Originally posted by Binko

Fallout 3 are like Avatar. Both sell a lot and thats why they get awards. But how good are they?

Fallout 3 have the same look like the old games, but for me it was not real Fallout.

Avatar... god I hate that movie... without all the special crap effects it's nothing... media brainwashed people so much... sad, sad.

I say Interplay!

Avatar was never intended to have a mind-blowing plot only  mind-blowing CGI. The plot is nothing new, but the craftsmanship  of the movie was what made it brilliant.

The same goes for Fallout 3, the storyline and plot wasn't anything new, it was pretty similar to Oblivion when you striped it to the bare bones. But Fallout 3's delivery was what made it so good. Interplay's original Fallout and the sequel were good, they were deep and interesting don't get me wrong, but Bethesda created a much better game. I actually found the storyline to be a little more interesting, it wasn't as deep but it kept me a little more intrigued than 1 and 2.

With all that in mind, and Interplay's current state, I would say Bethesda should be doing it. I just don't think Interplay can deliver the goods.

Interplay is only a shadow what it once was, most of the successful titles were all made by Black Isle (now Obsidian) and Bioware, when they closed it down (Black Isle) right before Fallout 3 (Van Buren Project) they lost pretty much every value they once had.

I am exited to see the continuation of the original crew with Fallout New Vegas.

Originally posted by -aLpHa-

Interplay is only a shadow what it once was, most of the successful titles were all made by Black Isle (now Obsidian) and Bioware, when they closed it down (Black Isle) right before Fallout 3 (Van Buren Project) they lost pretty much every value they once had.

I am exited to see the continuation of the original crew with Fallout New Vegas.

I agree. I really liked Fallout 3. I thought it really did the original titles justice, however, some important thematic elements, and game-play features that were in the original two were lacking in the Bethesda installment. I would like to see a game  with the totally open-ended elements from the first two games. I also agree with the OP's assertion that F3 was too much about "alignment" one was. I think that Interplay COULD'VE made a great MMO back when they were still working closely with Black Isle, but I'm not sure that they will be able to pull it off. That being said, Fallen Earth is very close in theme to the Fallout series and I think that it is a great game for those who crave a post-apocalyptic game. I still have Fallout 1, 2, 3 and FE available to me :) 

Originally posted by -aLpHa-

Interplay is only a shadow what it once was, most of the successful titles were all made by Black Isle (now Obsidian) and Bioware, when they closed it down (Black Isle) right before Fallout 3 (Van Buren Project) they lost pretty much every value they once had.

I am exited to see the continuation of the original crew with Fallout New Vegas.

/agree
 

Interplay hasn't released a good game in the last decade, and they are having financial problems.  Bethesda has released some of the best RPGs of the last decade, and they are one of the few gaming companies that is financially sound.

Some people don't seem to realize Fallout 2 was released in 1998.  Interplay is not anywhere near the same company as they were in 98.

I don't really see how anyone can lean towards Interplay, unless you just don't want Bethesda to lose production time on single player games.

I want the Interplay who made the first two fallouts to make Fallout: The MMO. BUT that ain't going to happen, those people long since moved on.

Worse, the audience has moved on. Part of the reason Fallout 1-2 were so much more open was because they were so much more simple. It is far easier and cheaper to draw a 2D world in low detail then draw a 3D world in high detail. Some thing as simple as the grove would have looked far simpler in the old games, and so the dev would have had more time to add story details, rather then just trying to make sure you could walk through every part of it without getting stuck, or seeing a wrong texture.

It is the same reason Bioware has been loosing depth. Far easier to add endless conversation options when all you got to do is write them, not record them AND try to find space for them on the consoles.

But enough ranting about how everything was better in the old days.

If Bethseda makes the Fallout MMO I think it will be okay, but we will get a lot of pretty graphics over actually depth. Geez, I wonder if that will sell to todays kiddies... oops there I go again. 

I actually think Fallout MMO is a bad idea. I would like to see the whole thing get dropped.  Here's my reasoning.

First, I think Bethesda did a horrible Job on Fallout 3, likewise I think they did a horrible job on Oblivion.  The last game that I feel they actually put innovation in was Morrowind, and the innovation was still small (Go play Daggerfall if you don't think so).  Mostly the only differences from these games came from being able to push through better graphics, more AI processes along with larger worlds and interconnecting maps. With that said, I'd rather not see Bethesda put out Fallout MMO because I don't think they would be able to make a solid innovative and fun MMO.

I don't want to see Interplay make the game, because well.. They aren't making the game anyway even though they have the rights to it.  They sublicenced it out to the people making Earthrise which is.. Oh wait another Post-Apoc MMO.  Why would a company make two Post-Apoc MMOs back to back?  It just makes me wonder why..

Lastly, Between Earthrise and Fallen Earth I think we have a good Post-Apoc MMO representation.  I currently subscribe to Fallen Earth and will check out Earthrise, but honestly Fallen Earth feels like everything a Fallout MMO would be like, without the Fallout specific factions.

So yah. Even thoug a Fallout MMO sounds like a good idea, I'd rather not see one finish development.

a Fallout MMO i think would be a bad idea, i didnt really like fallout 3 personally - post apocalyptic games .. i just think that there are enough titles already out there doing that, if it has to be a futuristic sci-fi game, then something a bit more upbeat would definitely be more welcome. Bethesda and Interplay, i think Bethesda actually make really good single player games, imo their probably better at it than Bioware are - Oblivion is still, for me the best Single player fantasy game out there, better even than Dragon Age;origins imo, although DA:O is definitely better graphically, in all other respects Oblivion has much better game play, and combat dynamics - especially the magic system in Oblivion, so while i dont think that Bethesda can't make a MMO, i just think that fallout is perhaps not the best way to go about it.. I can understand why different games developers are looking to move into the MMO scene, its obviously big business and more and more games seem to need an online element in order to be successful, though after the COD:MW2 fiasco (for the PC anyway) i really think they need to approach it a lot more carefully.

I'd like to see those companies to bury the lawsuit hatchet and join forces to make the Fallout MMO the greatest MMO to ever hit the market!

Originally posted by Fusion

I'd like to see those companies to bury the lawsuit hatchet and join forces to make the Fallout MMO the greatest MMO to ever hit the market!

If only, Fusion. If only.....

Neither, Bethesda don't have a clue about Fallout and, as has been said, Interplay are existing only in name.

Blizzard...

You know you are all thinking it.

Wow it would have to be Interplay the made the original.

I have to agree with the OP as in how Fallout 3 was a huge disapointment.