Bethesda Claims Interplay Wants to "Undermine" Fallout

[TornadoADV]

Honestly if interplay is doing that its pretty dickish of them. Bethesda made fallout 3, dont be sour and try to undermine it just because you were not allowed to make your own fallout 3. I'm with bethesda on this one.

Uh, they were allowed to make their own Fallout 3 (Obsidian Entertainment from Black Isle, the guys who made Fallout 2), it's called Fallout New Vegas. You know, the ACTUAL Fallout 3 that follows the Van Bueren design documents to nearly a T. But as previously stated these two Interplays are not the same and no pity should be felt for this Interplay.

 

[Kenko]

Brotherhood of Steel... Heck, I wanted to slit my wrists when I saw the trailer to that garbage. Fallout Tactics was a decent game, it wasnt bad imo. And the two first games are the best Turn-based RPG's ive played to date. While I disliked Fallout 3 for failing at the setting, I did love how it made the franchise more modernised. F:NV went back to Fallouts roots with its quirky humour and easter-eggs as well as making a more challanging game , I.E you are not Mr.Super McMuffin from the get go. Seriously, I wanted to rape Bethesda for makng Supermutants so patheticly weak and Power Armour useless. F3 was pretty non-canon on most things but had a decent story and setting but a poor execution of it.

Buuut back OT: Interplay of the past, we love you, but you are dead. Interplay of today? Fuck you, die in a fire you retards.

 

[SemiHumanTarget]

If it is a completely different genre of game, with a story that absolutely contradicts the established canon of the franchise, does it really deserve to carry the name of that franchise?

While perhaps not a deliberate attempt at undermining Bethesda's work, it seems clear as day that Interplay is trying to ride on the success of the Fallout name while pushing a completely different product. I won't go so far as to call that nefarious, but it's certainly dishonest.

I don't know what the legal precedent is here, but I would venture to guess that copyright law is a complicated, ugly beast. I wouldn't be surprised if Bethesda came out ahead on this one.

 

[Strazdas]

I'll boil it down to the facts.

1. Interplay is not the Interplay we knew. Don't mourn what may happen to this Interplay - They're not who you think they are.
2. Bethesda are being dicks, but not without reason.
3. Interplay are in no shape to create, finance and run an MMO. The amount they're borrowing and the frequency of their near-bankruptcies should make that clear.
4. Interplay sold the rights to Bethesda, and in Interplay's hands the Fallout franchise would undoutably either be lost to the mists of time or fail in a non-spectacular fashion.
5. Bethesda have, and will, continue to use the license for "good". Getting Obsidian (The remnants of the original developers for Fallout) to do New Vegas should be near enough proof of that.
6. Interplay needs to die. Now.

I happen to completely agree with this. Interplay was a great company. the key word is "was". it is nothing but a zombie now and has to go away.

 

[craddoke]

Wait - can someone really claim that undermining established continuity in a fictional setting is an offense worthy of a lawsuit?

That's baloney - and if it's not, let me be the first to suggest a class-action lawsuit against George Lucas.

George Lucas owns the rights to the Star Wars franchise, so you can't really sue him for doing bad things with it. Bethesda owns the Fallout Franchise now, so they can actually sue Interplay for undermining and misuse of their property.

I was just being silly with the George Lucas thing - mostly because I think Bethesda is being silly with their lawsuit (about this issue alone, mind - not other copyright infringement issues surrounding this MMO). You cannot prove to me that continuity matters or that the particulars of a fictional setting constitute "brand identity". This is grasping at straws, regardless of the Interplay's motives and Bethesda's rights to Fallout assets (which are completely different issues).

If Interplay has the rights to Fallout (an open question, of course), then it is ridiculous to argue that they can't write any story they want and call it Fallout (assuming they're not using assets for which they lack rights) even if the resulting story is complete crap and/or makes no sense in relation to Bethesda's work on Fallout.

 

[Chris^^]

well I'm unlikely to ever play the game, but as a Fallout fan I don't like the idea of them fucking over Fallout 3..

 

[Fusioncode9]

5. Bethesda have, and will, continue to use the license for "good". Getting Obsidian (The remnants of the original developers for Fallout) to do New Vegas should be near enough proof of that.

Prepare to be assaulted by a horde of people decrying your statement because apparently New Vegas should've never seen daylight.

Bugs be damned, Obsidian did a really good job on that one. Set a new bar to sandbox narratives.

It's not that New Vegas shouldn't have been released, just not yet. It needed a lot more testing.

 

[ChupathingyX]

Interplay is not the same and they need to go away.

That being said I do not support Bethesda, the only good thing they did was let Obsidian make New Vegas which was what Fallout 3 should've been.

Fallout 3 was like a kid who just found his dad's shotgun.

 

[INeedAName]

I'll boil it down to the facts.

1. Interplay is not the Interplay we knew. Don't mourn what may happen to this Interplay - They're not who you think they are.
2. Bethesda are being dicks, but not without reason.
3. Interplay are in no shape to create, finance and run an MMO. The amount they're borrowing and the frequency of their near-bankruptcies should make that clear.
4. Interplay sold the rights to Bethesda, and in Interplay's hands the Fallout franchise would undoutably either be lost to the mists of time or fail in a non-spectacular fashion.
5. Bethesda have, and will, continue to use the license for "good". Getting Obsidian (The remnants of the original developers for Fallout) to do New Vegas should be near enough proof of that.
6. Interplay needs to die. Now.

Wow, quick and accurate, kudos to you! I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment.

 

[INeedAName]

1. When Bethesda bought the Fallout franchise, Interplay retained the right to create an MMO and they should be allowed to do this. It doesn't matter if the same people don't work there and it doesn't matter if they are a completely different company - in the eyes of the law they are one and the same.
2. I agree to an extent, they obviously feel they are protecting their own investment but they should also either abide by their original agreement or create a new one in which they buy Interplay out of the MMO. Might be cheaper than legal fees.
3. It isn't really relevant whether or not Interplay is able to create and maintain an MMO (although previous rulings indicate that they are, in fact, well into the process of creation), they still have the right to do so.
4. Lost to the mists of time? That's a bit dramatic, especially when you can pick up both original Fallout titles on GOG or anywhere else online (which is also something Bethesda tried to prevent Interplay from doing). Even if you're correct, would it matter? Bethesda could have easily started their own post-apocalyptic franchise, but they decided to purchase the ability to use an established franchise for the purposes of name recognition and they allowed Interplay to retain the right to create an MMO. They didn't have to do that.
5. Since you surrounded the word good with quotation marks, I'll assume you mean 'good' is a matter of perspective. From Interplay's point of view, I imagine they also believe they are trying to make 'good' by the franchise.
6. I'm not clear on your last point - are you calling for the death of Interplay because they are in poor financial straights, they aren't making a product you want on the market, or both? If that were the litmus test for business, I can think of many companies who would have gone extinct long ago.

1: They rettained the right to make a Fallout MMO, but Bethesda bought the fallout universe, copyrighted material, story, characters etc. this means Interplay can create a Fallout MMO set in the fallout universe, but by the dictations and guidelines set by Bethesda, who owns the rights and content of that universe.
3er section 2.3 of the Trademark Licensing Agreement, a condition on Interplay's part was to have ?secured financing,? to develop a Fallout MMO.

 

[robinkom]

Just let it go. You sold the IP and you can't have it back

Oh they can have it back...for one BAZILLION DOLLARS!

Oh snap! Better sell off Earthworm Jim and a few first born children then!

 

[Aureliano]

(Youtube clips snipped)
Sorry but unleashing that abomination [BoS] on to the world is just unforgivable. Interplay had their chance with the Fallout franchise and they blew it out of the stratosphere. And I sincerely hope Bethesda does everything in their power to prevent another tragedy like that from occurring.

Edit: Looking through the thread I'm glad I'm not the only one who remembers Brotherhood of Steel. Never forget people. Never forget.

Ya know, I was initially going to side with Interplay on this considering that Black Isle created the fallout lore no matter who 'owns', in whatever legalese they want to put it, the rights to the game. But for purely practical reasons, BoS looked fucking terrible and there's no reason the people who made that game should be put in charge of making anything Fallout anymore.

That being said if it was OBSIDIAN versus Bethesda, then Bethesda could bite me regardless of who wanted to say they owned the rights to Fallout. But that's not the case here.

 

[Mauricio Guerra]

Ok, I'm not about to pretend I have a full understanding of this matter. After all, my expertise is in Psychology and Anthropology...I am not a fan of the legal system, especially intellectual property rights.

But this is what I can grasp from all this:
1) Interplay(Black Isle) sold the IP to Bethesda, with the stipulation of retaining rights to an MMO.
2) Bethesda/Obsidian added the stipulation that Interplay has use of the NAME Fallout only, no other trademarks and franchise materials.
3) Bethesda/Obsidian have put out 2 full games and about 7 DLC packs continuing the established franchise canon.
4) Interplay is using vault boy and other trademarks in their advertising.

The way I see, Interplay has the right to use the name only, therefore they can't use anything from the original franchise including the non-canon crap from Tactics.
BUT it has use of the name, so theoretically, couldn't they create anything they want as long as it doesn't infringe upon the established franchise trademarks?
Bethesda can't argue about being undermined if Interplay goes out and makes a game which is explicitly not a continuation of any of the other Fallouts.

Hell, Interplay could put out an MMO about breaking up with your partner and having to put up with the repercussions of the break-up and call it FALLOUT. As long as it doesn't refer explicitly or implicitly back to the established IP franchise and its trademarks, they would be clear, no?

The only thing I do fault Interplay for is using old Fallout material in their promotions. It leads the consumer to believe that this is all part of the established canon and franchise, hell, even I found it amusing and a bit nostalgic when I went to the website to sign up for the beta and saw references to the Master, and Harold and the Vault Boy.

 

[archabaddon]

My 2 cents:

Back in the 90s, Interplay had it's crap together. They made some great games, like that Star Trek game I enjoyed and the Fallout series.

Sadly, fast forward two decades later, and that's hardly the case anymore. A shell of its former self, they sold one of the few things it had going for itself - the Fallout IP - to keep itself afloat.

In comes Bethesda, and although their Fallout games are still filled with bugs, they took that IP they purchased and ran with it. And made (so far) a couple of games that won several awards. Whether you agree with the direction they took the game or not, you can't argue with awards.

Now, however, it seems as though Interplay is trying to capitalize on the success and IP of another studio. Certainly, the company (well, those that worked there at the time) created the IP in the first place, but Interplay sold it for some quick cash; whether they regret that choice now or not is irrelevant. Bethesda paid for the IP, and they have the say in what happens with it.

IMPO, Bethesda (asa company) is being a bit dickish, but rightfully so. Being the IP holders, Interplay should be playing by Bethesda's dictate of the IP. Anything less is just unfair to Bethesda, who already paid a good sum of money to have the IP in the first place.

 

[velcrokidneyz]

5. Bethesda have, and will, continue to use the license for "good". Getting Obsidian (The remnants of the original developers for Fallout) to do New Vegas should be near enough proof of that.

Prepare to be assaulted by a horde of people decrying your statement because apparently New Vegas should've never seen daylight.

Bugs be damned, Obsidian did a really good job on that one. Set a new bar to sandbox narratives.

New vegas is one of my favorites if not my favorite game of all time, i have had a cpl issues but nothing game breaking. A lot of gamers should be less picky, yes there are issues but they are fixing them and the new dlcs hvae been quite good.

 

[MR.Spartacus]

I'll boil it down to the facts.

1. Interplay is not the Interplay we knew. Don't mourn what may happen to this Interplay - They're not who you think they are.
2. Bethesda are being dicks, but not without reason.
3. Interplay are in no shape to create, finance and run an MMO. The amount they're borrowing and the frequency of their near-bankruptcies should make that clear.
4. Interplay sold the rights to Bethesda, and in Interplay's hands the Fallout franchise would undoutably either be lost to the mists of time or fail in a non-spectacular fashion.
5. Bethesda have, and will, continue to use the license for "good". Getting Obsidian (The remnants of the original developers for Fallout) to do New Vegas should be near enough proof of that.
6. Interplay needs to die. Now.

Didn't they get bought by Titus? As in the chumps what made Superman/Carmageddon on N64? After BoS and the dissolution of Black Isle they deserve to go Tango Uniform for good. I mean really after forcing out shite no one wanted and canceling their only profitable venture... they deserve it.

 

[Podunk]

I just want to play a Fallout MMO. And I would like it to be good. That is what I want.

 

[UnravThreads]

Didn't they get bought by Titus? As in the chumps what made Superman/Carmageddon on N64? After BoS and the dissolution of Black Isle they deserve to go Tango Uniform for good. I mean really after forcing out shite no one wanted and canceling their only profitable venture... they deserve it.

Sorta. Just going off Wonkipedia here. They exercised a majority interest in Interplay in 2000, and named one of the Caen Brothers the CEO after effectively forcing Brian Fargo to leave (He then went and formed inXile Entertainment two years later).