Interplay Claims It Could Take Back Fallout
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The Interplay guys in the interview sound like a bunch of three year olds, it's ours, fallout all belong to us! Ok crazy man... settle down...
Interplay should just crawl off and die. They did nothing with the supposed MMO until they saw that Bethesda made a boatload of money, and now they want to cash in too. There's nothing wrong with that in and of itself, but they don't really have a plan, aside from some drawings and whatnot. Interplay should go find another company to ruin, Fallout is flourishing in spite of them.
I feel for Interplay, but honestly they need to let it go. As others are saying, Interplay was all too ready to hand out its franchises and assets to anyone who could pay, but now they realize they've sold the golden goose and are suddenly scrambling to get anything out of it they can.
Its not like an Interplay-made Fallout MMO would be any good. They simply don't have the money or resources to build or maintain one. It would inevitably be a cheap cash-in on Fallout's current popularity.
Its not like an Interplay-made Fallout MMO would be any good. They simply don't have the money or resources to build or maintain one. It would inevitably be a cheap cash-in on Fallout's current popularity.
Forget Call of Duty 4.3, this is real world modern warfare.
Legal battles over control of vital resources...in this case, a brand name.
Knowing what I do know about contract law, Bethesda cannot possibly "refund" the value of the Fallout IP (because it has changed. Namely, it has increased in value, tremendously.) so the sale will have to be revoked completely if they fail to let Interplay do their MMO (unless Bethesda can prove Interplay violated the contract first, which changes Bethesda's action from a violation to one of legal necessity).
Due to the nature of the case, I seriously doubt either side will settle out of court, so the war over the brand name continues.
Ethically, it is my opinion that neither side is "innocent" here (based on the previous legal engagements and court records). Economically, I'm convinced that a Fallout based MMORPG would fail, due to the nature of the setting (post-apocalyptic isolation isn't so isolated when there are THOUSANDS of players running around the same area) and because it has to compete directly with WoW (and later, possibly Star Wars:TOR, assuming WoW doesn't smother it to death too).
Legal battles over control of vital resources...in this case, a brand name.
Knowing what I do know about contract law, Bethesda cannot possibly "refund" the value of the Fallout IP (because it has changed. Namely, it has increased in value, tremendously.) so the sale will have to be revoked completely if they fail to let Interplay do their MMO (unless Bethesda can prove Interplay violated the contract first, which changes Bethesda's action from a violation to one of legal necessity).
Due to the nature of the case, I seriously doubt either side will settle out of court, so the war over the brand name continues.
Ethically, it is my opinion that neither side is "innocent" here (based on the previous legal engagements and court records). Economically, I'm convinced that a Fallout based MMORPG would fail, due to the nature of the setting (post-apocalyptic isolation isn't so isolated when there are THOUSANDS of players running around the same area) and because it has to compete directly with WoW (and later, possibly Star Wars:TOR, assuming WoW doesn't smother it to death too).
There already was a post-apocalyptic MMO, and it was awesome. Too bad no-one plays it.uppitycracker said:
Like when you childishly called a kid dying a moron for a reason that the article stated a few times might not be the exact cause of death?Kenko said:
I dislike these cases. I'd like to side with one side or another but am permenantly aware of the fact that who's right will come down to some line in a document I'll likely never see and wouldn't understand if I did. Does it really take this long to read a document and come up with a ruling for a team of legal professionals?
According to the timeline Interplay has until April 2012 to finish the game and so Interplay is still keeping up their end of the bargain.manaman said:
The initial problem was the time frame to START the game, not complete it. They were supposed to start by April 2009, which they did (actually started in April 2008), but Bethesda said "It's not started enough" and tried taking the rights back which the courts denied them, agreeing with Interplay that the game was far enough along to be considered "started".
Interplay now has 4 years from the time of the start date to release the game. 4 years from April 2008 would be in April 2012 which is currently the expected release time. Whether Interplay will actually meet that date or not, who knows?
Almost all of Black Isle Studios split with some staying at Interplay and some forming Obsidian. Of course Interplay haven't made anything good in years and Obsidian have never made anything that wasn't broken, buggy and over ambitious. Leave Fallout with Bethesda.
Also the last Fallout game by Interplay was the 360 game "Brotherhood of Steel". Which sucked big dino balls.
Also the last Fallout game by Interplay was the 360 game "Brotherhood of Steel". Which sucked big dino balls.
which one? i remember reading about one a while back that really caught my attention but i can't remember what it was.Cyberjester said:
