Well, quite frankly, I'm aware of the large number of threads being open regarding Fallout MMORPG, but this has an actual meaning. I have a few questions that I do not want, but sincerely need answered. I also want to have a bit of a moan and get some points around. But anyway, here it goes.

Basically, the release of an actual Multiplayer edition of the award winning Fallout game had started off as rumours, and from what I here there is now full confirmation that it will be released. But, an answer I've been longing to know is will it be tactical or FPS (First/Third Person). Yes, that is my only question, but I'm going to give my opinions. Fallout 1 & 2, not bad for it's time, to be honest I think it's changed the way portray MMORPG's. It has also inspired other MMORPG's from what I hear, but then again, who am I to talk? I've only played it once briefly. But Fallout 3, it's not at all my type of game, but I have to say Fallout 3 was no doubt, one of the best games I had ever played! Personally, I'm a fan of games such as Grand Theft Auto, Saints Row, and good old FPS's. But I have to say, Fallout 3 alone is probably better than GTA IV, and GTA SA combined (Fallout 3 has a short story line and limited side-quests, but then again the gameplay is endless and always enjoyable!) I've been gaming since the Nintendo Entertainment System, I have many classics, I'm close to owning every NES game, not to mention that I have the best 64, SEGA, Atari and so on games. I also have a lot of great Playstation, Xbox, PC & Wii games just to prove that I'm not stuck in a 1980's dimension.

Now, honestly, hand on heart, I've played many games, I've lost count of each game I've played/owned and out of all those games, Fallout 3 has been one of the top 3 games I've ever played. It's next generation, it's the perfect game everybody's been waiting for, it's only problem is interaction, story and action. Apart from that, as you can see the game play is magnificent.

A game I also enjoy; the Unofficial Multiplayer extension to GTA: San Andreas. Grand Theft Auto San Andreas (Single Player), that wasn't one of the best games I've seen, It probably reaches number 13 in the best game I've played, pretty far from Fallout 3. It has limited options, it has constant missions, poor story line that makes absolutely no sense, literally the same as the previous two series (Just some edits and you play as a black guy who can swim, not to mention the fact that I actually can mod GTA TXD's & DFF's so making CJ was not a large installation). Now the Multiplayer, 1000 hours at least, one of the best games I've played, I'm not bored of it yet and I've been playing it for 3 and a half years. 3 and a half years, that's the most time I've spent playing a game probably. It used a Scripting language called 'Pawno', which you can change within the game. I usually play Roleplay Servers where you take a role as any type of person, making your way through the city, earning money, joining organizations etc. Not to mention that 'RP' is civilized, therefore you must act as it's similar to reality, meaning you cannot randomly go up to someone and say "hey u a noob i kell you"

Look, my point is rumours are that gamesas invested $70 million dollars into the MMORPG, and if it's tactical, it won't really be next-gen gaming, since it will have similarities to a game that was released in 1997. In my opinion, it will be successful of course, but not as successful as it could be. On the other hand, make it similar to Fallout 3, that would be the best game ever played. The possibilities would be endless, it would make the perfect game, you can do so much in Single Player that Multiplayer would be, well just insane. Heck, who even says "Make a game like Fallout 3, but start from scratch", as far as I'm concerned, use the majority of Fallout 3's coding, same map, environment etc, customizable character of different races, that would do great. It would even have millions of players. (By the way, I know I'll most likely get unnecessary comments, and no, I do not mean having 98 Million people in DC and the Capital Wasteland, there's something called a server you know)

Having a tactical game, it would be popular, it would make profit, no doubt. But it would not be what most gamers are looking for. That's all.

and if it's tactical, it won't really be next-gen gaming, since it will have similarities to a game that was released in 1997

What defines "next-gen gaming" ?

Not to get into non-gamesas games too much, but FO3 didn't do anything that wasn't done at least a decade prior. As far as hybrid FPS/RPG's go I'd say it falls far short of the benchmark set by Dues Ex (June 2000) imo, and I don't think it was any more innovative or revolutionary than System Shock (1994).

And first person perspective is older than dirt and in no way is it "next-gen"

Next-gen is just a buzzword. If the bells and whistles are up to date then it's next gen.

I think it'd be interesting to play an MMO with JA2 level combat complexity while controlling only 1 character in real time. That'd be pretty next gen I think.

uhm ... just to clear this up as i don't think you realize this:

the fallout IP was created by gamesas.

they made Fallout 1 & 2 as well as Fallout tactics and the "brotherhood of steel" line of isometric action games.

then gamesas hit a hard spot and virtually closed down. to generate some cash flow gamesas licensed Bethesda(TM) to make fallout 3. how ever that wasn't enough income to get the company back on its feet, so then they sold the Fallout IP to Bethesda(TM) for a goodly amount of money and the agreement that gamesas would develop and produce a Fallout MMO. now this was a few years ago and many things have changed with in both companies. Fallout 3 was released with much critical acclaim and financial success (IMO) prompting some people who were not originally involved with initial transaction between Bethesda(TM) and gamesas to to re-evaluate the contract and have found (what they believe) fault with how gamesas has held up there end of it.

currently the contract between gamesas and Bethesda(TM) is in legal review, how ever the Fallout MMO is carrying on and gamesas has stated they they have no intention of stopping it unless the legal review dictates that it has to.

that said: relations between gamesas and Bethesda(TM) are rather strained right now, but in the interest of professionalism gamesas has asked that this issue not be further discussed on the gamesas forums.

even before all the legal "issues" this forum is "gamesas's forums" for discussion about "gamesas's games" many people misunderstand that Fallout 3 is not an "gamesas game" and start to discuss it, only to have the thread locked. hay, "OC" ..... i got something for ya right here! _|_ (^.^) _|_


"MMO-RPG" = "Mass Market Oriented - Repetitive Profit Genera"
- damned things still svcked me in ...

To me it sounds like your raving mad and got no idea on what you are talking about. Fallout has only been a singleplayer, but Van Buren was going to have an online option.
It sounds like you are drunk AND talking about a different francise.

Fallout 3 has been one of the top 3 games I've ever played. It's next generation, it's the perfect game everybody's been waiting for, it's only problem is interaction, story and action. Apart from that, as you can see the game play is magnificent.

The interaction was weak, and the story svcked. The action was nice, the problem was that you where a walking God when you walked out of Vault 101.
The worst part was that they buthered away the SPECIAL and nerfed all skills to about useless. A good example was that Charisma become a dump stat and Luck was the most powerfull stat.
The worst part was the transformation into the happygoland which made no sense whatsoever.

But it would not be what most gamers are looking for.

Gamers want:
*Challange
*Balance
*Immersion
*A proper story
*Working grapics

gamesas is capabel of doing atleast 4/5 of those points, where Beth only managed to nail about 2 of em.

Gamers want:
*Challange
*Balance
*Immersion
*A proper story
*Working grapics

gamesas is capabel of doing atleast 4/5 of those points, where Beth only managed to nail about 2 of em.

I think Iply could easily get all 5 things. The unholy ones only get one...and thats for graphics.

If you think that the last iteration of fallout was one of the best games ever rated then i have to question what you think makes a game great. Being able to complete in like 2 hours? Being a god at the begining? A large Map with areas that have no purpose except to flood you with easily killed enemies?

Making V13 like FO3 would be the one thing that would make me not purchase it.

Having a tactical game, it would be popular, it would make profit, no doubt. But it would not be what most gamers are looking for. That's all.

How do you know what most gamers are looking for or not looking for?
You cant just say something like that as if you have some ice-cold facts.
And what do you mean by 'tactical' game? Do you mean isometric view?

And all that other bullshit you wrote, all that talk about how cool F3 was and how you didn't play F1 / F2 much at all, dude; gamesas made F1 and F2, not F3, so they cant and hopefully will not try to copy F3. If Project V13 ends up anything like F3 I'm not gonna buy it, I'm not even gonna download it.

Please play Fallout 1 and 2 from start to end, then do it all over again, then you can compare those two games with Fallout 3. PC specs:
CPU: Intel i7-920 @ 2.66GHz
RAM: Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1333MHz CL9-9-9-24 (12GB)
GFX: Gainward Radeon HD 4870X2 2GB
MB: Asus P6T Deluxe V2, X58
GPU: Corsair Power supply 750W Black
Case: Antec Twelve Hundred
Monitor: BenQ 24" E2400HD

Having a tactical game, it would be popular, it would make profit, no doubt. But it would not be what most gamers are looking for. That's all.

Hmmm you know why I agree with others when they say the next fall of the video game industry is around the corner? Cause of the fact that players think there should be "ONLY ONE FORM OF GAMEPLAY" and that is all there is to it! Well this is where you are totally wrong if you think FPS is the way to play. As far as graphics go and point of view, I still to this day love side scrolling games. Yes they are still out there by some of the brave companies to continue to release them.

The thing is video games is like music. You have a diverse genre system or at least that's what we are suppose to be seeing in the video game industry. Yet everything is moving towards FPS and as it was stated before it is truly by far not "next-gen" as FPS has been around since 1973 (Maze War). So why are we seeing the linearity of genres through sub-genres?

I'd like to find high quality published games of FPS, RPG, Action, ect in every possible point of view. I want to see side scrolling games, isometric, etc. Cause its the diversity that gamers had that made playing them that much more enjoyable! And as for "next-gen" as my room mate pointed out after me showing him Maze War he said, "Wow and 3d games haven't changed much since then." Then continued to say, "We just have more color (and texture) and more detail." This is very well true.

So if you are stuck in FPS or even stuck in RPG how about switching roles one time and give it shot! You know, you may just like what you get your hands on. Allow your library of games to grow and be very diverse as the meaning of games was never to pit players against each other in rude arguments of which genre is better. The true meaning of games was to let everyone have fun!
I told the Overseer of Vault 13 I'd give everything to save everyone, and so I did, I saved them all. Since then I've felt loneliness.