User blog:Ausir/Interplay countersues Bethesda

Well, if Interplay wins Bethesda would still have the rights to make 2 more Fallout games, including New Vegas.

We'll see. Bethesda has more money for lawyers, so they're likely to win anyway.

Damn I hope interplay wins there game were overall better but were just made during a time when games weren't my style

@ Wolfy

Yeah. Just you.

_{Because you're the exploitable sheep demographic that FOBOS appeals to.}

@ Wolfy

Who would they sell it to? Remember that the project was cancelled because nobody bought the first thing.

Also, don't call me a "dumbass teenager" until you learn that there's a space between a comma and the next word, alright?

@ Dolten

You mean Black Isle's games were good. Interplay just published them.

@ Ausir

Well, you have to admit that Fallout games from Interplay suffered without Black Isle.

@Nitpicker of the Wastes

Well, there wasn't a "Black Isle" when Fallout 1 was developed. And Black Isle was always a part of Interplay. It's like saying "Blizzard did not make Diablo, Blizzard North did!" or "EA did not make FIFA10, EA Sports did!".

"Well, you have to admit that Fallout games from Interplay suffered without Black Isle"

Nope, all Fallout games are good.They have their flaws, but all are enjoyable.Even BOS.

@ Ausir

I know that, but the people who went on to become Black Isle were always there. And without them, Interplay couldn't deliver an acceptable Fallout title to the masses.

Which is why I don't really consider Interplay itself to be the ones who made Fallout.

"Which is why I don't really consider Interplay itself to be the ones who made Fallout"

Normally i'd slag ya for that, but i'll let the community do my thing (Disappears)

@ Wolfy

When the community doesn't like FOBOS and is remaining neutral to Tactics? Which is technically agreeing with me?

@ Wolfy

What?

"I know that, but the people who went on to become Black Isle were always there. And without them, Interplay couldn't deliver an acceptable Fallout title to the masses. "

As in Tim Cain, Jason Anderson, Leon Boyarsky, Tim Cain, Scott Campbell, who weren't at Interplay and/or Black Isle anymore when the latter was formed, and who were the people behind the original creation of Fallout?

@Nitpicker of the Wastes

No, I don't know what you mean. Most of the 6 original creators of Fallout were never actually at Black Isle or left early during the pre-production of Fallout 2. While they all definitely were at Interplay (as were the Black Isle people).

The six original creators of Fallout are Tim Cain, Leon Boyarsky, Jason Anderson, Chris Taylor, Scott Campbell and Jason Taylor. Of these, only Cain, Anderson and Boyarsky worked on FO2 and they left during early development stages (probably before the team was even called "Black Isle"), while Chris Taylor only wrote the game manual for FO2.

WOW cant Bethesda stop being greedy for once?

You know, for a guy that owns Interplay stock, this guy is exactly what you'd expect, an idiot.

no offense wolf

this excites me greatly. go go interplay!

well im pulling for bethesda on this one i liked fallout 3 the best i went back and tried playing 2 and 1 and ughhh i hated them.

fallout 3 wasn't that bad compared to other games it was just absolutely terrible compared to fallout 1 & 2

How is Fallout and Fallout 2 better? Fallout 3 is years ahead of Fallout and F2 in terms of graphics and gameplay. I admit, Fallout and F2 had much better storylines, but Fallout 3's gameplay is far superior.

If Interplay wins we could get the aborted fallout games.

i really don't like the interplay style fallout because it's too slow as for the bethesda style it's really fast paced and it's an FPS.

P.S. No offense to the people who like interplay's fallout

fallout is gay anyways

Chipgambino is right.

However, I back no one up in this case. Beth must stop fighting over the title and let Interplay at least do their last things before Beth completely takes it over.

To the guy that said that Fallout is gay:

Why are you on this wiki, and why do you care? If you dont like Fallout, leave.

I hope Bethesda gets to keep Fallout, but I want them to let Interplay keep selling the origional three games. I dont want Interplay to get the rights back and start making Fallout the old way. I like how bethesda made it. The storyline could have been better, but I LOVED the gameplay.

As a fan of the entire Fallout series, I can only wonder if Interplay getting the rights back would be a blessing or a detriment. Reading some of the articles on this website makes me think that Interplay may not give the series the amount of care it deserves either. Stuff like: "If Interplay had allowed more time (and money), MicroForte would have been in a position to deliver a better game." "MicroForte wasn't responsible for nearly as many problems on FOT as Interplay was." (Both quotes from Chris Taylor in regards to FoT) Then you have FO: BOS which doesn't even seem like they respected the canon whatsoever, even worse than FOT... Then came the farming out of the rights and Bethesda's acquisition... call me crazy, but it seems like Interplay looks at that Fallout license and sees nothing but $$$. Obviously, Interplay has been in extremely dire straights financially over the last several years (forcibly shut down, bouncing payroll checks etc) so its easy to see why they might be in the "cash cow" mindset, but its hardly any excuse or ruining canon to a fan of the series. I guess the point Im trying to make is, is Interplay really who we want in control of this beloved license anymore, with their recent muddying of it? Personally, I think not.

Other than the name, today's Interplay really isn't the same company that brought us Fallout 1 & 2...

Years of mismanagement have taken their toll

Either way. This is a lose-lose situation. If interplay win then you'll most definitely not get new quality FO titles similar to 1 and 2 and the series may turn into vaporware (over exaggerating this point) , if Beth wins then some FO fans will be pissed.

Mind you I actually liked FO3 but it doesn't compare to FO 1 and 2.

@Anon 06:31

Sure it is, since it's written by an Interplay shareholder.

@Chipgambino

Fallout 3's graphics might be better, but its gameplay is not "far superior". It's a completely different style of gameplay, and while some people like the RPG/FPS hybrid, others prefer RPGs with isometric view and turn-based combat. Neither is inherently superior over the other, but I happen to prefer the latter myself and expect it from a Fallout game.

And yes, aside from Chris Taylor this isn't the Interplay of old anyway.

Personally, I would like Fallout to be owned neither by Bethesda nor by Herve Caen's Interplay.

Say, where is Porter? anyone kow aht happen to him

Bethesda all the way Fallout 3 PWNS all

Ahh, I see Interplay is still trying over and over to resusitate their dying company.

Like many others, I really would prefer that Interplay doesn't obtain any more rights to Fallout, seeing how they wouldn't be left with enough money to buy themsleves a proper coffin anyway. Honestly, if by some miracle Interplay got privately funded or something, I would be ecstatic. They could possibly win this lawsuit, and even re-obtain rights to publish another Fallout title. Still, that wouldn't be much consolation, considering they wouldn't have the original creators to dream up another great storyline for another great game. Seems like they are backed up into a really tight corner right now.

Anyway, if Bethesda wins the lawsuit (like most people can't already see the end in sight), I am still at least a little happy knowing that New Vegas is being handled/worked on by the original Fallout creators. If Obsidian does a justice at combining Bethesda's FPS aspect of the series with their ability to write an interesting storyline, then I will set aside 60 dollars right now just to wait for the game to come out next year. Also, when they get around to it, I hope Bethesda puts a little more effort into the MAIN storyline of Fallout 4 instead of surrounding a small one with dozens of side quests like they did for FO3.

Well, I guess I'll keep checking the new articles to come and keep posting my thoughts.

Oops, I forgot to say that if anything, Interplay should still be able to legally sell the old Fallouts. I am happy that a few copies were still in stores, considering I just bought them about a week or two ago.

@Anon

Just because Herve Caen's Interplay screwed up the franchise in the first place doesn't mean we need to love Bethesda's games either. We can dislike both. Ideally, I'd like the Fallout license to end up with either Obsidian or inXile.

Fallout 3 is very different from Fallout 1 and 2 and caters largely to a different target audience. It's natural that many fans of the originals are not fond of it, just like some fans of Fallout 3 are not into the originals. Get over it.

Yes, the current Interplay is not the Interplay of old, ever since it was bought out by Herve Caen. And yeah, Blizzard North was actually more independent than Black Isle ever was, but it was still part of Blizzard, and it's silly to say that "Diablo was not made by Blizzard!".

@Ausir: Same as the last anoymos, replying :)

The Blizzard/Blizzard North thing is a fine semantic line, I agree. Sad to see where Interplay is now. Mismanagement - whoever and whenever they did it - definitely sucked every penny out of an otherwise great company it sounds like.

I am sort of frightened by the concept of a Fallout MMO however. One of the things I DO like most about Bethesda's games it that I get a complete sense of lonely abandon frequently. It is one of the most enjoyable pieces of the massively single-player game.

Maybe someone else will buy up a license to do a 'classical' style Fallout game.

Bethesda would definately have the more money for lawyers, comparing when Interplay's new release is Boogerman on the wii, and also the selling of the original fallout series.

@The14th

Black Isle wasn't "fairly independent on Fallout". Black Isle didn't exist on Fallout. It was only created during the development of Fallout 2. Fallout was developed simply by "Interplay". And later, Black Isle was just a development team within Interplay. It was never a separate company, it wasn't even as independent as Blizzard North.

And there is at least one original Fallout developer still at Interplay, Chris Taylor. But I do agree that Herve Caen's current Interplay is not the Interplay of old.

@Yaik7a

They would, just not as mass-market blockbusters like Bethesda games. But there are lots of games that are fairly successful even if they're not AAA titles and don't cater to the lowest common denominator.

Hell, even Fallout 1 and 2 still sell pretty good.

@werewolfhell: I thoght you meant Tactics , How would what an BoS ?

@Ausir How does Fallout 3 cater to the "lowest common denominator"?

Obsidian (interesting track record) and inXile (no track record) would be great, but I don't think the license is exactly about to go to one of them. And if Interplay gets it, they'll NEVER see the franchise again, imo. Clearly, there's a difference of opinion over Fallout 3, but I think Bethesda is the lesser of the two evils present, at least it seems like they give a shit about the canon.

@Anon 16:33

Actually, the original Fallouts sold pretty decently, and still sell pretty well. If you think that Interplay went down because Fallouts didn't sell, you clearly have no idea about the history of Interplay.

I think Beth made a smart move buying Fallout but I think FO1&2 are waaay more hardcore than Fallout 3 Right off the bat, you could tell FO3 was made to appeal to the masses of gamers who are used 2 games like Halo. I think it takes more of a refined taste to play FO1&2 regardless i think FO3 is a masterpiece It makes the wasteland seem like a desolate place If you were to combine the amazing storyline capabilities of the Interplay folks mix that up with Beths ability to make a tremendous world with all them side quests(such as in Oblivion), They would have a game fit for the history books i tell you that much But instead theyre pouring all their cash into suing the crap outta each other -Reverend Black Ice

@Ausir

It may not have been named until after the release of Fallout, but it was the same division none the less. And most of the key devs (pretty much every one of them except Chris Taylor) founded Obsidian, the studio currently working on New Vegas. So from the stance of original talent, I side with Bethesda as if New Vegas makes it big they may hire Obsidian to make more Fallout games.

Well... looks like this fight is going to last a good while, im not going to take sides i enjoyed all Fallout games (FO:BOS no, what a waste of money) i just hope the series doesn't bleed out to death, as both companies are likely to make more games just to win money and forget what the series was.

Anonymous: "i hope if interplay win's that fallout is still on consoles"

Interplay probably doesn't even have enough money to even publish it on consoles. :P

If Interplay gets the license back will they get licensing fees from future sales of Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas, and the unannounced third fallout title Bethesda gets to make?

Someone with a time machine and several billion $ hop back into 2003 and give Interplay/Black Isle a hand so they don't have to close.

I understand that peoples' tastes and opinions differ, but that still doesn't mean that Fallout 3 can be considered a bad game. The game was well-designed and had no serious flaws that would make it a bad game.

Just as someone's preference doesn't necessarily make a game good, it doesn't make the game bad either.

I'd like to go read the full contract now. The guy who blogged about this seems like a prejudiced idiot, and I need to filter out the bias that may be there.

Fallouts 1 and 2 were ok, I loved the storyline to death but that's about it. Fallout 3 picked everything else up and made it good, but the storyline fell back noticeably.

@SSDGFCTCT9

Mostly because of totally different gameplay, yes. It would be an okay spin-off (like Fallout: Capital Wasteland), but a bad sequel. From a gaming sequel, I expect it to be not only set in the same setting, but to build upon the gameplay style of the predecessor, enhance its strengths and try to eliminate weaknesses. Not to replace the gameplay style with one of an entirely different series previously made by the same people.

Just like an isometric, turn-based Elder Scrolls V would be a bad sequel to the previous 4.

@ Ausir:

I somewhat agree with you that Fallout 3 shouldn't of been a sequel, since it didn't really continue the previous story. However they made it a sequel so it would sell, if they named it something like Fallout: DC, the consumers would probably be thinking "that sounds like a stupid game." However, the sequel thing is the only thing I agree with on you. Bethesda's Fallout 3 was far more superior in gameplay and other stuff. But as you say "opinions differ..." but still, many more people would agree with me that Fallout 3 was better since Fallout 3 had a much bigger fan base than the originals.

@ Ausir

Well I respect your opinion, it may be hard to believe but I do. I guess we all have certain likes and dislikes about Fallout, at least you give reasons why you don't like fallout unlike fanboys who just screan "fallout 3 sucks!".

I loved 1, 2, and 3, but think 3 would have looked really dorky as a turn based game in 3D, too slow and clunky. I do like using VATS in smaller doses, no worries though, in 3.

I've played Fallout 1, 2 and 3 and one of the main things I prefer 3 over 1 and 2 are is the design. I mean come on 1 and 2 were just lego design and every person had no face except for the occasional 3D character but most of them looked a bit creepy. Fallout 3 just looks good to look at and has some variety whereas 1 and 2 were just square shaped buldings and 10 pixel people. Design has always been one of the points I look for in a game, I mean look at Spyro, that was made around the same time as the early fallouts, and I absolutely LOVED the design. Plus why is everyone sayin 1 and 2 had great storylines and 3 had a shit one? Whats so good about 1 and 2 and what is so bad about 3? I liked 3's storline, especially "Blood Ties" and "The Replicated Man". Plus the combat in 1 and 2 can get really annoying sometimes and nearly all of the skills and perks were just useless and you could just pretend they weren't even there.

@Ausir

Stop complaining about Fallout 3, too bad if you think that real gameplay is worse than crappy, slow and boring turn based gameplay. In the modern world real time is the way to go, if you want to play turn based games thats fine, you are a part of the niche market that no one makes games for anymore, Fallout 1 and 2 are history and real a time Fallout game has replaced the old and if we reverted to that style of gameplay, we would have infact gone backwards. Tough shit to all you hardcore, old skool fans, let the next games be for the casual gamers, thats the future. Bethesda made a great game and a 9.8/10 review from IGN and other popular sites indicate that the game and future titles from Bethesda will outperform Fallout 1 and 2 in ALL ways.

@Anonymous 11:20

I'm pretty neutral on this, I wouldn't want the rights to be with the current Interplay nor with Bethesda.

yeah, hide what's true

Fallout 3 is the best single player game for the xbox... and anyway who knows how much longer interplay will be around? they've gone bankrupt and restarted numerous times. Honestly, i think bethesda having the rights is the best thing for the franchise for sooooo many reasons. Its a more financially sound decision, Bethesda is way more reputable, fallout 3 was awesome, i just honestly can't take interplay seriously anymore. yes, kudos for creating the series, but you blew it. Despite this, I do think that suing over the sale of fallouts 1,2, tactics is a little over the top.

And war. war never changes. not even in the courtroom.

You can argue that point all day long because its completely subjective. Some people liked Morrowind and Oblivion, some people didn't. When you take similar gameplay and overwrite Fallout's previous gameplay entirely with it, its going to cause a stir among series fans, especially those that didn't like Oblivion. Bethesda does know what they're doing, but they don't know how to make a Fallout game the way series fans have preferred (they said as much during development).

As far as the story is concerned, I'm not sure why people are bringing it up. FO1 and 2 had better writing than Fallout 3, but the stories themselves were pretty rudimentary. Not that Fallout 3 is better, mind you, but every game's story seemed... minimal. Most of the content in each game didn't really have much to do with the main story. The excellent writing comes in the form of the dialogue trees and player choice, not so much the story, in my opinion.

interplay made the best of all the fallouts

It saddens me that an intellectual PC-RPG that Fallout was, turned into a retarded consolebased shooterfest. But that is todays gamingworld and the rest of the world. Anything that is either constructive or intellectual will not be appreciated by the common audience.

@ Anonymous user 18:42, October 19, 2009

Honestly I don't know what you are bitching about. Just cause Gears of War and Gears of war 2 sold well means that all of the Gaming is full of retards? No, I bought Gears of war one and thought it was shit, most people who buy violent games anyway are little kids and douche bags. The Reason why Bethesda is a great company imo is that Fallout 3 reaches to all (or most... *Randy pitchford* Huh?) people of varying tastes of games. Its the reason why I like fallout 3, that and I don't have alot of space on my pc emulator to download fallout 1 and 2. From what I have heard, apparently during the later years of Interplay, they started to make shit games like BOS, once more based upon what I have read. I loved Fallout 3, though disappointed they didn't try to start from scratch, or else it wouldn't be as many damn glitches in it. Gaming is all based on opinion, a man can be intelligent yet still be called an Idiot for playing a game another one doesn't like. I think all of the Fallout fans should stop bitching about each others games and enjoy them or not enjoy them from here on. Besides without Fallout 3 you guys would be stuck with Van buren and Bos and Bos2 and Fallout 1 and Fallout 2... wait a minute that ain't a bad deal, well it wouldn't be as nice and polished would it? :) P.S. Fallout 3 is Bethesdas greatest work thus far imo -TJM

@Anon

Being "stuck" with Van Buren instead of Bethesda's FO3? Well, count me in.

@ Ausir

Besides My point being is that the fans of Bethesda's Fallout 3 and fans of Interplays Fallout series should stop bickering over such a masterpiece of a videogame series, Fallout 3 might be retarded in the eyes of most Interplay Fallout fans but its a hell of alot better than most games today. am I right or am I wrong? Its all opinion either way.

Fallout 3 still kicks ass though... and it looks as though Fallout 1 and 2 are still kicking...

With a huge modding groups they can create a free Van Buren Esque game made from Fallout 1 and 2 and the rest :)

good, i hope bethesda loses cause they don't know ow to make a game without bugs, and they don't give a crap about their customers

The thing about Fallout 3 is that it was developed only for the current audience; an audience that has lived off of first person gameplay for more than a long time (Halo Franchise). And the argument that Fallout 3 is superior in graphics is completely stupid; of course it is, because it was made years after Fallout 1 and 2 were made. A new Fallout game with the same style of gameplay and storyline complexity as Fallout 1 and 2, coupled with all the visual effects that modern graphic designs can achieve would be more than I could ever ask for.

(Likewise, I neither support Interplay nor Bethesda on this one.)

A retarded console based shooterfest? OMFG. Fallout 3 was awsome.

@Anon

Most fans of original Fallouts don't really care whether it's famous or not, but whether it's still the type of game they enjoy. For many of them, due to major changes in gameplay style, it is not.

Also, if Interplay won, Fallout would immediately die. Do you want that for your favorite game series? I sure hope not. Interplay cannot support themselves. They've already screwed up this series, they've showed they can't control their IPs and, they've gone bankrupt multiple times, with not enough money left for the next major Fallout game release(if they won). Leave the rights to Beth, they obviously have more experience.

@ Insane Survivor

Right on, bro.

Disliking Fallout 3 doesn't make you a NMA fanboy, you have to be bitten by one. Only then can the process begin.

People are well within their rights to not like Fallout 3. You don't have to agree. I think FO3's pretty entertaining. But the least you could do is have enough human decency to respect someone's opinion and not attack them.

And Insane Survivor, not really sure where you're going with the whole "it's Fallout so like it dammit" mentality. If Bethesda released a turd in a DVD case labeled Fallout 4 tomorrow, would you buy it and rave about how kick ass it is?

I hope Interplay wins, i've played every fallout game (yes that includes the van buren tech demo) and, this may just be a 14 year old's opinion, but Interplay's games were so much better. What would you rather, bethesda milking it dry with crap sequals, dlcs,ect or Interplay, back with its brainchild, build less games, but ones full of good story, humour, gameplay, and that fantastic stats system. This is David V.S Goliath (interplay v.s bethsoft) and i'm rooting for David.

@ Anonymous user

Interplay's brainchild? Fallout 1 and 2 kicked ass, but when they broke out Tactics and BOS they really f*cked the Fallout series up. All Interplay would do to the Fallout series is f*ck it up again in a desperate attempt to make money and save their dying company. With the Fallout series in Bethesda's hands, I actually think that they'll do a good job making sequels. And no matter who wins, Bethesda still gets to make two more Fallout games. Get over it. No matter what anyone does, Bethesda will still kick out 2 more kick ass Fallout games.

It's just like someone said before: Interplay isn't the same anymore. My hopes regarding Fallout are at Obsidian Entertainment and Fallout: New Vegas. Bethesda AND Interplay lack the right people, who either left or are at Obsidian. (F3 has been alot better than Tactics and BOS though)

The majority of these news stories' discussions just devolve into personal preference about the series. For all the criticism thrown towards Bethesda for rehashing old Fallout story components, it looks like a lot of commenters here just love to rehash the same old arguments about which game is better, Interplay rules, Bethesda sucks, etc, etc. Heavy, heavy irony.

Seriously, guys. I think we all get the point each side is trying to make. No opinions are going to change at this point.

To stay on topic, though. I'm skeptical about this. If it were someone closer to the proceedings than a simple stockholder who's supporting their stock, I'd give it more credence. Unless we could see the official documentation (and keep our eyes open long enough to read it all), I'm just going to watch as things proceed before forming an opinion.

@Anon

I've read the actual court filings, and, bias aside, he is more or less correctly describing Interplay's claims and demands.

and fallout 3 was not terriable it was good f1 anf f2 have better story (but i am only just got into the brotherhood on f1 and not really started f2 yet) but fallout 3 with all dlc's aswell brilliant

does this mean if bethseda lose no more new vegas im sorry but i want bethseda to win this one and anyway interplay is not the same and some of them are working on new vegas ive played fallout 3 completed and all dlc's half through f1 and havent really started f2 and i think they are no where near as good as fallout 3 and To Ausir who do you think will win

@SSDGFCTCT9

You can buy Fallout 1 and 2 (digital download) at http://www.gog.com

ok, i understand opinions differ and all that S&$t, but face it FO3 By Beth was a brilliant game, now wait considering it was a PLATFORM GAME... now i've played every FO game released loved them all Because it was FALLOUT i mean seriously. now i'm no n00b i played them when they came out. Think of it from Bethesda's perspective when making fallout they had to make something with their style (the rpg/fps) but fallout. and when you take those you get FO3. honestly did you expect another over the head 3rd person game. on the Xbox 360 Or PS3 what did you honestly expect?

The fans of the original Fallout games have an extremely divided, and unpleasible fan base. On one hand, you have the people that just wanted Interplay to stop abusing the franchise. Then you have the people that have the "Its popular so it sucks mentality" like the protecting their favorite band that achieved mainstream success and yet other groups that just want more of the series or just want it to end. That being said, I wish there was some way of getting the best of both worlds: Van Buren seeing the light of day and Bethesda's (or Obsidian's) continuation of the franchise.

@ Porter

Don't we always? :)

@ Porter

It's kinda obvious...

I will be VERY happy to see Interplay win. Bethesda ruined Fallout with this "Fallout 3". It had None of the original charm of the first two games.

@Porter Real time doesn't bother me, just that fallout 3 is empty. fallout 1 and 2 on the other hand, i could become a porn star, boxer, etc....

Interplay isn't the same anymore!!!!!!!!! Don't vote for them, they are traitors!!

Here's what I want:

Beth to make the story and writing depth truer to the original Fallouts in their next installments

Interplay to at least have a chance to redeem themselves and produce a quality game, so we can have physical, playable evidence on how they would treat the franchise

Fanboys on both sides to shut the hell up, enjoy their respective games, and understand that opinion, no matter how popular that opinion, =/= fact.

Pretty much Hopeful, Overly Optimistic and Dillusional Fantasy, in that order.

i dont think interplay should get fallout back. they will just sit on it. beth did great justice for the game and i think both should drop it before the series is ruined for everyone.

fallout 3 is an excellent game, just as good as fallout 1 and 2. Why can't these 2 studios just get along.. (btw tactics and BOS were complete shit)

Hmm, I really doubt that this stockholder really know the ins and outs of contract law, given especially how un-legal-esque his/her writing is, and so I think I'll instead wait to hear what the court says; although, even in that case, it's likely that the only readily available released documentation for this case will be the laymen opinions of the journalists covering it rather than the actual arguments and legal gymnastics of the lawyers and judge present. As such, my impression is that, besides the whole point that we the average onlooker won't fully appreciate the legal actions that may eventually happen, and, since we the consumers have next to no input when it comes the what fundamentally happens with a game (we have a greater input on a wider scale based off of supply and demand, but not the workings and additions to a particular product of this nature - such as games, movies, books, and otherwise entertainment items - save government actions such as age restrictions), that we should concentrate on the good things we already have - such as Fallout 3 and the soon to be Assassin's Creed 2 - and not worry about things which aren't currently a changeable reality. For example, if Interplay and Bethesda want to screw themselves over with legal hoopla, then I as a gamer will just buy other games made by other companies which, in the foreseeable future, will be Ninja Theory with Enslaved (Andy Serkis is Awesome!) and Ubisoft with Assassin's Creed 2 (probably going to be the best game this year).

This is my opinion, and, since I think it's fairly reasonable, I feel that it should be your opinion too.

Hmm... even though Fallout 3 is a good game (I plan on buying the Game of the Year Edition), I gotta go with Interplay because Bethesda did violate their contract. So Bethesda screwed up bad.

Even if Interplay gets the rights, they won't be able to do shit with them. Almost all of their talent that made the original has moved on to different studios. That could pose a problem to making an actual game.

@ Anonymous user 21:58 October 21, 2009

I don't think Assassins creed 2 is going to get the best game of the year award... even though it'd kick this game in the ass, *Sigh* Call of duty: Modern warfare 2 is definantly going to win it... Assassins Creed is pretty good though, sorry about that getting off track about the task at hand but who ever said that Bethesda is going to use Fallout for a retarded money whore is wrong, look at oblivion, its the fourth in their original series and it is still popular and loved by fans, even though they bitch that it was the retard and the third one is better... wait Im seeing a pattern at EVERY game wikia, everyone HATES the new games!

I love Fallout 3. Have loved it since I bought it. I have not, however, played FO1 or 2 so I can't say what I prefer. Fallout 3 is a great game, and, from what I've read, a lot of the original Fallout fans are just being spoiled purists. (By the way, this isn't directed at fans who dislike the visual style, or just dislike Fallout 3 in general)

This whole debate reminds me of one I've seen for one of my favorite musical artists, Regina Spektor. Regina Spektor is an amazing musician, but when she started taking some pop-like, hugely produced turns with her music, some other fans that I know started freaking out. They would say that she's sold out, when it's the same great musician, writing new, thought-provoking lyrics, with more production so as to get across the feeling.

My point is: Just because it's different than what you're used to, doesn't make it a bad game. It's still amazingly written.

I also don't see what's so bad about mainstream? Just because it's mainstream doesn't mean it's bad...

Can't interplay just age gracefully I prefer bethesda's recreation of the fallout universe sure, its not the original but would I rather go back to clicking at 2d objects and trying to get a thrill out of it or will I throw myself into a place where the gameplay is so much more immersive has loads more detail. I personally think even though bethsda is in the wrong they do a better job with the fallout games

and I agree with anon before, just cause its mainstream doesn't mean its like a disease.

@Anon

The comment was deleted, not because it was positive towards Fallout 3, but because it was full of personal insults towards players who don't share the commenter's taste. Any further such comments will also be deleted and if they repeat, the commenters will be blocked, no matter whether they're positive or negative towards any game.

Nothing stops you from expressing your preferences in a civil manner. Some of the other admins here, like Porter21, are fans of Fallout 3 who haven't even played the first two. But they don't tend to insult people with different tastes.

Me liek to playz falloot 3 it is the BEZT GAME EVERR

Wow. People are still fighting over this stuff? Why can't we just get along. Like Communists. Or Democrats, if you prefer that....LW556DCJ 02:28, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what surprises me more, that Interplay is fighting back or that they still have shareholders. Fingers crossed they win.

Interplay hasn't made a good game in about a decade.