Can a bad game be a good thing?

Millim

Millim

Venerable Relic of the Wastes
Orderite
[REDACTED]
Now I know most of you will disagree.
But I was thinking: If Van Buren was released instead of BoS, where will the series be now? Now, In my opion, FO3 was a briliant game, and it was released to consols.
But if Van Buren was released, then would FO be doing so well.
I mean most gamers have either a ps3 or 360.
But the original future FO were going to be made for PC.
What do you guys think?
 
I think it's probably irrelevant and this will most likely degenerate into theorycrafting and Fallout 3 bashing. If they released Van Buren we'd probably be in the same place, except Bethesda would have published Fallout 4 instead of 3.
 
If they had gone with fallout VB instead of tactics they probably would have made more money, and in doing so would pump out fallout games like no ones business until they saturated the market with them to the point that no one would want to buy the series so Bethesda would have stayed out of the fallout series, and we would probably all get sick of fallout, except for the hardcore fans. I don't know about you guys but I wouldn't be mad if that were the case.
 
I really don't know if Bethesda would have bought the franchise.
VB could have been a reasonably big hit (back then, consoles weren't everything and there existed actual PC games and not only shitty ports) and the fans would have been satisfied. VB would have been the sequel (especially gameplay-wise) that everyone was waiting for and Interplay (and the fans) could have moved on. No sequel immediately needed. With the rise of the XBOX360 and PS3, maybe Interplay would have made some spinoff games for the evergrowing console crowd.
 
I would have loved to play VB. the story sounds amazing (I was glad to read they were bringing the New Plague into the actual games).

But I think if VB was released it would be unlikely that Bethesda would have taken control of the series ( but there is a possibility so lets say its a 50/50ish tossup, all depends on how the game preformed commercially and to some extent critically)

But I liked Fallout 3 and play it on a PS3
 
Well, we'll never know. Even if Van Buren had been released I think the company had a lot of problems that probably wouldn't have been solved with F3's success.
 
VB was the game-changer, if they had just gone with that... oh how the world would have been better.
 
One way or another, we would have had a trilogy of Fallout RPGs that are consistent with another, and not a community of new fans of which most are a bunch of annoying pricks who feel that we do not understand that they are the modern day game community and that Bethesda's designers are geniuses.

Had Fallout ended after Van Buren it would still have been on a high note.
 
Plus, the possibilitie for a restoration project / unofficial patch / other fan stuff would have been given, if the game would have been released. :>
And as it was using a 3d engine, better texture mods, better models, etc. would have been no problem as well.
 
Van Buren would have been a great add to the series, don't know how it would have gone on from there though
 
Same thing would happened, but we would have one more real"Fallout", so i would rather have Van Buren out there, then after have another Fallout 3.
 
Crni Vuk said:
korindabar said:
Fallout 3 bashing. .
Click to expand...
Its in my eyes only bashing if the points people mention are not true.
Click to expand...

Some truth is subjective :-p But a thread about Van Buren would have inevitably included something about Bethesda and their Fallout 3, most of it not that positive.
 
Sometimes I look at back to the Van Buren techdemo, I really liked the way it looked and I'm sure if it would have been made then it could have been a major hit (considering the story and design docs alongside the demo).
 
Well seeing as Fallout 1 and 2 released in a time when alot of isometric RPGs started using early graphics cards, like Baldurs gate 1 and 2. I know 2 did. Fallout 1 and 2 were reasonable hardware wise and anyone could play them.

Now I believe Van Buren could have been made with a reasonable yet good looking graphics engine that would have been playable on PC setups. It would also have been a better Fallout game then Fallout 3, which is just a FPS. The company, I gather interplay.blackisle would have reached a larger audience with their game. But now the world is stuck with the abomination Fallout 3 with its bloom effects cranked to max, poor story, and its not even a real RPG. Its basically just porn for graphics whores.

Fallout 1 and 2 did so much with so little. Fallout 3 could not even be a good game with all it had, time for bethesda and graphics and what not.
 
Had I-Play released VB I think not only would the hardcore fans would have been pleased (us here) but I also think it would have showed that even pen and paper mechanics could look "graphically the wowz" too.

This way IPLAY gets sales from the hardcore fans while branching out and introducing a new generation of gamers with something more than another hide behind a wall pop up shoot run and chainsaw melee rocket to da face lulz game.

I mean honestly there are plenty of FPS out there but nothing like the classic Fallouts. Was it really that much of a stretch for IPLAY to release VB THEN test the waters of the console action crowd with a spinoff Fallout that doesn't blow chunks.

Bethesda got involved because IPLAY had diddly squat of an idea about what action console gamers want. They figured if they use loud awezomes rocks metal bandz and bawlz advertisements plus gratuitous swearing and OMG BOOBIES, it would sell millions. In other words they tried to pander to a market they had not much experience selling to.

Bethesda on the other hand got the ingenious idea of making a oblivion with guns game. Not only did they serve to their own fans a elderscrolls, post-apoc hybrid but they also learned from inept-plays FBOS mistakes. Now they are not only masters of the sword and sorcery genre but they now consider themsevles badasses in the post apoc genre to boot. F3 in otherwords was a much better action rpg hybrid than FBOS was.
 
TBH, IPLAY would still have gone bankrupt even if VB was released. It would have sold well, but only to PC gamers. BoS was really just an experiment to see if Fallout would have sold well on consoles. But just like the vaults,it failed leaving us with a good game, Fallout 3.So in a way, BoS was the best thing IPLAY could have done, it's a shame they were stupid about it and changed everything. Beth were clever enough to put F3 on pc at least.
 
Millim said:
TBH, IPLAY would still have gone bankrupt even if VB was released. It would have sold well, but only to PC gamers. BoS was really just an experiment to see if Fallout would have sold well on consoles. But just like the vaults,it failed leaving us with a good game, Fallout 3.So in a way, BoS was the best thing IPLAY could have done, it's a shame they were stupid about it and changed everything. Beth were clever enough to put F3 on pc at least.
Click to expand...

Please, tell me that you are trolling... please...
 
I don't think you get what I'm trying to say.

F1 & F2 are good on pc's because it was of its time. IPLAY could have made Van Buren for consoles as well as pc as consoles were big around the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top