Vault Dweller
Commissar, Red Star Studio
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2003
- Messages
- 28,024
<a href=http://www.nma-fallout.com>NMA</a> has posted <a href=http://www.nma-fallout.com/article.php?id=34629>the second part</a> of their award-winning story of honor and faggotry.
<blockquote>It is impossible to say what would have followed Van Buren had it been completed and released as Fallout 3. But it is interesting that this case can be directly compared to Bethesda. The key factor is that Bethesda has shown little willingness to communicate and revealed only bits of, mostly negative, information. This has led to a reciprocal relationship between Bethesda and the community. Bethesda does not give the fans a chance for input in the game’s development, so the fans will not give Bethesda a chance to prove themselves. The chances given to Van Buren are denied to Bethesda's Fallout 3.
But this assessment is unfair for the very reason that Fallout 3 has not yet attempted to prove itself. To draw up a reasonable prediction of the future one must look over the several cases of development and reaction that we've seen. We've seen "good game, shitty setting" with Tactics. We've seen "I'll kill you!" with Brotherhood of Steel. We've seen "I don't agree with you but damn this game has some promise" with Van Buren. Bethesda can choose any of these paths and the reaction will likely be the same as they were before.</blockquote>:honor:
<blockquote>Failure to live up to these expectations, constraints and values can easily kill a franchise. X-Com was a popular franchise in part because UFO Defense and Terror from the Deep were games that shared common elements. The central tenets of the first game were well received by the game's fans and the developer remained determined to keep the series alive in the follow up in ways consistent with fan expectations. This led to the creation of a viable and successful franchise. The franchise was struck a blow with a modified combat system and a reformed style introduced in the third game, Apocalypse. But although the franchise was struck hard by the developer's failure to adhere to the games' tenants, it was not yet down. The killing blow to this wildly popular franchise came in the one-two punch of Interceptor and Enforcer. Interceptor hit first by being overtly campy and poorly designed, resulting in low sales figures. Enforcer killed the franchise by being completely disconnected from the first two games in gaming style and gameplay.</blockquote>I still can't believe that someone was stupid enough to kill XCOM. It just doesn't compute and makes me want to kill people Commander Shepard-style.
Thanks, Kharn and Jiujitsu.
<blockquote>It is impossible to say what would have followed Van Buren had it been completed and released as Fallout 3. But it is interesting that this case can be directly compared to Bethesda. The key factor is that Bethesda has shown little willingness to communicate and revealed only bits of, mostly negative, information. This has led to a reciprocal relationship between Bethesda and the community. Bethesda does not give the fans a chance for input in the game’s development, so the fans will not give Bethesda a chance to prove themselves. The chances given to Van Buren are denied to Bethesda's Fallout 3.
But this assessment is unfair for the very reason that Fallout 3 has not yet attempted to prove itself. To draw up a reasonable prediction of the future one must look over the several cases of development and reaction that we've seen. We've seen "good game, shitty setting" with Tactics. We've seen "I'll kill you!" with Brotherhood of Steel. We've seen "I don't agree with you but damn this game has some promise" with Van Buren. Bethesda can choose any of these paths and the reaction will likely be the same as they were before.</blockquote>:honor:
<blockquote>Failure to live up to these expectations, constraints and values can easily kill a franchise. X-Com was a popular franchise in part because UFO Defense and Terror from the Deep were games that shared common elements. The central tenets of the first game were well received by the game's fans and the developer remained determined to keep the series alive in the follow up in ways consistent with fan expectations. This led to the creation of a viable and successful franchise. The franchise was struck a blow with a modified combat system and a reformed style introduced in the third game, Apocalypse. But although the franchise was struck hard by the developer's failure to adhere to the games' tenants, it was not yet down. The killing blow to this wildly popular franchise came in the one-two punch of Interceptor and Enforcer. Interceptor hit first by being overtly campy and poorly designed, resulting in low sales figures. Enforcer killed the franchise by being completely disconnected from the first two games in gaming style and gameplay.</blockquote>I still can't believe that someone was stupid enough to kill XCOM. It just doesn't compute and makes me want to kill people Commander Shepard-style.
Thanks, Kharn and Jiujitsu.