I like to take stupid things apart.
Kieron Gillen said:
The only thing that confuses me about Bethesda getting the Fallout licence is why they'd even bother. Fallout, while important and brilliant, was never a runaway sales success.
Neither was any of Bethsoft developed games before Morrowind.
At the moment, Bethesda are arguably the most commercially successful western-style Role-playing Game developer on earth.
Well it seems Canada was relocated to outside Earth then since I take BioWare as being more successful.
It'd actually be far smarter for them to develop their own post-apocalypse setting from scratch rather than trying to raise Interplay's child from the nuclear ashes.
What stupid comment.
I give you this evidence:
Silent Hill 4: The room started development not as a Silent Hill title and only became Silent Hill 4 because someone in Konami panicked and forced the slapping of Silent Hill 4 to boost sales.
New IPs sell less that established IPs ... any freaking idiot with half a brain cell knows that, that is the reason why every year we get all those "movie:The game" since they sell despite the (usually lack of) quality.
The idea of Bethesda doing a post-apocalypse game is as big a story as Bethesda doing Fallout 3. Perhaps even a bigger story. Since it'll be presumably be appearing on the consoles, where it'll have no history whatsoever, the "3" is going to make people back away slowly. (Don't
expect it to come out under the name "Fallout 3" but "Fallout: Some Extra Subtitle")
Too bad there was another Fallout title in consoles and did poorly, even even if I do believe Bethsoft will not use "Fallout 3" I will not be surprised they do it to get away from "Fallout:Brotherhood of Steel" association.
So what have they bought with the licence? Just the enmity of the hardcore Fallout fans who'll hate any game Bethesda make with it just on principle.
What games?
Oh you mean that once every 5 years Elder Scrolls title they come out with since that is pretty much what Bethsoft actually DOES, they publish more games but that "publishing" is a bit different that "making".
So why did they do it? Only reason I can work out is Bethesda are just dirty big Fallout fans and would love to play in the Sandbox. Which is a good a reason for the rest of us to be very excited indeed.
And here we see the utter idiocy of gaming journalism.
I already pointed out that new IPs do not move that many units, established IPs however do and just because Fallout was not a big seller in the 90's does not mean the name have no value, it does and Bethsoft is certainly going to cash in on that.
Bethsoft is also going to cash in on the fact gaming journalists are usually idiots and will even go as far as saying Bethsoft CREATED Fallout (yes, they can be as stupid) and after seeing how almost nobody pointed out the glaring flaws of Oblivion ... well ...
Better still we have Star Trek as a example, they got the rights and even if they did not develop in-house they certainly followed up what were the gender ST games had more success with the results we all seen.
Could that NOT be said the same? that Bethsoft "loved Star Trek and loved to play it on a sandbox".
I sooner trust the word of a member of the Bush Administration that of a gaming jornalist ...