It still amuses me that people are saying this is the usual reaction of the Fallout fandom. Well, it is, but considering they've been jerked around, lied to, given nothing but defective products aside from the first, I'd say they have every good reason to be upset. Especially when game-ending bugs are still not fixed.
Other fandoms would be likewise upset if their favored title were to go under the same knife of incompetence, and games that are to cash in on a potential audience like X-COM's are coming under fire for their gameplay (UFO: Aftermath, mostly arising since UFO was/is the Euro name for X-COM).
The end result is that the Fallout fans as a whole have been lied to again. If Chuck had indeed gone around to the fansites as he had claimed, then he would have been much more well informed. If he had gone to a good number of gaming sites in general, then he might have seen the negative post-release reaction by the fans to Fallout Tactics.
Please notice that I'm not just talking about those who visit NMA, DAC, SAD, VT.net, FrenchVault, or the rest of the Fallout fan sites. Yes, the fans that visit the fansites are a bit more bitter than those who are generally not, but that's because we've seen most of the shit tricks up close. The other fans are still upset, too. It's futile to claim you love Fallout and then spite the fans in such a way. It's at best a bold-faced lie. Until the fans have some reason to not be pissed, I'd have to say they have every right to be.
If the developers had a clue, they would have already seen the reception of FOT and how word of mouth killed that game, even back at the first hairy DeathClaw and despite the biggest pre-order in Interplay history, it still fell from the charts and from favor over a wide audience. From the initial plans to press releases to screenshots (original or updated), the reaction of Fallout Enforcer has been nearly unanimously negative, including on console sites.
Unfortunately, it's not a bright idea to start off by alienating those who could become your biggest assets and could instead help along the game if it was done at least halfway right, those who have been around since day one and have the ability to spread word of mouth.
Interplay still thinks that a couple hundred thousand is a good number for the console market. Unfortunately again, Fallout isn't some macro-name of D&D, so it can't go for the comparatively mediocre sales of BG
A. It doesn't take much to know that the Fallout title on the console market isn't well established. That there is a great number of console owners doesn't mean they will buy the game versus spending their money on titles that look much better in many aspects. Or is Interplay hoping on a number of impulse sales alone?
What do you think will be the reaction of the console players when they go and take a look around and notice that there's such negativity about the title, and not just because it's coming out for consoles?
That surely isn't the sign of developers brighter than a 20 Watt bulb with two settings, "Stupid" and "Back-pedal". Especially when people play "spot teh funney" with the interview and just cringe.
Or, we can look to the fact that it's not just the long time Fallout fans that visit the fansites that are upset. If the developers had a clue, they would have done it right the first time around, rather than put themselves out of their potential consumer's favor from the start. If they had paid attention to what made up Fallout and kept to it, then all of this fuss wouldn't have been so big, or there might not have been any more gripes aside from it's a console title. Instead of The Matrix and other "kewl" things, they could have stuck to the 50's setting. You know, like how Fallout did, and got a strong following, with a wide variety of people, and is known by a number (including PCGamer) because of its gameplay and style. Or are they going to patronize the intelligence of their audience?
Then again, we have to remember that common sense isn't really the Interplay way. They seem far too content to work on "direct to bargain-bin" titles as of late, hoping that people won't notice the rushed and unfinished quality of them.
At the end of all this, we're supposed to expect that the lead guy behind Run Like Hell can come up with changes to make this game seem like a Fallout title, in 6-7 months.
What's next for the insane miracle bag? Hiring Romero back to lead Deus Ex 3?
Other fandoms would be likewise upset if their favored title were to go under the same knife of incompetence, and games that are to cash in on a potential audience like X-COM's are coming under fire for their gameplay (UFO: Aftermath, mostly arising since UFO was/is the Euro name for X-COM).
The end result is that the Fallout fans as a whole have been lied to again. If Chuck had indeed gone around to the fansites as he had claimed, then he would have been much more well informed. If he had gone to a good number of gaming sites in general, then he might have seen the negative post-release reaction by the fans to Fallout Tactics.
Please notice that I'm not just talking about those who visit NMA, DAC, SAD, VT.net, FrenchVault, or the rest of the Fallout fan sites. Yes, the fans that visit the fansites are a bit more bitter than those who are generally not, but that's because we've seen most of the shit tricks up close. The other fans are still upset, too. It's futile to claim you love Fallout and then spite the fans in such a way. It's at best a bold-faced lie. Until the fans have some reason to not be pissed, I'd have to say they have every right to be.
If the developers had a clue, they would have already seen the reception of FOT and how word of mouth killed that game, even back at the first hairy DeathClaw and despite the biggest pre-order in Interplay history, it still fell from the charts and from favor over a wide audience. From the initial plans to press releases to screenshots (original or updated), the reaction of Fallout Enforcer has been nearly unanimously negative, including on console sites.
Unfortunately, it's not a bright idea to start off by alienating those who could become your biggest assets and could instead help along the game if it was done at least halfway right, those who have been around since day one and have the ability to spread word of mouth.
Interplay still thinks that a couple hundred thousand is a good number for the console market. Unfortunately again, Fallout isn't some macro-name of D&D, so it can't go for the comparatively mediocre sales of BG
A. It doesn't take much to know that the Fallout title on the console market isn't well established. That there is a great number of console owners doesn't mean they will buy the game versus spending their money on titles that look much better in many aspects. Or is Interplay hoping on a number of impulse sales alone?What do you think will be the reaction of the console players when they go and take a look around and notice that there's such negativity about the title, and not just because it's coming out for consoles?
That surely isn't the sign of developers brighter than a 20 Watt bulb with two settings, "Stupid" and "Back-pedal". Especially when people play "spot teh funney" with the interview and just cringe.
Or, we can look to the fact that it's not just the long time Fallout fans that visit the fansites that are upset. If the developers had a clue, they would have done it right the first time around, rather than put themselves out of their potential consumer's favor from the start. If they had paid attention to what made up Fallout and kept to it, then all of this fuss wouldn't have been so big, or there might not have been any more gripes aside from it's a console title. Instead of The Matrix and other "kewl" things, they could have stuck to the 50's setting. You know, like how Fallout did, and got a strong following, with a wide variety of people, and is known by a number (including PCGamer) because of its gameplay and style. Or are they going to patronize the intelligence of their audience?
Then again, we have to remember that common sense isn't really the Interplay way. They seem far too content to work on "direct to bargain-bin" titles as of late, hoping that people won't notice the rushed and unfinished quality of them.
At the end of all this, we're supposed to expect that the lead guy behind Run Like Hell can come up with changes to make this game seem like a Fallout title, in 6-7 months.
What's next for the insane miracle bag? Hiring Romero back to lead Deus Ex 3?
oS. Has Interplay sunk so low that they're actually selling advertising space in their games? God, that's just sad.
The NPCs that travelled with the protagonist were truly likeable.