Recent content by Dork Mage

Brian Fargo has pledged 5% of profits to kick-forward (which inXile formed?) so he expects there to be profits....

Well, decided to upgrade to the $75 level (from $50) - have a beta version to play!

The TLA specified that a session required a minimum of 101 players to start a game with a minimum upper limit of 1000 players.

No worth much but... February issue of PC Gamer notes the lawsuit and then says FOOL will be released 2Q 2012 with playable humans and ghouls.

I'm on the road without a copy of the APA/TLA so from memory: The APA is a straight-forward buy/sell agreement. Bethesda pays money and Interplay provides all rights and assets to Fallout. There is no mention of the TLA in the APA. Whatever happens with the TLA has no impact on the APA...

The Creation Engine apparently is still the Gamebryo engine:

My last comment on this... I've realized we have been buying the argument by Bethesda and Interplay that the APA and TLA are co-mingled contracts when in fact they are two seperate, stand-alone, contracts. Consider my contracting a painter to paint an apartment build and a house a...

Re: Paralysis by limited Analysis No breach of contract has occurred even if a contract partner is acting in bad faith as long as they are holding to the letter-of-the-law contract requirements (gray areas, between the lines doesn't count - that's what litigation is for). This is an asinine...

Re: Paralysis by limited Analysis I agree. As I see it (which isn't worth much), Bethesda's "acting in bad faith" isn't relevant until it is shown that Bethesda is in violation of the contract. Is there any act by Bethesda that is in violation of the contracts?

The APA is very clear (The APA is a scrupulously written contract unlike the TLA): "All packaging, advertising and promotional materials used by or on behalf of Seller in connection with the Pre-existing Fallout Games shall be submitted by Seller to Purchaser for Purchaser's written approval...

@UncannyGarlic I wasn't aware that the "Trilogy" was a previous issue. I did state "(apparently)" because I couldn't fathom why Interplay would risk such a violation but then Bethesda is being REALLY stupid to claim a re-issue of a previously issued package somehow justifies the nullification...

Nice to hear from someone with a legal (limited) background, I don't BTW. I look upon this case as entertainment so I've finally perused the APA and TLA to try and see what's going on. The APA is a drab, boring sell/purchase agreement. Frankly the only way to violate that agreement is for...

Why? While our opinon doesn't count, the general opinion here is Interplay's lawyer is doing a first-rate job especially compared to BethSoft's third-string (or is it forth string now) lawyers. And Interplay's filing reads very legal... thanks UncannyGarlic!

It looks to be informational only (we'll let the court arrange a date) and really reads as a speech-to-text dictation letter which would explain the

Re: What Bethesda is facing I agree with BN that Interplay doesn't deserve to win this case, but part of contract law is good faith effort which Bethesda: clearly fails at while Interplay can presumably show good faith effort on producing FOOL. As I see it, in all likelyhood the judge...