How predictable of you to side with the big dog, and not the underdog, but maybe that wasnt the case, anyways, it's bethesda that's been making all these baseless claims since their little plan to get the MMO rights fell through. They didn't want to pay the full amount Interplay who were the legit owner of Fallout, but instead got a deal anticipating Interplay wasnt going to make the requirement for the Fallout MMO. They did, and so Beth doesnt get the MMO rights. Interplay did make Brotherhood of Steel, but they made fallout 1, 2, and many others too, they started the fallout games, beth only did one, a very lousy crappy title that pissed more into the fallout name than any Interplay MMO could.

Do remember that common sense does not exist in US court system (we are talking about country where person can sue (and win!) microwave oven producer because the microwave oven's manual did not explitely state that they cant dry their pet in microwave and their pet died when the person used microwave for that). This means that if something does not explitely state something it can be intepreted in multiple ways.

This court case is perfect example .

1. What does it mean for game to be in full production? Bethesda says it means they Interplay should have presentable game by set date and interplay says it means game design process is fully underway by the set date (I belive they provided game design documents for the premilinary injunction hearing as proof that they were fully committed to it).

2. Interplay is supposed to rise 30 million dollars (or something) for the game's development. Bethesda claims that it means that Interplay should have had the money rised by the date full production was supposed to start and Inteplay claims it is enough if they rise the funds before the game is released (during the game development).

If the agreement does not explitely state one way or another, then who's inteptretion is the right one ?

Same goes for the latest claims. If the agreement does not explitely state what it does or does not cover, what does it cover?

Remember that none of us has actually seen (nor will we) the original agreement text. We've only read what each side claims it reads/means.

I totally agree that common sense has no place in the US legal system and that's one of many fine examples of just how true that is. In any other countries she'd be the one under scrutiny for being mentally sub-nornal and either in need of a carer or sectioning. You can't blame companies because their products are sometimes sold to people a can short of a 6 pack.

But anyway:

1. Interplay announced having assigned a developer to the project after the deadline had been missed. So it's a bit difficult to see how pretty much any level of production could have been going on before that. Furthermore this deadline was very bloody lax. There's no feasible excuse for not having a developer on board for all that time.

All Interplay then later on provided as evidence of their work were some concept sketches. If you knew how fast concept artists work you'd know that what was shown was less than a week's work for one artist. That's not convincing.

2. I think this one's fairly clear: Bethesda wanted to ensure that the project could be seen through to its conclusion. Then of course maintain the servers and support needed to keep the game alive. Anything less than that and it's just another doomed MMO project by another company that has no business making one.

If you were to argue that Interplay should be allowed to scrape in the pennies as it goes along would lack foresight and any insight into other financially doomed MMOs.

The fact this MMO still exists somewhere in some form is amazing. They're even promoting it. I thought sure it would crash and burn in no time.

Probably still will though.

Don't give me that big dog and underdog crap. Interplay were once a very big dog and through their own mis-management and bad corporate decisions they collapsed. I have zero compassion for a corporate entity that has squandered riches both real and intellectual. If Bethesda had not bought the IP from Interplay then there would be no Fallout 3 or Fallout New Vegas. There would also be no Van Buren as it was Interplay who canned it not Bethesda. We would have no Fallout at all.

Clearly you are one of those people that consider Fallout 3 an attrocity that should never have happened and no Fallout is better than a Fallout game you don't want. Well I hate to break it to you but you are clearly a fool who fails to see the runaway retail success of both Fallout 3 and New Vegas, I think you should apply to be a contestant on The Apprentice as you clearly have ZERO business accumen.

You said Bethesda made one very lousy crappy title. No They made two. The first name that appears on Fallout New Vegas is Bethesda NOT Obsidian. It was Bethesda who CARED enough about the IP and the fans reaction to Fallout 3 to approach Obsidian to make Fallout New Vegas a company headed by Feargus Urquhart who worked on Fallout previously and designed by JE Sawyer and Chris Avellone who wrote the damn Fallout bible fans like you clutch to your chests so tightly. People who Interplay SACKED.

Why is it that people like Tim Cain actually LIKED Fallout 3 but the people who claimed to love Fallout and be true fans can't even give the game ANY credit at all. Even if you think the game is a steaming pile it still brought the license back into public attention and this had a knock on effect of generating interest in the original Fallout games.

Interplay at the moment are a bunch of corporate suits squatting on IP's. They played a game with Bethesda. Let them develop the big budget modern game but keep our hands on the juicy MMO rights and sit back and gain the royalties from the classic games. Bethesda are well within their rights to fight Interplay in court and I bloody hope they get their hands on the full Fallout franchise as at least Bethesda have shown they care about Fallout. There is nothing whatsoever to like about Interplay, if they ever actually produce an MMO I will be gobsmacked.

If I sound angry I am because your comment about being predictable is frankly insulting. Do I go around championing the big megacorps on a regular basis or something?

Van Burren got shitcanned, this will too, it's the Fallout MMO way.

Did ANYONE actually think this was going to come off? Interplay has shown absolutely no ability to so much as hire a head programmer or scrape up enough funds to actually build and maintain an MMO server network. They're basically Strategy First redux, clinging to something resembling life while producing absolutely nothing. They're a hollow shell and they have been for some time, and that has a lot more to do with their own bad business decisions and firing most of their actually talented developers than anything Bethesda has done.

What has Interplay done since they let everybody go? I thought they went out of business, but then I heard about them still being around, and evidently they are. So have they done anything except sell off their franchises?

Eh, the reason this wasn't viable from the get-go is that Fallout is a single player game. The whole universe works primarily because you're helping or dicking over NPCs, and in some cases non-NPC characters as well. On top of the story telling aspect which doesn't work very well outside of a scripted environment.

Try to extend that to an MMORPG, and what you get is a Fallout themed MMORPG. Probably with a lot of the same complaints that were made about FO3 being a FO themed FPS or about FOT not being a real FO game.
I'm not sure. It gets a bit complicated because there was also Black Isle involved. I haven't been following particularly closely, but in cases like this a company sometimes will sell pretty much whatever assets they have in order to stage a come back. That's what Ford did a couple years back, at that point they sold everything and borrowed against what little they retained, betting that they could make it back to profitability before going bankrupt.

Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.