evil and example is the way wow does things how people from the "evil" side can't go to good cities and vice versa where they can have it setup where if you attack/steal do something bad it triggers guards to attack. not the regular guards either like they spawn and attack. Plus thats shopping what about encounters like in the games aswell can give the character who is evil a better chance for bad encounters.

 

[mor]

game pauses kinda how kotor works where you hit space the game pauses so you can adjust like that where you get unlimited with pve but during a pvp session a player should get like 5 or so.

i am sorry but that will never happen.


here is the basic rules of any big commercial MMORPG (that i just made up):
* the game designed in goal of bringing money not the hopes and dreams of the core players of the franchise, although you get a bonus if you are able to sell it as result of user feedback.
* the budget determines the polish level of the game, for example quest wise the number quest like go Kill 10 of... or go fetch 10 of.. fedex quest
* there will not be TURN BASE or PAUSE in MMORPG ever !!
* unlike usual RPG's the damage will be reduced and HP will be upped, to prolong the length of the battles.
* there will restricted zones, that you cannot kill any thing or level restriction.
* there will usually be small amount of main factions thus less nees fo content and more of it exposed to the user.
* no major life decision will be implemented in the character creation screen or there will be predetermined already optimized stats wise char available for you (to which the quest will be tailored)
* mostly no small spaces.
* the will be always "single player" quest line up.
* there will be game map, there will be quests list, there will be compass and there will be pointers to where to go (at best they will be optional)

well this from the top of my head, we may not like it but this how it works.

see now your saying that every single mmorpg has to be the same it doesnt does it? its not gonna be the same exact thing yes a lot are the same but that isnt my point im just pointiing out that EVERY mmo HAS to be the same EXACT thing which in many cases it doesn't. i realise not everything will be worked out but have u even played any of the fallouts they all have some type of turn based element even fallout 3 has it. you should also see that very cheap mmo's have very different polish this is an example have you seen wow quests basically kill this collect this where infact a game the makes a considerable amount less that wow have better quests. my example for that is runescape yea its a bad mmo but have you done any of the quests it actually has storyline and if u wanna get even more technical there is no single player quest line im sure in this case it will. also for turn based last time i checked kotor online will probably have 1 pause during combat considering all kotor games have that type of combat system and i doubt they are going to change that. i agree that no specific thing in character creation should effect your character but your in-game actions should. The mmo doesn't have to be exactly like wow yes a lot of games have the same elements but wow isnt the first mmo to do everything they just hit the right balance.

i never said or implied that every MMORPG should be the same, on the contrary WOW clone will never succeed so the designer must get creative if they want to succeed.

but with that been said, they cannot ignore basic rules, users demographics/statistics/usage/etc and most importantly learn from past mistakes instead of repeating them.

 

[Unfitg0d0fwar]

[/quote]

i never said or implied that every MMORPG should be the same, on the contrary WOW clone will never succeed so the designer must get creative if they want to succeed.

but with that been said, they cannot ignore basic rules, users demographics/statistics/usage/etc and most importantly learn from past mistakes instead of repeating them.[/quote]

again you clearly are because you're saying they need to have specific rules ect. You can't say you aren't implying it when you said that they needed certain things to be an mmo when they don't infact they could make the really horrible but it's still an mmo. The only thing they rea;;y need at this point is appeal and they have that since fallout is really the only big known post-apocalyptic game

 

[mor]

every one follow a specific rule set, its called experience, target audience and statistics.

but if you want to believe that FOOL will have pause or SWTOR will or the like, be my guest, my bet that you'll be one of the loudest when your unrealistic expectations will be crushed.

 

[Unfitg0d0fwar]

every one follow a specific rule set, its called experience, target audience and statistics.

but if you want to believe that FOOL will have pause or SWTOR will or the like, be my guest, my bet that you'll be one of the loudest when your unrealistic expectations will be crushed.

yea well have you ever heard of the term standard deviation?
that doesn't follow statistics either but it is still apart of the data
you can't just simply assume that every mmo has to have the same aspect when in reality it doesn't i highly doubt they will have a pause but it is just an observation from the games and actually thats something they could do is have real-time worlds and turn-based worlds just like in fallout tactics. Besides my point is that you can't just assume that it will have this and that based off of other mmo's because fallout isn't like any other games nor will it be like any other mmo. Have you played any mmo that isn't like wow? or are you a wowtard too? Reguardless wow is nothing like the games as well so i shouldn't be making observations since you correctly know that it can't possibly have certain things. Let's be honest target audience is the fanboys. A great example of that will be when starcraft gets an mmo which wouldn't surporise me if it did but that game would be for fanboys. and a last point id like to touch base on is rule set. There are mmo shooters out there that follows no such rule set ever in place because its an fps. Before wow ever was even thought of the first mmo was very different compared to wow and it was sucessful im comparing many things to wow because there are too many wow clones to name them. anyways i can almost see that interplay is coming back from the grave considering that bethesda was practicing obstruction for sales and futre ideas even in the e-mail they wouldn't reply to interplay.

 

[mor]

starcraft is a bad example, since our player base is amazing, this why blizzard worked for years to make SC2 the way we like it, while in FO we got FO3...

with that been said, everything is possible, although its as likely as triple A turn based FPS or just any triple A turn based game even RPG's.
because the majority dont like them and you know the industry motto SHOW ME THE MONEY.

so even if its technically was possible in that engine, in my opinion turn based worlds is just a lot of wishful thinking, while in realty the best you can get is some realism pvp mode.

 

[Unfitg0d0fwar]

starcraft is a bad example, since our player base is amazing, this why blizzard worked for years to make SC2 the way we like it, while in FO we got FO3...

with that been said, everything is possible, although its as likely as triple A turn based FPS or just any triple A turn based game even RPG's.
because the majority dont like them and you know the industry motto SHOW ME THE MONEY.

so even if its technically was possible in that engine, in my opinion turn based worlds is just a lot of wishful thinking, while in realty the best you can get is some realism pvp mode.

ok thats 2 different companies making the same titled game and i say titled for a reason fo3 is just an oblivion clone while fo2 and fo1 and even fotactics are very differnt compared to fo3. also for Sc that perfectly fits my example becaus your fan base is good have you seen the fallout fan base? you might now have considering interplay is STILL making money off of fo1 and fo2. and continuing you on your quote" they made sc2 the way we like it" so your saying that interplay isnt going to make an mmo the way us fallout fanboys like it? let me tell you what ok if interplay fails to make a game that most of the fanbys like like more of a wow clone or copy of a different mmo the game won't sell if u take the games made in the fallout name thats a lot of money because so far fallout is basically the most known apocalyptic game out there on the market meaning there is a huge fan base and a lot of money to be had there. As far as turnbased anything that can be any turn based game an example of this is civilizaton by sid meir meister whatever his name is thats turnbased also here is a link to a possibility to a turn based mmo that is already out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFuY1NprrtU&feature=related
basically they have it like final fantasy where the people are set into a different instance which they could definitly do with encounters. Again for fo3 wise let me put this in sc terms lets say for some reason or another blizzard decides to sell the name starcraft to bioware and they make a copy of one of their games except put it as sc3. there is definitly a difference in the games then what im trying to say is that they shouldnt be put into the same catagories just the same name.

 

[mor]

comparing FO fan base to SC fan base you realize that even if i take only SC hardcore fan base its still bigger than all of our FO fan base, in Korea they had a Tv channel showing battle with annalist reports and ppl who payed to watch them...
besides SC stays in the same format... while FO will be an MMORPG...

btw nice catch no civilization, i forgot about it, i should really check if they released new info about this one unit per hex new mechanic and archers shooting over citys, that i suspect will ruin the game for me

any more examples

lets say for some reason or another blizzard decides to sell the name starcraft to bioware and they make a copy of one of their games except put it as sc3. there is definitly a difference in the games then what im trying to say is that they shouldnt be put into the same catagories just the same name.

and how many times you made the same argument about FO3 and did it helped you?

what you dont get is that i agree with you, i hated FO3 spinoff infact i was so disappointed that unless i see some real changes FOLV i'll pass it even if its made for a more mature audience and with better plot.
and who knows if interplay didnt went down and made FO van buren, today we might have a real FO4 and then maybe FOOL could look slightly different. (although even then there would be much sacrifices due to genre change)

the difference is that i prefer a more practical approach, fact is that today more ppl consider FO3 as FO and most of them never played or tried and disliked FO1/2.
fact is that we already know what game engine will be used and as far as i know there is no technical way to add turn base in its open world environment.
fact is that MMORPG of this magnitude will cost five to ten times as much as the most expensive game i know (which is gta with 20million investment i think) so you make the 1+1

because all i see is that you are still in denial, as you see another FO game and maybe the last hope to bring our childhood game back to its glory slipping through your hands.
anyway this discussion is pointless, how about we postpone this and wait for someone to ask it directly on interplay Q&A session and see if you get an illusive answer or at all.

 

[Arden]

The whole argument of what the majority of players want and what appeals to the masses doesnt have the same impact in desiging MMORPGs as in singleplayers.
There is a serverlimit. What use is a game that appeals to 50 million people when there is only room for, say, 100000? In the worldwide internet you will always find enough players of a certain turn of mind to fill your servers no matter what the game is.
The only thing that kills special mmorpgs is that they often attract people who dont like the way the game is set up anyway and then whine. Or people that come to piss others off.
A mmorpg with turn based combat, apart from the technical issues, would be succesful in terms of filling up the servers. Who cares if 10 million other people dont like the idea? A company doing something like this should only concentrate on doing it well and cater to their target audience.
SWG was quite ok with an excellent crafting system. The problem was not that they had too few subscribers. Some suit decided that it would go still better if they dumbed it down to get the retardies too. It was not that the concept did not work, they just changed it to something else, alienating the old players and not getting enough new ones.

Do you really think that if there was a good, immersive mmorpg in a fallout-universe or similar with turn based combat or open pvp, or any other special (compared to todays standards) features, with a 100k serverlimit that it would be emtpy?
15 bucks an account is 1.5 million/month= 18 million/year. If you want high margin, lets say 10% (wich is ridiculous) you could pour 180 million into development (wich is ridiculous too). Financing a mmorpg is very different from a single player game.

Problem is, that, like in many other areas, no one is looking for a good investment but only for a quick buck. Mmorpgs arent for quick buck-making, you need continous attention and care or your players leave. Unlike FO3 where you can sell some bullshit in a few months and then never talk about it again.

 

[mor]

actually from what i heard after the change SWG managed to raise its subscriber numbers even with all the change dissidents, so the change worked, which is why the a new "SW" game, follows the same new principle.

and with all do respect to all your number crunching, the game industry has a lot of guys whose job is only this e.g. make profit. because no one will put his money in the MMORPG market without a expecting a nice profit margin.


but again all of this is pointless and unproductive, if inter had given any priority for turnbase game they would never have chosen this engine.

and there is no point of whining about how the game industry general direction, i assume that we are all have at least a decade or two of gaming experience and we start then we wouldn't

the truth is that most of the original exciting none fps titles i played in recent memory, where from small developers, because the market for them is to small for the 'big dogs' to care. (most of the had terrible production values and QA testing)

but like in politics we all whine about it the system, we all say we all need to stand together to make a change and eventually the average voter who barely know what they vote on, decided the outcome or more exactly the candidate who manage to give a better show on the tv wins...

so forgive me but i'll sum up your post into, the below, to end this turn-base fiasco:

the technical issue

EDIT:
btw there is many games that use crafting systems and no ridicules gold on animals etc, most of the European RPG's for example or this conan game i brought a link to it before:
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/hyborian-insider-age-of-conan/33818

 

[Unfitg0d0fwar]

meh conan was basically a waste of your time it was a really bad game in general because of all the things they added after the open beta like during the open beta everything was pretty good then you actually played the game and it ended badly

 

[Unfitg0d0fwar]

because all i see is that you are still in denial, as you see another FO game and maybe the last hope to bring our childhood game back to its glory slipping through your hands.
anyway this discussion is pointless, how about we postpone this and wait for someone to ask it directly on interplay Q&A session and see if you get an illusive answer or at all.

what you don't get is that i really don't care much of what you are saying because of A the open beta B the game isn't out yet so both of our arguements are invalid and C fallout isnt the game of my child in fact i have only heard of it until i played fo3 and i actually liked fo3 as i liked the other see what you don't get is that fallout doesn't mean that much for me to go out of my way and prove a point i have my good old games call of duty, medal of honor, other fps. Actually im pretty sure that fonv will be a good game from the new things they have added to the game like ads, new dialoge trees, and other things like that.

 

[mor]

meh conan was basically a waste of your time it was a really bad game in general because of all the things they added after the open beta like during the open beta everything was pretty good then you actually played the game and it ended badly

i heard that it was disappointing after release but they got much better after the expansions, iirc they was even nominated to the most improved mmorpg and non wow like MMORPG with the most potential.

but its not about how conan, its about good mechanics, that can be adapted to the FO spirit and applied to FOOL.

i really think that this combination of guild/crafting/war thingy is amazing, its like FOonline bases, only that they will be more than just warehouses.
if located in pve areas, they will be strategic points, very important to anyone who wants to pass in this stretch of the desert..
maybe even adding economical aspect, by moving the mines near those outpost or setting them near trade routs, so instead of the expected noob procession from the mine to the main city, we will have them spread out across the waste and raiding will be more than just killing everyone but will make your faction stronger, etc..

Actually im pretty sure that fonv will be a good game from the new things they have added to the game like ads, new dialoge trees, and other things like that.

if it wont change more than just a FO3 with better story, then i prefer to spend my time on a good book.

 

[Unfitg0d0fwar]

if it wont change more than just a FO3 with better story, then i prefer to spend my time on a good book.

they added more than a story they added much needed things mainly new dialogue trees , companion settings , ads . they basically added much needed tweaks not just a storyline

 

[Arden]

mor...
I agree with your view concerning FOOL, there is not enough info to even speculate about what kind of game they are gonna do. And every speculation about it at this point is moot.
My problem is just that i would like to see a good mmorpg hitting the market and FOOL is just the next candidate. I always get my hopes up like that, its a kind of hype i think, for a game that will finally do it differetly and thus be a game worth playing. Im aware of the techical problems a turn based combat game faces in real time internet connection. Im aware of the problems an open pvp game faces in... well the face of todays griefing community. I just wish for a cool game that doesnt cater to the lowest common denominator.
For fucks sake, is it that much to ask for that the gamingindustry does what (almost) all the other industies did and stop seeking the the short term gratification but the long time investment-return of money? ccp did it for heavens sake, they make their money and dont give a toss about whiners, game domographics and public opinion. The servers are full, what else should a company ask for?
As for SWG, have a look at their servers now, they are fucking empty. I had a look around not 3 months ago and apart from a frigging macro-bugger bashing some critters outside tatooine there was no one around. A mmorpg does not live because it got a ton of subscribers for 3 months, it lives because of its constant subscribers that stay there no matter what comes.

Perhaps im too idealistic, perhaps im asking for a good game as others ask for a good government, but i dont see why it should not be. It would be commercialy viable, it fits the current world view, where the fuck are all the niche-mmorpg-games that im waiting for? Am i so wrong in my assumptions of the market and the buggers that evaluate it? if so, the computergaming community better prepare for some bleak years ahead with a lobotomy or a new hobby. Why does it all have to be the same shit all over again? if i want to loot some cool gear without hassle, il log in to wow or lotro or whatever. If i want some meaningful exchange in a world where my actions actualy mean something i will log into eve or perhaps.... yeah, where? if i hate internet spaceships but want to play something that is a bit more than "get the newest loot available at your nearest bigbadboss", where the fuck do i log in nowadays?
Do we make the rules for soccer retarded? do we say that, no matter how good you play chess, you always win, or at least dont loose? Replenishing shields/health, no pk possible, no hassle whatsoever under no circumstance whatsoever? Is it ok being killed by a critter but unthinkable to be ganked by an actual player? Should we handle our games like we handle our politics (you are right there mor, sadly i agree with your view)? Should a game not be entertaining, chalenging? Apparently not, its all about instant gratification, success and self agrandisment. A game that puts you in the position of just another poor sucker in a harsh world doesnt work does it? Instead we are all superheroes, chosen ones, saviours and all the other megalomaiac stuff. And then we look on our real lifes and see that we are just one voter, one voice in a neverending debate of who should do what and why when and where.
Sports games are all about challenge, who is faster, stronger, better? Computergames are all about you, you are the best, no matter how retarded you behave. In case you behave really retrarded, we made the children unkillable hehe... what the fuck? Evolution-wise games (well, playing) was an important "what if"-scenario that enabled us to learn how to do things without getting killed. Through games nowadays we learn that its all about us, no need to interact, no need to compromise, negotiate, behave and/or haggle for position or power.Sometimes im really afraid of the future and im sad to have those fears at the age of 35 and not 70.

But whatever you say, yeah, pvp, turn based, cosequences... who wants to deal with stuff like that when we have the tried and tested ways of making a game. I sugest that we change the rules of chess too, lets make it no pawn realy dies, they respawn after 10 seconds. And no player, no matter how retarded he/she is, should loose agains a computer. In a game against other human players there should be... what? how do we polish our egos in a game against other humans? Or should we stop competitive gaming cause of the lowering of self esteem loosing could cause?

Disclaimer: im aware that your (mor) comments base in reality and thus do not necessarily reflect your personal views and preferences. My answer should therefore not be taken as a personal response but more like a reaction to the general viewpoint of people, specifically gamers or how they are percieved by opinion-makers in the public-relations departments of the gaming-industy and associated media. I do not intend to insult/contradict you in any way or form since you are of course entitled to your opinion, the citing of other opinions and common knowledge/asumtions, even if they are not your own and you dont agree with them. I just want to make it clear that im fed up with the constant apologetic argument about what should or should not be done based solely on the possible marketability (asumption) of something. If we would follow this train of thougt no one would drive a car because clearly in 1900 a horse and cariage was way more economically sound than one of those new fancy "motorvehicles". Anyway.. no offence meant (really). You did read my post and apparently not just this one but the other ones in the other thread concerning online games as well.

I think we are on the same page concerning FO3:NV, i just cant decide what book to buy, but then does it really matter? Even something about jerry cotton will do i think.

 

[TheWesDude]

free and open PvP with consequences failed.

UO is what you have obviously never played or heard of.

outside the main towns/cities it was completely unrestricted. people could kill anyone they wanted. if you died, your body dropped with everything you had on it.

thats consequences, you died, you lose whatever your killer(s) want to take from your body. and you had to go find a healer to res you. and they could keep killing you.

free and open PvP with consequences.

after 2-3 years UO started hemmoraging playerbase like crazy. so they left the open PvP and added consequences in the form of added status that prevented you from going into towns/cities, and if you died and ressurected within a timeframe of dying you lost skills. everything was skill based. its comprable to losing levels in most MMOs, not exp, but levels.

it helped, it made the PK players rather than go in 1-3 player groups killing people, and they started going around in 4-8 player groups. they would buy resources on alternate chars on their account while keeping their PKers seprate.

it slowed the hemmoraging of players, but did not stop it. then they introduced a copy of the main world that only consentual PvP was allowed. no more PKing in this "safe" area.

that brought back lots of players. people could play without getting killed all the time now.

they later implemented more and more things to encourage people to play in the areas with unrestricted PvP such as special drops or more resources. did not help the PvPers much, its pretty much a dead lifestyle.

they tried making a server with free and open PvP where only the PvP areas were available and restrict it to 1 char per account. people just bought more accounts and ran multiple accounts.

they later added methods that cost in-game gold per death to "save" items to prevent them from dropping to the corpse.

you want to know what happens when you have free and open pvp especially with consequences? read up on the history of UO. this is just a very very brief overview.

free and open PvP especially with consequences to the loser of PvP do not work.

 

[Lexx]

... or just play FOnline.

 

[mor]

please like FOonline hasnt compromised for better gameplay as well, unless you can explain me how you can get from NCR to vault city on foot, with equipment in a few hours! about third the speed of the friking train!!
my best was 90km with equipment in day and here you got about three times the distance and less time
even if in FO universe we all had inherited that inzime that those guys from south Africa that always wins the long distance runs has, i doubt we can make it ...

also what the deal with tent tagging, this will never fly on a real MMORPG with paying customers, its 100% certified game breaker...

also its not an open world... so its can be played as turn base by those who choose to but in general TB works mostly in single player or with very few friends but more than this its just boring...
besides the supposed tactical gameplay its introduce is mediocre at best compared to other options.

but i'll stop here before i'll go into the abysmal UI and the rpg only by name rant...

 

[Lexx]

It's "FOnline" and not "FOonline".


Also the post was about open pvp and nothing else. So your rant was a waste of time. And don't tell me you want to spend real life days for traveling from city A to city B. That's bullshit.

 

[mor]

And don't tell me you want to spend real life days for traveling from city A to city B. That's bullshit.

exactly, this why there wont be open pvp and turn base etc in FOOL