Well, when I look at writing I divide it into these groups:
Plot and Overall Theme
World-Building/Lore
Characters/Character Building
Dialogue
I would say Bethesda does a great job with lore. Like they are really great at creating worlds that feel lived in. Its their biggest strength and why I think their games are so successful.
However, their plots are average at best and that tends to be made worse by that fact that their dialogue ranges from mediocre to cringe-inducing.
My wishlist for Fallout 4 would be a return to isometric, fallout 1 style game with very limited voice acting and most of your interaction being done as text. being told you pulverized a guy to a pulp with a burst of minigun ammo is a lot more fun than simply seeing the same gore animation time and time again.
Come to think of it, new gore animations are on my wish list. No more 'limbs only', let's get giant holes and chunks from torsos now.
Also I really don't have an opinion on dual wielding, but maybe make it an options from perks or cyber enhancement. Maybe you could have three levels of a perk, and each time it becomes more efficient and useful (although ultimately you still have to sacrifice something for that sweet dps). Maybe with certain cyber enhancements such as better eyes, a weird brain that can handle and manage simultanoues precessing, and cybernetic arms or enhanced musculature for recoil, you could introduce it in a lore consistent manner. Because all those enhancements have been seen before. I actually did muse to myself, after getting nearly every relevant enhancement, that hey this guy could dual wield.
Been playing KoToR thanks to the humble bundle and you can dual wield but in that game without taking basically all three levels of the DL perk it is terrible.
I think a big problem from duel wielding would also come from early game, where you would eat through ammo stupidly fast, as well as be damaging two guns at once. I think that would be another thing that could keep it balanced early on, from a cost-benefit viewpoint.
I have to confess that I got Fallout 1 and 2 recently, but haven't been able to get into them because of the combat. Turn-based in itself doesn't bother me, but it seemed so incredibly slow. Maybe it is all due to being so low-level, but it seemed like it was taking several minutes per enemy (rats and radscorpions), and any encounter with more than 3 or so went on for what seemed like 20 minutes
I'd have to say that I vastly VATS-ly prefer the combat in Fallout 3 and NV. I'll have to deal with it though, because everything else about Fallout 1 was really interesting
You can turn up the speed of combat animations in the options menu so that it goes much faster. That being said, if you don't like turned based combat, it's still going to seem slow-paced to you.
Also, your character sucks horrendously bad at combat in the beginning. Things will die faster later in the game. Sometimes comically so.
Eventually, I promise, your character will stop missing that fucking rat one tile away from you.
+2
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited February 2015
You know something I would love...and this is completely random and out of left field.
The ability to create your own "tribe" or group.
Like say as your name grows amongst the people, you start to get more fans/followers. Then someone comes to you with the idea of creating your own city(kinda like a Megaton) or something.
Then you could go through a some quest of putting it together. Finding materials, recruiting people like doctors, salesman, guards. And maybe a few defense missions.
Maybe even give you the option to be evil and create your own bandit group.
While I don't deny that could be very cool, it's easy for the 'tribe' thing to fall into the Dragon Age: Inquisition folly where you are the leader of this massive force, but end up being the only one who really does anything and still have to go out and gather herbs, materials, and bear asses while all your followers sit around and complain (aka give you quests). I still don't think the idea is a bad one, but I would just prefer it more on a smaller scale, like if in the course of a game you find a ghost town, and help get it set up with various people, who then make you the Sheriff. You have to protect the town and chase down outlaws, but get benefits like a salary, cheap/free services, and 'side benefits' such as getting to keep contraband that you confiscate from badguys (or 'bad guys' if you aren't such a virtuous cop).
Oh man...I forgot how crazy the perks got in Fallout 3.
I remember I was invincible by the end of the game.
Yeah, Bethesda always had a tough time balancing their open world games since they seem to mainly go for "play long enough and you can do everything" instead of something more along the lines of encouraging specialization.
I started Skyrim as a rogue but by the end, I was wearing heavy plate armor, throwing fireballs and swatting dragons like flies by running at them like a mad man/murder hobo.
I know some really prefer specialization, but that idea of being able to get and do everything eventually is why I have liked the modern Bethesda games so much.
It makes for a really fun first playthrough.
I totally get why they do it. In a game where you can spend over 200 hours on a single run they don't want things getting stale.
Well, when I look at writing I divide it into these groups:
Plot and Overall Theme
World-Building/Lore
Characters/Character Building
Dialogue
I would say Bethesda does a great job with lore. Like they are really great at creating worlds that feel lived in. Its their biggest strength and why I think their games are so successful.
However, their plots are average at best and that tends to be made worse by that fact that their dialogue ranges from mediocre to cringe-inducing.
My wishlist for Fallout 4 would be a return to isometric, fallout 1 style game with very limited voice acting and most of your interaction being done as text. being told you pulverized a guy to a pulp with a burst of minigun ammo is a lot more fun than simply seeing the same gore animation time and time again.
Come to think of it, new gore animations are on my wish list. No more 'limbs only', let's get giant holes and chunks from torsos now.
Also I really don't have an opinion on dual wielding, but maybe make it an options from perks or cyber enhancement. Maybe you could have three levels of a perk, and each time it becomes more efficient and useful (although ultimately you still have to sacrifice something for that sweet dps). Maybe with certain cyber enhancements such as better eyes, a weird brain that can handle and manage simultanoues precessing, and cybernetic arms or enhanced musculature for recoil, you could introduce it in a lore consistent manner. Because all those enhancements have been seen before. I actually did muse to myself, after getting nearly every relevant enhancement, that hey this guy could dual wield.
Been playing KoToR thanks to the humble bundle and you can dual wield but in that game without taking basically all three levels of the DL perk it is terrible.
Bloody mess combined with being a melee character and some VATS targeting of things like arms was always fun.
Give someone a dead arm so hard their entire body explodes in a shower of chunks and bits...
0
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
edited February 2015
I don't think you should need perks or cybernetics to dual wield from the start but using those to unlock better options like better profiency and dual rocket launchers/rifles and the like in the higher level tiers like 20 and up would be fun.
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
Well considering there are minimum strength requirements to wield large guns anyway, dual wielding assault rifles or grenade launchers is going to require STR of 10 anyway. And there will undoubtedly be heavy accuracy penalties for dual-wielding two-handed weapons. No doubt you could dual-wield 10mm pistols, but a pair of automatic shotguns? How are you supposed to do that with any semblance of having the bullets go in the direction you want them to?
0
KadokenGiving Ends to my Friends and it Feels StupendousRegistered Userregular
You know something I would love...and this is completely random and out of left field.
The ability to create your own "tribe" or group.
Like say as your name grows amongst the people, you start to get more fans/followers. Then someone comes to you with the idea of creating your own city(kinda like a Megaton) or something.
Then you could go through a some quest of putting it together. Finding materials, recruiting people like doctors, salesman, guards. And maybe a few defense missions.
Maybe even give you the option to be evil and create your own bandit group.
You know something I would love...and this is completely random and out of left field.
The ability to create your own "tribe" or group.
Like say as your name grows amongst the people, you start to get more fans/followers. Then someone comes to you with the idea of creating your own city(kinda like a Megaton) or something.
Then you could go through a some quest of putting it together. Finding materials, recruiting people like doctors, salesman, guards. And maybe a few defense missions.
Maybe even give you the option to be evil and create your own bandit group.
Mount and Blade: Wasteland?
I've never played that game.
But just because an idea has happened in one game doesn't mean you can't want to see it in another.
Heck, I was thinking of city sims when I was writing that all out.
0
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
Well considering there are minimum strength requirements to wield large guns anyway, dual wielding assault rifles or grenade launchers is going to require STR of 10 anyway. And there will undoubtedly be heavy accuracy penalties for dual-wielding two-handed weapons. No doubt you could dual-wield 10mm pistols, but a pair of automatic shotguns? How are you supposed to do that with any semblance of having the bullets go in the direction you want them to?
The STR requirements are from Obsidian, not sure if Bethesda will go with it.
Same with ammo weight, condensing big guns and small guns, etc. Hopefully they'll integrate most of it.
Would be nice if hardcore mode was built in from the start again.
I would expect the next Fallout game to follow the same path as Skyrim did compared to its predecessors in the Elder Scrolls series: reducing and consolidating the attributes and stats system dramatically. Would not be surprised to see the SPECIAL system axed in its entirety.
0
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
I would expect the next Fallout game to follow the same path as Skyrim did compared to its predecessors in the Elder Scrolls series: reducing and consolidating the attributes and stats system dramatically. Would not be surprised to see the SPECIAL system axed in its entirety.
Series needs to keep differentiating it's self from Skyrim. I enjoy the classic system of gaining XP and doling out the stats from there than i do the TES system.
There will be streamlining but hopefully the basic differences will stay intact. I've enjoyed each evolution the elder scrolls have taken over the years with much approval, curious to see what their idea of the future is for Fallout.
You know something I would love...and this is completely random and out of left field.
The ability to create your own "tribe" or group.
Like say as your name grows amongst the people, you start to get more fans/followers. Then someone comes to you with the idea of creating your own city(kinda like a Megaton) or something.
Then you could go through a some quest of putting it together. Finding materials, recruiting people like doctors, salesman, guards. And maybe a few defense missions.
Maybe even give you the option to be evil and create your own bandit group.
Mount and Blade: Wasteland?
I've never played that game.
But just because an idea has happened in one game doesn't mean you can't want to see it in another.
Heck, I was thinking of city sims when I was writing that all out.
...Who said I posted that to say that's a bad thing?
Did you know that I have 757 hours into Mount and Blade Warband?
I would love to see Fallout steal anything from Mount and Blade.
I confess, I never really care about the stories in Bethesda games. That's not why I'm there. I'm there to explore, and if the main storyline isn't pants on head dumb, that's a plus for me.
I'd like to see them introduce some really crazy tech if the MIT rumors pan out.
Yeah to be honest, I'd be just as happy if there really was no 'main' story, but rather just lots of little quests, stories, and jobs to partake in. A real sandbox game in other words, and the karma system could make a comeback so that you do build a reputation through your deeds. I'd like it to be a bit like Skyrim, where each hold or zone has their own opinion of you, with maybe a 'fame' stat that affected the overall world's opinion.
This would also make DLC easier to integrate, since they wouldn't need to worry about where in the storyline this stuff is supposed to happen, but could add more jobs, quests, etc... and if one or more of the DLCs has an actual storyline? Cool, since they tend to be a bit more compact. I would also, if we're making wishlists here, like it very much if all DLC wasn't completely unrelated to the main game the way most of them have tended to be (especially in New Vegas).
As for dual-wielding, I honestly have no idea why that wouldn't fit into the Fallout universe. It seems more likely a mechanical limitation than anything which, if Bethesda overcame it with Skyrim, I'm sure they could do it here.
I can't see them ever getting rid of the main quest in any of their games. I'm sure many of us in this thread would be fine without one, but a lot of players need an overarching objective to lead them around or they get bored.
I confess, I never really care about the stories in Bethesda games. That's not why I'm there. I'm there to explore, and if the main storyline isn't pants on head dumb, that's a plus for me.
I'd like to see them introduce some really crazy tech if the MIT rumors pan out.
Yeah to be honest, I'd be just as happy if there really was no 'main' story, but rather just lots of little quests, stories, and jobs to partake in. A real sandbox game in other words, and the karma system could make a comeback so that you do build a reputation through your deeds. I'd like it to be a bit like Skyrim, where each hold or zone has their own opinion of you, with maybe a 'fame' stat that affected the overall world's opinion.
This would also make DLC easier to integrate, since they wouldn't need to worry about where in the storyline this stuff is supposed to happen, but could add more jobs, quests, etc... and if one or more of the DLCs has an actual storyline? Cool, since they tend to be a bit more compact. I would also, if we're making wishlists here, like it very much if all DLC wasn't completely unrelated to the main game the way most of them have tended to be (especially in New Vegas).
As for dual-wielding, I honestly have no idea why that wouldn't fit into the Fallout universe. It seems more likely a mechanical limitation than anything which, if Bethesda overcame it with Skyrim, I'm sure they could do it here.
I can't see them ever getting rid of the main quest in any of their games. I'm sure many of us in this thread would be fine without one, but a lot of players need an overarching objective to lead them around or they get bored.
I actually think doing something similar to Fallout 1 works pretty well. A big objective like save this town gives you a lot of options on how to play, from heroic and dastardly actions to anywhere in-between. Fallout 3's find dad was a pretty good starting option, though having a father judging you messed with a lot of players and how they played.
My wishlist for Fallout 4 would be a return to isometric, fallout 1 style game with very limited voice acting and most of your interaction being done as text.
That will not fly in a 201X big-budget game. It simply will not.
Quirky indies on Steam? Sure. But the mass market? Console ports? Not gonna happen.
My wishlist for Fallout 4 would be a return to isometric, fallout 1 style game with very limited voice acting and most of your interaction being done as text.
That will not fly in a 201X big-budget game. It simply will not.
Quirky indies on Steam? Sure. But the mass market? Console ports? Not gonna happen.
Wasteland 2 is pretty good, why wait to be disappointed with a single character FPS Fallout 4? It's out already.
Fallout 3 and NV were a lot of people's first experience to the franchise, myself included. To go back to the traditional Fallout 1/2 style would like having the next GTA go back to the top down view of GTA 1&2.
That's not to say the style is bad, it just seems like it's a step backwards from a technological standpoint.
BrocksMulletInto the sunrise, on a jet-ski. Natch.Registered Userregular
As someone who played the original Fallout's when they were released, let me say that I do not miss the isometric perspective nor the combat system. The best thing about those games is the universe they created.
Advent rusing let you dual wield every gun, including rocket launchers and sniper rifles.
I would have enjoyed better integration of random stuff and towns interacting with each other. NV was better at it but fallout 3 seemed to forget that people traveled.
Some hydroponic facilities, greenhouses and better modeled farmland would satisfy me as well because there is no way that New Vegas was kept fed with that little bit of space.
Also, for way out there, let me change the color of blood and death animations in additions to ragdolling and spinning. I'm thinking random bandits bleeding silver blood and breaking into the robot before they explode.
As someone who played the original Fallout's when they were released, let me say that I do not miss the isometric perspective nor the combat system. The best thing about those games is the universe they created.
As someone who played the original Fallout's when they were released, let me say that I do not miss the isometric perspective nor the combat system. The best thing about those games is the universe they created.
That and the writing. Father Tully for life.
Which was accurately caried forward about as much as the isometric viewpoint and combat /NMA
0
BrocksMulletInto the sunrise, on a jet-ski. Natch.Registered Userregular
edited February 2015
That's true, New Vegas is more interesting than the originals.
The SPECIAL system was pretty straightforward as far as most stat systems go.
While the stat system for older Elder Scrolls games were kind of an obtuse mess and personally I wasn't sad to see them go.
Single player Fallout is S.P.E.C.I.A.L.
Get rid of the system, you get rid of the heart of the game.
The while reason it exists is because fallout wanted post apocalyptic rpg and d&d wouldn't accept their level of violence.
Er, the whole reason SPECIAL exists is because Steve Jackson Games and Interplay had some sort of falling out and the GURPS guts of Fallout 1 had to be switched to a new system, and SPECIAL is sort of like a weird red-headed stepchild of GURPS. Nothing to do with D&D or 'levels of violence'. Corporate cojones waving is the best bet.
Relevant excerpts from Steve Jackson behind the spoiler for those interested in the history.
February 12, 1997
Rumor Control about Interplay
Executive Summary: We wish we knew.
I had problems with a couple of features of the otherwise very impressive alpha version of GURPS Fallout. As I corresponded with Interplay staff about this, I got handed up the ladder but their responses remained puzzling -- and that is the most detail I'm going to give for now.
Just before leaving for Europe last week, I got a call from a reporter asking me to comment on the Interplay decision to drop GURPS. I told him this was the first I'd heard of it. Calling Interplay, and talking with the last man I'd corresponded with, I got first "We haven't decided that, where'd you hear it?," then "Well, we have been talking about it and somebody must have gotten the idea it was decided," and finally "Yes, we have decided to drop it, so sorry."
The statement on the Interplay web site, to the effect that this was a mutual decision of SJ Games and Interplay, is not true. Scott Haring tells me that no written correspondence from Interplay has YET been received at our office. We are not clear what their proposal to finish and release the game without the license entails, for us or for the game, and have absolutely not agreed to it.
I can't imagine how Interplay could take three years working on a GURPS. computer game, and then be able to create and install a completely dissimilar game engine in a few months. Nor have I read (or heard) any explanation of how they might plan to do that. So "no comment" on that for now, too.
I've been invited to meet with Brian Fargo, who I understand owns Interplay, when I'm in LA in a few days. I'll be very interested to see what he has to say. I hope we will be able to announce that this was a tempest in a teacup.
February 19, 1997
Steve's Back
Whoa, what a trip. And what a stack of e-mail to read last night.
Things seem to have gone very smoothly while I was away. I'm grateful to Scott, Kelly and the whole crew for making that happen.
OrcCon was great. Those of you who live in the Bay area should really check out this con and its sister events. It wasn't just a card game show -- as a matter of fact, the boardgame auction was far bigger and hotter than the card game auction.
Yes, I visited Interplay while I was on the West Coast. Marathon six-hour negotiating session with the programmer who is now in charge of the FALLOUT project. Clearly all the original problems could be resolved; I made a lot of concessions because I want to save the project. The GURPS implementation they've created is *worth* saving. But their decision won't be made by the programmers. All I can say is "wait and see."
It was a busy trip. Other computer deals, with other companies on other games, are in the works. More as it develops.
It's good to be back . . .
March 14, 1997
Interplay Update
I just got a phone call from my contact at Interplay, telling me that they were indeed dropping the GURPS system from the project which has been going forward as GURPS Fallout since 1994. Sigh.
The stated reason was that they were "too far along" with the process of deGURPSizing the game. I asked if I could get any of this in writing. He laughed. But he said he'd talk with others there and "see" if he could send me a letter.
He also stated that Interplay was still interested in starting a new game using the GURPS system, and I replied that I would look at a proposal. But the saying "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me" comes to mind.
I'll be at the Computer Game Developers Conference this April, and it looks like I'll have a lot to talk about with the companies represented there.
wasn't SPECIAL developed in like a weekend by one of the Fallout Devs after gurps fell through.
It less 'fell through' than it was 'stripped out'. For whatever reason, Interplay dropped GURPS and their relationship with SJG. Reading between the lines, it was a decision which had significant lead time on it, and was probably to get out of licensing fees. I'm sure there was some," Who's Steve Jackson and why are we paying him any money?," going on in the Interplay boardroom. In the end, SPECIAL's GURPS lineage is massively apparent. "Developed in a weekend" is more like "sanded off enough of GURPS so SJG couldn't sue Interplay".
As someone who played the original Fallout's when they were released, let me say that I do not miss the isometric perspective nor the combat system. The best thing about those games is the universe they created.
That and the writing. Father Tully for life.
Which was accurately caried forward about as much as the isometric viewpoint and combat /NMA
Let us not raise the specter of the forum that shall not be named.
Posts
I think a big problem from duel wielding would also come from early game, where you would eat through ammo stupidly fast, as well as be damaging two guns at once. I think that would be another thing that could keep it balanced early on, from a cost-benefit viewpoint.
I'd have to say that I vastly VATS-ly prefer the combat in Fallout 3 and NV. I'll have to deal with it though, because everything else about Fallout 1 was really interesting
Eventually, I promise, your character will stop missing that fucking rat one tile away from you.
The ability to create your own "tribe" or group.
Like say as your name grows amongst the people, you start to get more fans/followers. Then someone comes to you with the idea of creating your own city(kinda like a Megaton) or something.
Then you could go through a some quest of putting it together. Finding materials, recruiting people like doctors, salesman, guards. And maybe a few defense missions.
Maybe even give you the option to be evil and create your own bandit group.
I totally get why they do it. In a game where you can spend over 200 hours on a single run they don't want things getting stale.
Bloody mess combined with being a melee character and some VATS targeting of things like arms was always fun.
Give someone a dead arm so hard their entire body explodes in a shower of chunks and bits...
Mount and Blade: Wasteland?
Give me dual wielding explosives.
Yes, that's all I really want.
I've never played that game.
But just because an idea has happened in one game doesn't mean you can't want to see it in another.
Heck, I was thinking of city sims when I was writing that all out.
Same with ammo weight, condensing big guns and small guns, etc. Hopefully they'll integrate most of it.
Would be nice if hardcore mode was built in from the start again.
There will be streamlining but hopefully the basic differences will stay intact. I've enjoyed each evolution the elder scrolls have taken over the years with much approval, curious to see what their idea of the future is for Fallout.
The SPECIAL system was pretty straightforward as far as most stat systems go.
While the stat system for older Elder Scrolls games were kind of an obtuse mess and personally I wasn't sad to see them go.
...Who said I posted that to say that's a bad thing?
Did you know that I have 757 hours into Mount and Blade Warband?
I would love to see Fallout steal anything from Mount and Blade.
I can't see them ever getting rid of the main quest in any of their games. I'm sure many of us in this thread would be fine without one, but a lot of players need an overarching objective to lead them around or they get bored.
Steam: MightyPotatoKing
I actually think doing something similar to Fallout 1 works pretty well. A big objective like save this town gives you a lot of options on how to play, from heroic and dastardly actions to anywhere in-between. Fallout 3's find dad was a pretty good starting option, though having a father judging you messed with a lot of players and how they played.
That will not fly in a 201X big-budget game. It simply will not.
Quirky indies on Steam? Sure. But the mass market? Console ports? Not gonna happen.
Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
Wasteland 2 is pretty good, why wait to be disappointed with a single character FPS Fallout 4? It's out already.
That's not to say the style is bad, it just seems like it's a step backwards from a technological standpoint.
WoW
Dear Satan.....
Steam: BrocksMullet http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197972421669/
I would have enjoyed better integration of random stuff and towns interacting with each other. NV was better at it but fallout 3 seemed to forget that people traveled.
Some hydroponic facilities, greenhouses and better modeled farmland would satisfy me as well because there is no way that New Vegas was kept fed with that little bit of space.
Also, for way out there, let me change the color of blood and death animations in additions to ragdolling and spinning. I'm thinking random bandits bleeding silver blood and breaking into the robot before they explode.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
That and the writing. Father Tully for life.
Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
Which was accurately caried forward about as much as the isometric viewpoint and combat /NMA
Steam: BrocksMullet http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197972421669/
Single player Fallout is S.P.E.C.I.A.L.
Get rid of the system, you get rid of the heart of the game.
The while reason it exists is because fallout wanted post apocalyptic rpg and d&d wouldn't accept their level of violence.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
Er, the whole reason SPECIAL exists is because Steve Jackson Games and Interplay had some sort of falling out and the GURPS guts of Fallout 1 had to be switched to a new system, and SPECIAL is sort of like a weird red-headed stepchild of GURPS. Nothing to do with D&D or 'levels of violence'. Corporate cojones waving is the best bet.
Relevant excerpts from Steve Jackson behind the spoiler for those interested in the history.
February 12, 1997
Rumor Control about Interplay
Executive Summary: We wish we knew.
I had problems with a couple of features of the otherwise very impressive alpha version of GURPS Fallout. As I corresponded with Interplay staff about this, I got handed up the ladder but their responses remained puzzling -- and that is the most detail I'm going to give for now.
Just before leaving for Europe last week, I got a call from a reporter asking me to comment on the Interplay decision to drop GURPS. I told him this was the first I'd heard of it. Calling Interplay, and talking with the last man I'd corresponded with, I got first "We haven't decided that, where'd you hear it?," then "Well, we have been talking about it and somebody must have gotten the idea it was decided," and finally "Yes, we have decided to drop it, so sorry."
The statement on the Interplay web site, to the effect that this was a mutual decision of SJ Games and Interplay, is not true. Scott Haring tells me that no written correspondence from Interplay has YET been received at our office. We are not clear what their proposal to finish and release the game without the license entails, for us or for the game, and have absolutely not agreed to it.
I can't imagine how Interplay could take three years working on a GURPS. computer game, and then be able to create and install a completely dissimilar game engine in a few months. Nor have I read (or heard) any explanation of how they might plan to do that. So "no comment" on that for now, too.
I've been invited to meet with Brian Fargo, who I understand owns Interplay, when I'm in LA in a few days. I'll be very interested to see what he has to say. I hope we will be able to announce that this was a tempest in a teacup.
February 19, 1997
Steve's Back
Whoa, what a trip. And what a stack of e-mail to read last night.
Things seem to have gone very smoothly while I was away. I'm grateful to Scott, Kelly and the whole crew for making that happen.
OrcCon was great. Those of you who live in the Bay area should really check out this con and its sister events. It wasn't just a card game show -- as a matter of fact, the boardgame auction was far bigger and hotter than the card game auction.
Yes, I visited Interplay while I was on the West Coast. Marathon six-hour negotiating session with the programmer who is now in charge of the FALLOUT project. Clearly all the original problems could be resolved; I made a lot of concessions because I want to save the project. The GURPS implementation they've created is *worth* saving. But their decision won't be made by the programmers. All I can say is "wait and see."
It was a busy trip. Other computer deals, with other companies on other games, are in the works. More as it develops.
It's good to be back . . .
March 14, 1997
Interplay Update
I just got a phone call from my contact at Interplay, telling me that they were indeed dropping the GURPS system from the project which has been going forward as GURPS Fallout since 1994. Sigh.
The stated reason was that they were "too far along" with the process of deGURPSizing the game. I asked if I could get any of this in writing. He laughed. But he said he'd talk with others there and "see" if he could send me a letter.
He also stated that Interplay was still interested in starting a new game using the GURPS system, and I replied that I would look at a proposal. But the saying "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me" comes to mind.
I'll be at the Computer Game Developers Conference this April, and it looks like I'll have a lot to talk about with the companies represented there.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
It less 'fell through' than it was 'stripped out'. For whatever reason, Interplay dropped GURPS and their relationship with SJG. Reading between the lines, it was a decision which had significant lead time on it, and was probably to get out of licensing fees. I'm sure there was some," Who's Steve Jackson and why are we paying him any money?," going on in the Interplay boardroom. In the end, SPECIAL's GURPS lineage is massively apparent. "Developed in a weekend" is more like "sanded off enough of GURPS so SJG couldn't sue Interplay".
Let us not raise the specter of the forum that shall not be named.