I'm Probably Dead for Saying This, But...

M

Mialdor900

First time out of the vault
I can understand and almost agree with why Chuck did what he did with the Brotherhood of Steel. But perhaps I should explain, before you shoot me.
Companies make products in order to sell them. Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel is a pretty crappy game in and of itself, I agree, but they've been doing things to up its buy-ability.
---We know that the Fallout label sells. And if you own a label, and want to sell a game, 1+1=2 and you stick the label on the game. At least it is somewhat Fallout-related. It's not Fallout: Super Hide-and-Seek or something completely un-Fallout.
---Sure, the PC is a great platform, but there are a lot of potential buyers who own platforms. 2-1=1 and that's half the money you could have gotten. So add 1 and it's a nice piece of change.
---Sex sells. We know that. Look at TV. Look at paysites. People will buy sexy things. Guys, anyway. Game+Sex=Sale and there they go.
---Things are going retro again, but we haven't gotten so far back as to the fifties. The seventies are selling (bellbottoms, flower power, assorted groovy objects.) The seventies means rock music. If you like rock music, (and we already know you like sex,) and you see a game that has it, you'll feel inclined to buy it. Sex+Rock'n'Roll means there's a market for it.
---Violence sells. It's true. people buy violent games (i.e.:Fallout and Fallout 2.) F:BS is violent. You want a violent game, you find a violent game, you buy the violent game. 1-2-3.
All this means that there are people out there who will want this game. I can see why. And this is good, because Interplay is at financial risk, and they need to sell some games. It may not be the thought in Chuck's head, but: They're selling a buyable game so that they will have some money to make a good game, Fallout 3.
I close in saying that there is little wrong in what Chuckie is doing, and that F:BS is not a crime against nature, but merely a cash cow of sorts, that Interplay very much needs at the moment.
 
I'm sure that all the points you made were exactly what went through the heads of Interplay's marketing department when they decided to make this game, but I'd like to make a few counterpoints as to why I think this was a bad idea for a "cash cow" game:

-Fallout has almost no brand recognition on consoles. No "console only" gamer I've talked to has ever heard of Fallout, nor expressed any intrest in playing it. Admittedly, this is only about 10 people, but I'm sure its indicative of the majority of console gamers.

-Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel has almost none of the characteristics that made Fallout popular. Fallout had a great story, multiple endings, intelligent and varied dialogues, various ways to solve quests, open-ended gameplay, turn-based combat, a post-apocalyptic setting, and just an all-around atmosphere of "intelligence". Of these, PoS only has the setting. Read any interview with Chuck and any notion of "intelligence" in or behind this game will disappear instantly.

-Of the people who played Fallout and own a console, almost all of them who were interested in PoS said they would rent it, not buy it. This isn't going to make any profits for Interplay.

Basically, I think they made a horrible decision in making this game. The points you made are valid and will probably up the "buyability" of the game, but the fact is it doesn't really appeal to the majority of the people who are fans of the game, so it's "buyability" isn't that great to begin with. Chuck's record as a game designer is pretty mediocre, and as far as I know Interplay's console games have done pretty poorly apart from BG: DA. If they really wanted a cash cow, this was probably the worst game they could have picked.
 
I can think of one other Interplay game that did pretty well... Earthworm Jim! Ahh, I loved that game.

Anyway, knowing a lot of console-only gamers, I introduced a lot of them to Fallout. The $20 2-in-1 Jewel Case was also a real selling point for them. I don't think you can just classify all console-only gamers as not liking Fallout.
 
Don't worry, Mialdor, nothing will happen to you for saying that. At least not until Rosh comes back. :wink:
 
After reading much of what jester said on the FO:BOS forum, I think I can make peace with the game. It may help fuel the FO name and FO3. I don't think it will hurt FO3.
 
Ironically, it will only bonk if people don't buy it, and people won't buy if they hear crud about it (truth though it be,) and are either persecuted or punished (depends on your point of view) for wanting it. So persecuters/punishers/naysayers wind up being the bonkers, and thus the tarnishers. Kinda makes you want to scratch your head and say 'Huh?,' doesn't it? A catch 22 of sorts, not wanting people to buy a crappy game when if they don't, a good game will be shot...

*scratches head*

Huh?
 
Mialdor900 said:
Ironically, it will only bonk if people don't buy it, and people won't buy if they hear crud about it (truth though it be,) and are either persecuted or punished (depends on your point of view) for wanting it. So persecuters/punishers/naysayers wind up being the bonkers, and thus the tarnishers. Kinda makes you want to scratch your head and say 'Huh?,' doesn't it? A catch 22 of sorts, not wanting people to buy a crappy game when if they don't, a good game will be shot...

*scratches head*

Huh?
Click to expand...

Well, the thing is that even though a lot of people from NMA, DAC and other sites may be bashing this game to hell I don't think we've changed anyone's mind. The people from this board who are interested in it are still interested in it, no matter what we say against it. Maybe there are a lot of lurkers who's minds have been changed, but there isn't any way to tell really. Look at Neverwinter Nights - that game had people swearing up and down that it was the worst piece of shit they ever bought, and it still sold incredibly well. If PoS tanks it'll be because it's a horrible game, not because a few message boards hate it.

As far as "PoS failing, thus FO3 getting cancelled" - that's Interplay's call. As much as I want FO3, I'm not going to buy PoS in the hopes of getting it. It will suck if FO3 gets cancelled, but if it does it's no ones fault but Interplay's - it was their call to pin their financial future on this game, not mine.
 
Montez said:
If PoS tanks it'll be because it's a horrible game, not because a few message boards hate it.

As far as "PoS failing, thus FO3 getting cancelled" - that's Interplay's call. As much as I want FO3, I'm not going to buy PoS in the hopes of getting it. It will suck if FO3 gets cancelled, but if it does it's no ones fault but Interplay's - it was their call to pin their financial future on this game, not mine.
Click to expand...
I looked at all their preview/gameplay movies and it looked exactly like what I expected a platform game to look like. Unless the game is seriously bugged or is seen as too much of a Quake/HL clone, I doubt it'll fail.

I think the bigger danger to FO3 on PC is FOBOS doing very well. Look at all the recent IPLY releases. Their platform games (BGDA) have had some success and their PC games have been disastrous (Lionheart) or met with so-so response (IWD2).

John

No worries, I've got Assault grade Phoenix Implants! :mrgreen:
 
This is a pretty funny thread, honestly. Yes, the original poster has the idea behind what the morons at Interplay are thinking. However, they are doing as they have been doing and going for some kind of gimmick, much like their stance on RT/TB/etc. As long as it's "trendy", then it should be done. If nobody else is making it, then it must not be profitable.

Yes, they follow that kind of illogic.

Unfortunately, they don't realize that there's other games with the same schtick selling points, but have been done better and before this one. Combine in the nearly banal gameplay this sounds like it's turning out to be, then it's just problematic to an extreme. In the "Gross-Out Game" of video game extremes, F:POS is already set up to be a Johnny come lately, but without anything special. The ironic part is that if Chuck didn't start this out with his head up his ass, then he might have realized that Fallout had a fairly distinct setting, so why go for every other gimmick at the same time? I've seen too many failures that have arisen from the same bad design.


Here's why the fans get upset and it still mystifies me that some people still haven't gotten it:

If, by some chance in hell the game does well, then it puts a taint upon the franchise by changing the tone of the game, clashing with the universe and timeline already. Chuck has proven he doesn't care much about the fidelity of the timeline or setting, hadn't really cared to listen to anything politely put except to really fool someone over in a "divide and hush" attempt with a mod powers bribe on the IPLY forums. Of course it might be that he's whistling the same tune as the morons at IPLY marketing. The game will have an affect upon Fo3 or any other Fallout incarnations.

Fallout Tactics had the HIGHEST pre-order of ANY IPLY game at its time. After word of mouth and other factors came in, the sales dropped off SHARPLY, especially when you factor in that IPLY had no intention of providing more patches to the game to solve critical issues. I'm talking about issues that would make any competent QA person go "Holy fuck!"

If the game flops, then it just makes for more holes in IPLY's wallet, possibly causing them to do ANOTHER stupid like making a game for 2.5 YEARS and then just throw it into indefinite hold (*coughBaldur'sGate3?cough*). That would endanger ANY game/licensing in IPLY's future and we've already seen how IPLY likes to "bail" itself out. Instead of doing honest work, the French Inquisition, headed up by Herve Caen, are more interested in taking over a publisher and skullfuck it into the ground as Titus has done to IPLY with their gross incompetence. Seriously, what does the upper echelons of the publisher do except sit on their thumbs if they can't make sure the right things are done? It speaks even worse when they don't care about what the "right things" are, but instead are intent on taking a license, making a crappy game off it, all in the fine Titus tradition.
 
Plus with F:POS coming out it'll shape all those who are new to the Fallout world. We all remember when we first played Fallout and were quite amazed originality. We were amazed when the penny dropped and we realised the game was much deeper then we originally thought. That's why we love the game... but the generation of Fallout gamers who play F:POS will be shaped by that... and what happens next is anyones guess. The only thing we can do is to convince people to buy Fallout 1 & 2 not F:POS.
 
Montez said:
-Fallout has almost no brand recognition on consoles. No "console only" gamer I've talked to has ever heard of Fallout, nor expressed any intrest in playing it. Admittedly, this is only about 10 people, but I'm sure its indicative of the majority of console gamers.
Click to expand...

I think they will solve it with: MAJOR commurcials EVERYWHERE.
 
TheBigL said:
I think they will solve it with: MAJOR commurcials EVERYWHERE.
Click to expand...
ROFLMAO! What was the first thing IPLY stopped doing when they graduated to hemorraghing? Cut their ad budget of course. Oh wait, VU is now the publisher, ads are their responsibility. Hum. They don't have any money either.

me said:
Dead Company Walking
Click to expand...
 
PlasmaJohn said:
TheBigL said:
I think they will solve it with: MAJOR commurcials EVERYWHERE.
Click to expand...
ROFLMAO! What was the first thing IPLY stopped doing when they graduated to hemorraghing? Cut their ad budget of course. Oh wait, VU is now the publisher, ads are their responsibility. Hum. They don't have any money either.

me said:
Dead Company Walking
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

hahaha :lol: I like this quate "Dead Company Walking" :D

and I am pretty sure those basterds "gamespot" will post lots of possitive shit about the game. so who know :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top