Fallout 3 - Preview & Interview @ NMA

[Dhruin]

What happens when you let NMA go to GC (http://www.nma-fallout.com/article.php?id=38620) and view Bethsoft's Fallout 3 demo? Well, you get a good walkthrough of the demonstration, some "conclusions" at the end and an interview. Here's an early snip:
Outside, the PC turns on his PipBoy flashlight, which has a kind of greenish light. Near the vault door are a few skeletal remains holding up signs saying "Let us in motherfuckers!" and the like, Hines joking that these are people they wouldn't let in. The vault door can be seen closing as Hines turns around near the end of the tunnel, before opening the shed door which closes the tunnel off from the outside world.

Initially the light "blinds" the PC, making the entire world look blurry until your eyes adjust in about 5-10 seconds. The PC walks unto a ridge marked "scenic overlook" by a sign (perhaps for the demo), where he stands to look at the desolate, rocky, desert surroundings, with some ruins of buildings and of a bridge. Hines notes this is the wasteland surrounding DC, and that you can walk to whatever you see. The wasteland itself looks fairly empty, but ruined remains form clear landmarks in the distance. The sky was grey and dreary, which is how it remained all throughout the demo.
...and a clip from the interview (http://www.nma-fallout.com/article.php?id=38623):
NMA: How do you explain the omnipresence of nuclear explosions -both from nuclear powered cars, from the Fatman and from Megaton- in the game, while in the original games nuclear power (especially explosions) was treated with much consideration and respect, thereby making it a rare occurrence whenever it was used. The same goes for radiation itself. In the originals, it was extremely lethal if you didn't take the right precautions, but in the demonstration we see plenty of times where radiation is more seen like a trivial matter. Standing next to an exploded nuclear car barely gives off any radiation.
Pete Hines: In the demonstration there are a lot of nuclear explosions, like the Fatman, that seem very present, but this won't be so in the actual game. I can assure you that ammunition for the Fatman will be very scarce indeed and that it won't be treated lightly. As for the strength of radiation, much of it is simply game balance. While we want the game to be raw and cold, we also want the game to be fun. We're, of course, still balancing the radiation strength and impact.
More information. (http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/newsbit?newsbit=6173)

[Brother None]

What do you get? The apocalypse is what!

Your opinion, Dhruin?

I'm curious to hear everyone's opinion, since there're a lot of posters with good heads on their shoulders here. One thing I'll pre-emptively state: yes, there is some bias and yes, there's quite a bit of bias in the third page, though a lot of that is more a matter of NMA's perspective being different than that of reporters*. I wouldn't write it off whole as just a biased piece, tho'. At least I hope not

* As Desslock once discussed it with me:
As you mentioned, a lot of gaming press probably doesn't have that perspective - in fact, many of the people writing for gaming publications today probably weren't writing when those games initially came out, and a lot of them have never played them, at least to any significant degree. So they just see a "new" game, and evaluate it with a clean slate, and could care less how faithful an experience it offers to the franchise.

[guenthar]

I say that if it ends up like the demo then it won't be as good as I hoped but like I have said before and was patially confirmed here the demo isn't relevant to what the game is going to be like. They probably just threw this together so they would have something to show the press.

[GhanBuriGhan]

The undercover dark ops slant is somewhat amusing. I am happy that the article rightfully rejects the "Oblivion with guns" simplification which I always found a bit off the mark.
It is clear that this is observed from a certain critical perspective, and that you were out to substantiate that perspective. Since we all know where you are coming from, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact it seems you tried hard to be as objective as you could. In addition this is of course the most detailed account of the demo we have had. So I say good work.
The question to me is really about what you discuss in the conclusions: is there a real design vision here, or is it the mere hotchpotch of ideas and styles, all simmered down to a casual gamer digestible broth, as you suspect? I am sceptical too, because Todd does not seem to have the kind of vision that lead to great games in that sense (though admittedly highly amusing and successful ones as Oblivion) and it is completely open how Emil performs as a lead designer. He has certainly shown a talent for smart and involved level and quest design in the past, but can he craft a story and a coherent world too, especially when limited by the canon of the Fallout universe?

[Prime Junta]

Good article. Very refreshing to read a write-up of the demo that's beyond the "ZOMG that's awsum!" level we've been seeing. As I've said before, I don't know whether Bethsoft has the talent and passion to pull it off; your write-up certainly hasn't done anything to reassure me on the point.

Interesting point about the name of the game. I can't say I fully understand what difference it would make if the game was called Fallout: Capital Wasteland rather than Fallout 3 (and frankly, I don't think many people other than our friendly glittering gems of hatred do either). :P

[Surlent]

NMA infiltrates Bethesda press presentation as undercover journalists and asks the pr head man himself some serious questions? Hah hah, good show fellas! :thumbsup:

The three page preview like itself says shows the same demo of Fallout3 that has been shown already in E3 and maybe somewhere else. So it was pretty (indepth story) much of what was already known of the title, Oblivion with guns. But the picture of B.None staring face down right next to the paragraph with the future prospects of FO3 is hilarious.

As for the Q&A part it was pretty nice job asking questions other "journalists" haven't asked before. For Pete Hines' sake I have to say that he gave pretty detailed answers considering that was just a demo of the full game that is still far ahead from being completed.

NMA: Apparently not everyone is pleased with Bethesda's interpretation of Fallout. NMA, RPGcodex and DaC are a few of the oldest Fallout communities around and none of them seem to accept Bethesda's view on things, or are at least very skeptical about the game. Why is it that the communication with those communities is difficult at best?

Pete Hines: We are in contact with those communities and they receive the same treatment as all the other communities. We frequently read them and we understand exactly what it is they want. The problem is however that they've had years to think about what they wanted and create a view of what Fallout 3 should be that could never be possible today. They're still stuck 8 years back in their views of Fallout 3. It simply wouldn't work.Lol the irony of this question. That's some solid comedy gold. Did Hines have a clue at that point?

[Briosafreak]

is there a real design vision here, or is it the mere hotchpotch of ideas and styles, all simmered down to a casual gamer digestible broth, as you suspect?

That's the million dollar question right there. A few criticisms so far seem to come from not very well thought previews and misunderstandings, although Beth has it share of blame by only now starting to get things straight, as Emil did recently.

And other specific problems that are still in the air might be resolved, there is still time for that.

But what it isn't clear by now, even with this very detailed account of the demo and good questions is if there is a coherent vision across the project. That's what keeps me in the fence, although the game overall seems to be a step forward regarding Oblivion (it will never be my desired Fallout 3, but one has to move on).

A former BIS dev complained at NMA a few days ago about that, the lack of a consistent and coherent vision on Beth's discourse about the game. Maybe they do have that consistent vision, we'll have to wait on that and keep pushing for more info in order to finally answer your million dollar question, GhanBuriGhan.

[txa1265]

Very nice work - it was really nice walking through the demo and then getting some (admittedly biased) perspective.

One thing that stuck with me was the bit near the end of the demo about the group of reporters who all clapped and laughed at all the right moments. You know most of them have seen this demo more than once before, and are engaging in a ritualistic dance with Bethesda ... who knows how *that* will end ...

[BillSeurer]

The problem is however that they've had years to think about what they wanted and create a view of what Fallout 3 should be that could never be possible today. They're still stuck 8 years back in their views of Fallout 3. It simply wouldn't work.Did Hines have a clue at that point?

I think Hines is dead-on right.

[father lamat]

You wanted to be disappointed and you were. Shocking how that turned out.

[The Watchman]

Nice work. Will never stop to amaze me how retarded Hines is.

[mactbone]

I think Hines is dead-on right.

Really?

The problem is however that they've had years to think about what they wanted and create a view of what Fallout 3 should be that could never be possible today. They're still stuck 8 years back in their views of Fallout 3. It simply wouldn't work.

Someone tell VD that Dragon Age is not possible today. Oh, and ignore Van Buren which was being worked on four years ago.

I wonder when the Modern Age started.

[BillSeurer]

Really?

Yes, really.

Someone tell VD that Dragon Age is not possible today. Oh, and ignore Van Buren which was being worked on four years ago.

Dragon Age is a commercially successful follow-on to Fallout 2? Then why is NMA complaining? Oh, wait, it's a fantasy RPG that hasn't been released yet despite them demoing it in 2004 already. Bioware's claiming it is a "blockbuster" before it is released is like Disney declaring every one of their movies is a "classic".

When was Van Buren released as a successful commercial game? Oh, wait, it was abandoned.

[Briosafreak]

Since Arena and Dagerfall predate Fallout we also can say Bethesda is ripping the fruits of work done over 8 years ago with their Elder Scrolls games, that they are using gameplay and a setting that is even older on Oblivion than the gameplay and setting of Fallout.

So they should be kinder to the old games.

And I didn't read much disappointment on the articles, there's some confusion there.

[xSamhainx]

good recon mission, NMA

[Brother None]

You wanted to be disappointed and you were. Shocking how that turned out.

You want to think we were inherently pre-biased to the point where we couldn't be convinced of anything and you do. Bet you didn't even have to read the preview for that ;)

One thing that stuck with me was the bit near the end of the demo about the group of reporters who all clapped and laughed at all the right moments. You know most of them have seen this demo more than once before, and are engaging in a ritualistic dance with Bethesda ... who knows how *that* will end ...

One of the Gamespy reporters was seeing it for the fourth time. FOURTH. And he still laughed at all the right queues.

The group I was with seemed to be more international and level-headed. Good thing too, I would've been pretty disgusted by the behaviour in SuA's demo

[kalniel]

Sounds great.

Shame NMA were so scared as to use aliases. Not being let in for being NMA would be a much bigger event. Bethsoft have never cared who people were from for press events in my experience.

VATS sounds completely different to RTwP, and looks like it's good as well. Good article :)

[Brother None]

Silencer did apply under NMA and was turned down, kalniel.

VATS looks completely the same as RTwP. Believe me.

[father lamat]

You want to think we were inherently pre-biased to the point where we couldn't be convinced of anything and you do.

You lived up to my expectation in the exact same manner the game did to your's. We all win.

[aries100]

Really?



Someone tell VD that Dragon Age is not possible today. Oh, and ignore Van Buren which was being worked on four years ago.

I wonder when the Modern Age started.

To be clear:

VD's game is called 'age of destruction'. Dragon Age is PC RPG, made by Bioware.

I also find it interesting that Sander who applied in the name of NMA got turned down...

[Briosafreak]

It wasn't Sander, it was Silencer

[aries100]

It wasn't Sander, it was Silencer

-eh- OK -

but the point still stands:

NMA got turned down - or so it seems - since Silencer applied under the NMA name.

I'm sorry :blush: that I got the name wrong :lonely:

[Brother None]

Gstaff provided the reason for that. It's a press showing, so fans have no reason to be there.

Small, volunteer sites like RPGFan and Strategy Core do, but since NMA is a fansite, it doesn't

[Dhruin]

Age of Decadence. ;) I don't see how a self-funded, unreleased, indie title has much relevance to this topic.

On the article; an excellent walkthrough...one of the best I've read but hard to get excited, since I've read so many. The conclusions section is interesting - I appreciated the BoS observations but didn't really get the "guts, daring, innovation" comment. Would being turn-based have been gutsy because they would have defied conventional wisdom? What would be innovative while still respecting the franchise?

Enjoyed the interview - some good questions.

[Moriendor]

Not to be a party pooper (no, really *cough* :biggrin: ) but has it ever occurred to you that this stunt might have pretty bad repercussions? I don't really expect Bethesda to go that far but did you ever think about the possible outcome that Bethesda might simply refuse to admit any volunteer site staff in future presentations of Fallout 3 (or all of their games)? What special right do you assume for yourself to potentially ruin it for everyone else? If Bethesda should in fact ban any and all non-commercial/volunteer sites (this would potentially affect this very site's staff here at RPG Watch as well), were the giggles and pats on the back from the Fallout hardcore fans worth it all?

No need to answer, really, as you obviously opted for 'yes' on every single one of these questions.

[Brother None]

didn't really get the "guts, daring, innovation" comment. Would being turn-based have been gutsy because they would have defied conventional wisdom? What would be innovative while still respecting the franchise?

Turn-based would indeed have been gutsy because it's going against the grain.

But I wasn't just trying to cover combat. The whole feel of the game is one of "taking the easy way out." Generic setting, RTwP combat, etc. etc. They have some good ideas, it's just all really, really unoriginal.

Not to be a party pooper (no, really *cough* :biggrin: ) but has it ever occurred to you that this stunt might have pretty bad repercussions? I don't really expect Bethesda to go that far but did you ever think about the possible outcome that Bethesda might simply refuse to admit any volunteer site staff in future presentations of Fallout 3 (or all of their games)? What special right do you assume for yourself to potentially ruin it for everyone else?

I don't think Bethesda ever had any intention of working with NMA or DaC in any significant way. If they do somehow, I doubt this changes it, much.

If Bethesda should in fact ban any and all non-commercial/volunteer sites (this would potentially affect this very site's staff here at RPG Watch as well), were the giggles and pats on the back from the Fallout hardcore fans worth it all?

That won't happen, Bethesda has great relations with a number of independent volunteer sites.

Anyway, your suggestions reek too much of blackmail, Moriendor. So even if Bethesda had directly forewarned that would be the consequences, chances are I might not have caved, because blackmail rubs me the wrong way in a major way.

[Moriendor]

That won't happen, Bethesda has great relations with a number of independent volunteer sites.

This might change to "had" because of your super funny and sneaky ways. Bethesda wouldn't be the first publisher to have a change of policies and to only admit professional journalists with full credentials and a press ID card to their events. Or to admit only journalists from volunteer sites that they know and have dealt with before. Many volunteer sites have staff coming and going on a regular basis so this might impede them majorly if Bethesda ups the bar.
But -hey- I know you can't be arsed with such concerns. At least you've had your giggles, your pats on the back and your little ego trip so it's all OK, right?

Anyway, your suggestions reek too much of blackmail, Moriendor. So even if Bethesda had directly forewarned that would be the consequences, chances are I might not have caved, because blackmail rubs me the wrong way in a major way.

That sure is nice of you. Always concerned about your fellow human beings and about the consequences that your actions might have on them. I expected no less.

[Brother None]

This might change to "had" because of your super funny and sneaky ways. Bethesda wouldn't be the first publisher to have a change of policies and to only admit professional journalists with full credentials and a press ID card to their events. Or to admit only journalists from volunteer sites that they know and have dealt with before. Many volunteer sites have staff coming and going on a regular basis so this might impede them majorly if Bethesda ups the bar.

I don't see how that'd be a major shift, everything so far has been pretty tight-lipped anyway. Bethesda has never been grand on working with anyone except people they really liked. Will they go completely nuts now? It's possible. Painting me as the great evil demon who personally killed Bethesda's nice behaviour right now is just pathetic, tho'

But -hey- I know you can't be arsed with such concerns. At least you've had your giggles, your pats on the back and your little ego trip so it's all OK, right?

Why exactly are you trying to stretch facts in a juvenile personal attack on me?

That sure is nice of you. Always concerned about your fellow human beings and about the consequences that your actions might have on them. I expected no less.

It's instinct. What, am I supposed to roll over whenever someone tries to blackmail me or a company tries to muscle me? You must have a great sense of journalistic integrity.

[Moriendor]

Painting me as the great evil demon who personally killed Bethesda's nice behaviour right now is just pathetic, tho'

Hey, I didn't. I chose words such as "might", "possible" and "potentially" on purpose.
I know exactly that the chances of me turning out to be an overly concerned idiot because nothing will happen on Bethesda's side are far greater than any repercussions ;) .

Why exactly are you trying to stretch facts in a juvenile personal attack on me?

If I attack you for your juvenile stunt then I might as well do it properly, no? :biggrin:

It's instinct. What, am I supposed to roll over whenever someone tries to blackmail me or a company tries to muscle me? You must have a great sense of journalistic integrity.

Did I just hear someone uninvited, sneaking in on an event with fake credentials, pretending to be someone else, talk about "journalistic integrity"? AHEM! ;)
Besides, I fail to see any attempts at blackmail or muscling. You just weren't invited. That's all. - Also, you know, I would actually applaud you for throwing any concerns for other people out the window if we were talking about the coverage of a life- or world-saving event. But we aren't. We are talking about the presentation of a stupid piece of entertainment software to put it bluntly and possible effects that your (in my opinion) rather poorly thought-through behavior might have on other people who are pursuing this same hobby. Please let us stop pretending as if anything really important depended upon you being there. You just did it for "teh funny" category (and out of personal curiosity probably).

[Brother None]

If I attack you for your juvenile stunt then I might as well do it properly, no? :biggrin:

Impressive

Did I just hear someone uninvited, sneaking in on an event with fake credentials, pretending to be someone else, talk about "journalistic integrity"? AHEM! ;)

Maybe you should spend less time typing out biting attacks at people based on assumptions of their motives, behaviour and its results, because so far, you're getting it all wrong.

I had an official appointment, my credentials I real, I was registered under my real name. I did not lie, I did not forge, I did not sneak. Everything I said to Bethesda was true. Note that I did not make the appointment, Gamernode did that for me

Besides, I fail to see any attempts at blackmail or muscling.

Where did I say there were any attempts at those? We were talking about a hypothetical case. Though I guess you're retroactively trying to blackmail me by making me feel guilty about doing something which might possibly have consequences, or something. What point were you trying to make, exactly?

We are talking about the presentation of a stupid piece of entertainment software to put it bluntly and possible effects that your (in my opinion) rather poorly thought-through behavior might have on other people who are pursuing this same hobby.

If it's just a stupid piece of entertainment software, why are you making me out as a huge villain for this?

Please let us stop pretending as if anything really important depended upon you being there. You just did it for "teh funny" category (and out of personal curiosity probably).

Considering this preview is currently making fast rounds through dozens of national and international forums and newssites and is receiving praise and compliments for a job well done and new information gained, your accusation is wrong. I felt the coverage afforded by press at that point wasn't sufficient and, judging from people's reactions, they're happy to see the other side of it too.

Seriously, you bludgeon in accusing me heavily of a hypothetical consequence and make false assumptions on what happened and my motives for it. You act as if I killed your puppy or something, while so far all I did was write a widely appreciated preview with no apparent consequences to anyone else, so far.

[Moriendor]

True, true. It's all hypothetical, unfortunately. So until something really happens I shall leave you basking in the light of your huge success. You really showed them, man!
I guess all I can do is just hope that you will consider your actions more carefully in the future. Aren't you the guys who are usually promoting thought, choice and (thinking about the) consequence? Maybe next time you'll think about possible repercussions and how your behavior might do more harm than good (especially to uninvolved people who might get dragged into this through no fault of their own). My mission has been accomplished if that goal is reached ;) .

[Brother None]

I guess all I can do is just hope that you will consider your actions more carefully in the future..

That would require me considering your line of thought even remotely valid. I don't see any validity or meaning in any of it. You're basically shouting "you're just being childish and stupid!" really loudly, and alone. That's not going to convince me of anything.

Though I've done been pwnd, true (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v222/scharmers/300pxFO3Leipzig-Sellout.jpg)

[Moriendor]

That would require me considering your line of thought even remotely valid. I don't see any validity or meaning in any of it. You're basically shouting "you're just being childish and stupid!" really loudly, and alone. That's not going to convince me of anything.

Fair enough. It doesn't surprise me that someone as egocentric as you can not see my line of thought which involves thinking about the consequences of how other people might be affected by your actions. What else is new?
As long as you got your coverage and the laughs on your side everything is obviously alright in your world. *shrug* ... Fine then. If you aren't open to any sort of different view on this subject then I guess you just aren't. Not like I can force you to be convinced of anything. Case closed.

Please carry on with the praise and the rockstar celebrations, folks. Sorry about the small interruption :) .

[Brother None]

someone as egocentric as you

The mere concept of you thinking anyone can possibly take you seriously with lines like these make me smile. You are so obviously rabidly against me as a person, it's not even funny.

[Corwin]

OK guys, while I enjoy the work of both of you, could we cool it with the personal attacks. Thanks!! :)

[xSamhainx]

please, Mo.

It's becoming embarrassing

[Gorath]

While I would agree that Mo has become a fucking troll over the past months I think he has a point this time. It is possible this action has done a lot of smaller sites a disservice.

[GhanBuriGhan]

Why should said smaller sites not have the freedom to decide who they want to send to such an event? Silencer afaik is actually writing a second preview for that shrimps site.

[Moriendor]

Why should said smaller sites not have the freedom to decide who they want to send to such an event?

Because Pete Hines might find out that he had some uninvited guests at GC. Then Pete Hines might reconsider who they allow admission to their events and they might limit it in some way (worst case would be to only allow "real" professional journalists such as only GameSpy/IGN, GameSpot and editors of print mags to future events).
These events are usually by invitation only. As some may remember I once handled stuff like this for RPGDot many, many moons ago. We had it happen back then that a volunteer staff member (unknown to any of us in person as is typical for smaller sites with an international volunteer staff) was turned down by a big publisher due to misconduct at a previous event (must have been a "fucking troll" like me :biggrin: ). If they say "no" then you either ain't sending no one or you're sending someone else that they will hopefully accept. It's that simple, really. It's their event. It's their rules of admission.
If Bethesda now changes its rules or policy thanks to someone at NMA needing their 15 minutes of fame then all other websites who fall victim to the stricter policy should know who to address their thank-you letters to. That is all that I was trying to say.

Sincerely,

Yours Fucking Troll

[GhanBuriGhan]

They were not univited guests. They were they as the invited representatives of the sites that sponsored them. They also happened to be NMA members, and last I checked Bethesda had not even blacklisted the site, and it is certainly no criminal organization. According to Pete in the Q&A they are even reading and "in contact with" NMA. Again: if some site with an invitation to an event decides for whatever reason to send a representative that is also an NMA member, who obviouly had no chance to misbehave at an earlier event yet, I simply see no problem. Its not like they gave wrong names, stole the tickets, or snuck in in black Ninja suits. Nor have the particular NMA members uttered any death threats against Devs afaik. TES forum members have several times been at Beth press events as representatives for one site or another, giving both enthusiastic and critical accounts. If Bethesda feels they need to change their system because of that, than they are the morons, and NMA is right about them.

[txa1265]

So it would be like me going under the press pass of GamerDad and also gathering info for RPGWatch?

[Moriendor]

They were not univited guests. They were they as the invited representatives of the sites that sponsored them. They also happened to be NMA members, and last I checked Bethesda had not even blacklisted the site, and it is certainly no criminal organization. According to Pete in the Q&A they are even reading and "in contact with" NMA. Again: if some site with an invitation to an event decides for whatever reason to send a representative that is also an NMA member, who obviouly had no chance to misbehave at an earlier event yet, I simply see no problem. Its not like they gave wrong names, stole the tickets, or snuck in in black Ninja suits. Nor have the particular NMA members uttered any death threats against Devs afaik. TES forum members have several times been at Beth press events as representatives for one site or another, giving both enthusiastic and critical accounts. If Bethesda feels they need to change their system because of that, than they are the morons, and NMA is right about them.

If all of what you say is true then why didn't they explicitly go there as and for NMA, you know, proudly wearing NMA T-shirts, singing the NMA hymn, flipping their NMA V.I.P passes in everyone's face? :biggrin:
Obviously, Bethesda turned down one NMA member according to Brother None. So we'd have to assume that Bethesda did for some reason not want to invite someone from NMA.
If NMA members then turn around and sneak in behind Bethesda's back using a different site's credentials then that's just that... "sneaking in". Whichever way you put it or want to spin it.
Besides, if they were going for that other site then why did the article end up on NMA? And did Bethesda know of and approve of an article based on this event getting published on NMA? Is Pete Hines d'accord with a pic of him showing up on NMA? Would he have agreed to have his picture taken had he known where it was going to be posted? Would he have agreed to the interview and given these answers had he known where it would end up?

It's simply a matter of appropriate conduct and fairness to be open about your agenda and who you are and who you are reporting for (there is a reason that at professional press conference journalists are required to stand up, quote their full name and the publication they are reporting for before asking their question). Especially if you run around waving the "journalistic integrity" banner all over the place as Brother None does. Start with the man in the mirror... blahblahblah... is what I'm saying here ;) .

So it would be like me going under the press pass of GamerDad and also gathering info for RPGWatch?

I think it's generally perfectly OK to go to these events for several sites. A lot of professional journalists who sell their articles to a variety of different magazines do just that. But if you are pretty much a "persona non grata" as one would have to assume for NMA members (since they were not invited and had one staff member turned down) and you then use a sort of "backdoor" method to get in regardless is where things might start to get complicated if Bethesda should choose to draw consequences from this event.

[GhanBuriGhan]

They were not invited as NMA because to Bethesda NMA is just a fansite, and they don't invite anyone from fansites, only "press" - be that a real rule or a pretext, but thats the reason they give. Now, if a member of a fansite comes for a gaming press site, I don't think they have any rule against that, even if they might not be particularly delighted in this specific case. I think its a prefecctly valid backdoor to use, as I said other fans have done it before. And I don't think BN is persona non grata. He is uncomfortable, but he is probably the most active poster on the FO3 forums, he is civil, he is mostly but not solely critical and negative. Now if it had been Roshambo who went to the press event, I might agree with you. :)

[Gorath]

So it would be like me going under the press pass of GamerDad and also gathering info for RPGWatch?
No, because you could use RPGWatch´s press pass.

[Moriendor]

They were not invited as NMA because to Bethesda NMA is just a fansite, and they don't invite anyone from fansites, only "press" - be that a real rule or a pretext, but thats the reason they give.

No, they gave no reason according to the article... Silencer, who applied in the name of NMA, was turned down with no reason given.
The fact remains that Bethesda did not know which publication these guys were really reporting for and that they did not know that they were effectively demo'ing and giving an interview to NMA since that's where the article ended up. I don't see the article on Gamernode or Madshrimps. I see it on NMA only.

Now if it had been Roshambo who went to the press event, I might agree with you. :)

Haha if Rushing Rambo would have busted Bethesda's Fallout 3 presentation I would have demanded HQ shaky-cam footage :biggrin: .

[GhanBuriGhan]

The reason was give for earlier contacts, IIRC, BN should know.
You have a point in that Bethesda did not know that an article would appear at NMA, but then I don't think that those they invite have to sign anything that states that, what, and where they have to publish. And since many journalists work for more than one outlet, that wouldn't make sense either. So I still can't find anything very evil in this coup. Even less so because the resulting preview is detailed, factual, and fairer even in the commentary than I would have dared expect.

[father lamat]

So I still can't find anything very evil in this coup. Even less so because the resulting preview is detailed, factual, and fairer even in the commentary than I would have dared expect.

There is no coup. They stole some seats from a couple of 'journalists' and good on them. It's a little bad ass and for that a definite cheers. However, the article itself panders, which detracts heavily from what's honest to deem fair. In it's language, structure and tone it plays heavily and obviously. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's the nature of an opinion piece and the more daring you are to explicitly state that leads at times to a more sensational read. Again, that can be aces... Zero Punctuation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYQLR7dE5k4).

When the language runs to places such as "poor man's" from what amounted to all of thirty seconds screen time or references to the combat using limited terms like "just rtwp" it falls into the same catergory as Yahtzee's piece. He does it well. This reads like two guys at their very first 'media event'... I hate that term, it's infotainment at best... seriously, it's video games don't expect Globe and Mail type journalism. Demand better but don't expect an expository into gradations of fun. Anyways, reads like probably one of the first times they've seen a crappy alpha build demo (they're always crap, even when they're well done a certain rough and ugliness is just par for the course) at an event such as this and by all means possibly wanted to get a gaming woodie from what they were going to be shown. I don't think anyone is so stalwart as to not be honestly swayed. However, this piece meanders and it panders without the pudding and Belgium jokes while falling into stereotype with juvenile digs, novice expectations and flat humour.

If people want to take a baseball bat or knife to something, do it well. Don't half ass it under guise or pretense. Be honest in it and with craft... and honest to god, be a little less to defensive about it too. Wow.

[Brother None]

The reason was give for earlier contacts, IIRC, BN should know.

Here (http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38636):
Nope, no conspiracy [to keep Fallout fans out]. He was simply letting me know to be on the lookout for coverage from NMA on the game. We hadn't allowed fan sites access to the game, because we are only showing the game to gaming press at this time. Given that both of the guys got press access, they got to see the game.

It's a little bit embarrassing that you're trying to be overly critical without even bothering to do basic factchecking, Mori. SuA is still writing the article for MadShrimp. I offered GamerNode a second look, but their current preview is fine, so I'm writing on another game from GC for them (they did ppost on it (http://www.gamernode.com/News/3921-NMAs-Fallout-3-preview-is-the-best-yet/index.html)). You could say both me and SuA freelanced it at GC, and our pay was an invitation to Bethesda's Fallout 3 showing. Tagging that evil is a stretch, trying to continue to push that Bethesda might go all beserk is kind of hard when there's no sign of that, right now

In it's language, structure and tone it plays heavily and obviously.

Wow, what a paranoid post.

[father lamat]

Wow, what a paranoid post.

I don't think you're nefarious, you just wrote a very clumsy piece. I was very clear about that.

[Brother None]

I don't think you're nefarious, you just wrote a very clumsy piece. I was very clear about that.

Your opinion is duly noted.

While I would agree that Mo has become a fucking troll over the past months I think he has a point this time. It is possible this action has done a lot of smaller sites a disservice.

The fact that NMA exists at all could possibly do a lot of smaller sites a disservice. I'm not going to worry about that. We got in through legitimate if deceitful means, we never lied, we were civil and courteous there, we wrote a preview that's well-received and not a huge insane flamefest. If Bethesda's takes exception at any of this, that's kind of their problem.

[GhanBuriGhan]

Your opinion is duly noted.
If Bethesda's takes exception at any of this, that's kind of their problem.

I agree.
I also diagree with father lamats asessment of the preview. No pulitzer, but not nearly the worst I have seen either. Opinionated, true - but were the others not, only in the opposite direction?
So, enough sucking up to NMA for now!

[Acleacius]

Good work and great job. :)

Pete Hines
"The problem is however that they've had years to think about what they wanted and create a view of what Fallout 3 should be that could never be possible today. They're still stuck 8 years back in their views of Fallout 3. It simply wouldn't work."

How absurdist can you get, wouldn't it be funny to see someone actually try and defend this crap. :biggrin:

Secondly reguarding potientially damaging other small sites;
This would kill any chance bethseda had to dominated the media, if they were that dumb, word would spread like wildfire.

They would be adding to the number of sites that would be willing to print negitive comments about them and reenforcing the current internet wide oppinion that the big game sites that laugh on cue and grab their ankles for an early chance to preview/review while constantly making sucking, gurgling and slurping sounds can't/won't print a real review.

[Brother None]

Apropos, seems the professionals agree with Moriendor (http://blogs.pcworld.com/gameon/archives/005313.html)

[Briosafreak]

And others don't. (http://www.neoseeker.com/news/story/7069/)

[Moriendor]

Apropos, seems the professionals agree with Moriendor (http://blogs.pcworld.com/gameon/archives/005313.html)

Nooooooo... dammit. Couldn't you find someone with a brain who agrees with me instead of Matt Peckham? Sammy was right in his comment on the previous page. This is (at least beginning to get now) fucking embarassing :biggrin: .

[Brother None]

Nooooooo... dammit. Couldn't you find someone with a brain who agrees with me instead of Matt Peckham? Sammy was right in his comment on the previous page. This is (at least beginning to get now) fucking embarassing :biggrin: .

Matt Peckham doesn't strike me as stupid, just a bit obtuse.

But I agree this kind of stopped having a point a while ago, so it's fine to drop at this point

[Gorath]

What Mo meant is that Peckham is the go-to guy when a site like 1up wants to have an RPG slaughtered. His reviews often don´t leave the impression that he bothered to base his text on playing longer than a few hours.

[Corwin]

Are you sure he even plays them that long? His reviews are a joke!!

[Squeek]

I finally got a chance to read this thread, and I'm sitting here with a big smile on my face!

Next time Bethesda may have to make a stronger effort to keep out the "undesirables." That's tough. Chalk one up for gonzo journalism!

[abbaon]

It's just that annoying little hangover everyone's blithely ignoring about how deception empowers the public relations cloud when it comes to future information sharing.
I want you to confiscate my computer if I ever write anything as vague and insensible as this sentence.

[Brother None]

What Mo meant is that Peckham is the go-to guy when a site like 1up wants to have an RPG slaughtered. His reviews often don´t leave the impression that he bothered to base his text on playing longer than a few hours.

Yeah, the Codex guys pointed me in the right direction. I remember the legendarily stupid NWN 2 review, I forgot it was this guy, though.

I don't know if he's really stupid or just pretending. It's a good way to get attention, if nothing else.

[txa1265]

I don't know if he's really stupid or just pretending. It's a good way to get attention, if nothing else.
Matt isn't stupid, but I think he has tired with traditional RPG's and rather than (a) being objective or (b) passing on the reviews, he allows himself to speak through his butt.

[woges]

Moriendor = Matt Peckham.

It's possible.

[Corwin]

No, Mo is actually a better writer than MP. Check out some of his work from the old Dot days!! :)

[Moriendor]

Moriendor = Matt Peckham.

It's possible.

Good one... R to the O to the F to the L :biggrin:

And thanks for the flowers, Corwin, but I disagree strongly :) . Matt is a native English speaker so he is (naturally and not only because of that) miles and miles and miles above me in writing skill. But he's a pretty bad "researcher" or however you want to call it. For example, in his Gothic 3 review, he assumed that the game had already had nine patches at the time he got around to reviewing it (it was version 1.09 then). Come on. Everyone knows that devs don't always use a sequential numbering scheme for patches. He could have at least put up the effort to find out how many patches the game had really had (which was three since the day of release patch was 1.07).

[woges]

There is too much stupidly opinionated journalism going around at the moment. I'm guessing it’s due to academic journalism courses. There is nothing wrong with having ones Ego intact it’s just when it's EGO! I just find it offensively bad.

Of course the real masters of the craft don't have too much to fall back on but the mastering of the language. If I critise somebody for their language skills it makes one such a superior critic, what what.

[aries100]

I want to thank Brother None (aka Kharn) and SuAside for going to Leipzig to Games Convention 2007 (GC 2007 or just GC) to see Fallout 3. Many have already pointed thos out, but the two of your really deserve acclaim and a :thumbsup: for writing this - ahem - preview article. It has been the most informative yet, both in its themes, how it was written (its structure) and in the questions asked to Pete
Hines. It is clear that both you? are university students, which probably also is why you were able to take notes as you good you did, I think.

The preview, as said, were one of the most informative, I've seen for a long time. It also reminded me of how preview and interviews used to be 8-10 years ago, or even just 4-5 years ago. It old the gamers exactly what to expect from the game, what they thought was good, what they thought was bad, what they liked and disliked. They tried, as I could see, to be as objective as possible, while being critical about what they saw. And that's what journalists are supposed to do - to inform the public.

Brother None's interview with Pete Hines was outstanding :clap: :thumbsup:
Brother None asked Pete H. all the correct questions, questions each fan of Fallout wanted to hear how Bethesda would answer. And I nearly got my coffee down to the wrong throat (meaning I couldn't nearly believe it) when Pete H. said that Fallout fans were 8 years behind in the development of games, basically admitting that Bethesda wants to throw out the old Fallout fans - and get some new ones, Fallout fans, that is.

Again, thank you brother none and suaside... :)

Great job you did :)