Interplay: Fallout 6 could be ours

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 21 January, 2011

If Bethesda blocks Fallout Online.

Interplay reckons it could end up developing the sixth Fallout game if Bethesda successfully prevents it from releasing Fallout Online.

Speaking exclusively to Eurogamer, Interplay president Eric Caen said his company was "ready to fight for years if necessary" in the high-profile legal battle with Bethesda over the future of the in-development post-apocalyptic MMO.

"We sold the Fallout IP to Bethesda in exchange for a certain amount of cash and the right to do the Fallout MMO," he said. "If they refuse to let us do the game, then the sale of the IP is terminated, and they will be allowed to do only one more Fallout, 5.

"But in that case, the IP will come back to us, and of course, we will complete our work and release Fallout MMO."

Caen's Fallout 5 refers to the next Fallout game from Bethesda, with last year's Fallout: New Vegas considered the fourth game in the hugely successful series.

"The original licensing deal was for three games and their DLC," Caen continued. "So they already did Fallout 3, then Fallout: New Vegas, and they can only do one more Fallout, 5, if the sale of the IP is cancelled by the court.

"We will love if we have to do Fallout 6 and sequels. But we will see what happens in court. It can be this year or later... We have the back-up of our shareholders to fund this fight."

Bethesda purchased the rights to the Fallout franchise from Interplay in 2004 for $5.75 million. It licensed the online rights back to the publisher before starting development on Fallout 3.

Interplay announced its intent to release a Fallout MMO soon after that deal was signed, with a release currently slated for 2012. But a legal tug of war over the future of the game has put its release in doubt.

The latest development saw Bethesda hit back at Interplay's claim that its attempt to derail its planned Fallout MMO was "absurd". Bethesda had claimed it gave Interplay rights over the Fallout trademark and nothing else, meaning it had no right to use essential Fallout ingredients such as weapon art and game concepts, for example the Pip Boy and what's called the "World Bible".

"We have confidence in justice, and we should win this case," Caen said. "But the decision isn't in our hands."

Interplay has so far refrained from showing much from Fallout Online because "anything we show will help Bethesda in their fight".

Caen refused to comment on his commitment to launch the game during the second half of 2012, but insisted the game was well into development.

"Since early 2009, we have a virtual Fallout world that exists and grows every day. We don't want to release too many elements because of the litigation. We don't know yet when we will reveal more. Sorry!

"Our team, led by Chris Taylor and Mark O'Green [two of the creators of the original Fallout], loves Fallout and what we are putting together. We all hope we will be able to show you soon more of our work, and that you will like it."

Bethesda continues to argue it owns all the Fallout IP rights.

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (54) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • MojoDex #1 1 year ago

    if this is right bethesda would be foolish to take them to court. though i have my doubts that it is. fallout has enjoyed more success because of bethesda than interplay, why would they risk all that work?

  • Razz #2 1 year ago

    As much as my gut feeling is that Bethesda is in the wrong here, it's equally possible that Interplay is just trying to cash in on Fallout's success at Bethesda and trying to portray themselves as the innocent party to the media.

    Time will tell.

  • waynenot #3 1 year ago

    I hope interplay lose - Fallout's really good now. MMO? - it's about wandering the wastes and discovering things on your own - not running round getting teabagged by a raiding party.

  • Moribundman #4 1 year ago

    It would be Fallout 4. Fallout New Vegas was not a full sequel.

    Aside from that, Interplay aren't really taking into account the fact that Bethesda and Obsidian have resuscitated a franchise that they raped and left for dead long ago. I'm not rushing to the shops to buy "Fallout 6: From the people who brought you Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel!" but I'll happily buy the latest game from the teams that brought me Fallout 1&2 and the Elder Scrolls series...

  • Spekingur #5 1 year ago

    Of course Interplay might be trying to cash in on the fame that the current Fallout games have garnered. But we really don't know which company is being the a**hole because we haven't seen the actual agreement/deal they made. I would like to see that and see the wording for myself.

    Since Interplay sold the IP they can ask for the sales agreement to be claimed void due to a breach in agreement. Which means that Bethesda are just being stupid. If the article is true then Bethesda only has one additional Fallout game to make before the full IP rights move back to Interplay. It might be that Bethesda is trying to 'steal' the IP as their own. If that turns out to be true then Bethesda have gotten rather full of themselves (I'm hoping they haven't since I really want to like their next Elderscrolls and Brink).

  • Moribundman #6 1 year ago

    The nearest analogy I can think of would be if Lucasarts and Telltale fell out over the rights to say Monkey Island. Half the team who worked on those old point and clicks are now at Telltale and they've made some great games there. If Lucasarts saw dollar signs and wanted to milk the franchise themselves with a totally fresh team, cutting out Telltale's involvement, then it would likely piss off the fans and result in some cash in movie license style games a la the rest of Lucasarts recent catalogue...

  • Cronan #7 1 year ago

    I'm finding it hard to care about this anymore. On one side, a hideously buggy and increasingly creaky engine underpins some good story, and on the other, a vapourware MMO.

    Both hanging off a franchise that is already feeling milked to death.

    Meh.

  • Nodebug #8 1 year ago

    Interplay have been riding off the success of their back catalogue for years, I doubt they have the know how to put together a AAA game

  • Sunyavadin #9 1 year ago

    "Bethesda and Obsidian have resuscitated a franchise that they raped and left for dead long ago. I'm not rushing to the shops to buy "Fallout 6: From the people who brought you Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel!" but I'll happily buy the latest game from the teams that brought me Fallout 1&2 and the Elder Scrolls series..."

    THIS

  • yoomazir #10 1 year ago

    Interplay,once a company with cool people and GREAT games, now just a bunch of hyenas fighting over a bone that are seeing the opportunity to steal back a franchise that is popular again thanks to the work of others.
    Even if they get back the Fallout IP, do you really think they are going to pull of a new game? with what money?
    Fuck Interplay
    Edited by yoomazir at 21/01/11 @ 09:05

  • Spekingur #11 1 year ago

    We are going to look like clowns if it turns out that Interplay's Fallout MMO is rather awesome.

  • jackdoe #12 1 year ago

    @Yoomazir: Interplay of today is pretty much Titus in new clothes. Damn shame.

  • Markusdragon #13 1 year ago

    I think they should both fire the lawyers that drew up the original contract if the whole thing is as convoluted and vague as both parties have suggested. Bet they haven't though; bet they're the exact same lawyers as the ones that are making this mess even messier.

  • Alestes #14 1 year ago

    Ah, Interplay, the company that decided to put focus on Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel (and starting on Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel 2) instead of finishing Van Buren. They killed Fallout and nearly died as a company, Bethesda and Obsidian resurrected both Fallout with the games and Interplay thanks to the IP purchase.

    The Caen brothers hasn't made a single right decision since they aquired Interplay back in 1999 (how the heck did they manage to do that!?), I don't think they have now either. Who wants to run around in a wasteland that isn't a wasteland but crowded with other people? Fallout is about being on your own.

  • space_ace #15 1 year ago

    that's a lot of fallout

  • dagas #16 1 year ago

    Let Interplay make an MMO if they want. They need the money and they created Fallout. Bethesda have already made more than enough money from the Fallout games to cover the cost of them buying the license. It may not be legally correct, but I think it's morally correct for the original creators to be able to make a new game in the series they created.

  • Cid #17 1 year ago

    I'm sure Bethesda wouldn't be doing this if they thought there was any chance of them losing the IP.

  • Monkey_Puncher #18 1 year ago

    Stop talking shit Interplay!

    When was the last time Interplay released a game that was worth a shit? I can't believe for a second they have the resources or the man power to put out a good Fallout MMO. I don't blame Bethesda trying to block this nonsense!

  • koopa #19 1 year ago

    "It would be Fallout 4. Fallout New Vegas was not a full sequel."

    It wasn't, but I think in legal terms it is, since it's a full standalone Fallout game, otherwise they could be forever releasing Fallout games without a number...

  • Spekingur #20 1 year ago

    @Monkey_Puncher: Fallout 1 and 2 come to mind.

  • andywilkie35 #21 1 year ago

    Yeah surely it would be Fallout 4? New Vegas is to Fallout 3 what Vice City and San Andreas were to GTA 3 (although saying that, I don't think anyone would have argued with Vice City or San Andreas being GTA4 and 5 respectively)

  • thesombrerokid #22 1 year ago

    you forget that Bethesda licensing agreement had a clause in it where interplay had to start work by a certain date & Bethesda believes they didn't & interplay says they did.

  • Moribundman #23 1 year ago

    @Spekingur That's true. But I'd rather have Bethesda and co (including former Black Isle/Van Buren devs) making great Fallout games at the expense of a vapourware MMO than have Interplay cut off Fallout's nose to spite its face.

    Can't someone just sell Interplay the rights to Waterworld and let them use that license? It almost seems like they only want Fallout for the brand, which thanks to the sterling work done by Bethesda, is now worth something again. They aren't after the Fallout brand because they care passionately about the Fallout universe and want to make a great game.

    It's all about the caps, baby...

  • Kami #24 1 year ago

    I must say after the shoddy New Vegas saga I'm not so sure people should be jumping up and down and kissing Bethesda or Obsidian. I like New Vegas, but it was clearly another of those games released last year that wasn't quite ready for primetime. If that is the direction the franchise is going, I'm out. I want to think a company is making a game the best it can be, not trying to meet a deadline and releasing a half-baked game with more errors than Wikipedia.

    So no, I honestly don't know who I support more in this battle. Both sides are quite frankly as bad as each other. Interplay screwed up a decade ago - Bethesda screwed up last year. Both sides are screwing up a perfectly decent franchise and in all fairness, I don't think either one should be allowed within 20 yards of it. It needs to be taken into protective custody...

    And given to Bioware.

  • Murton #25 1 year ago

    The trouble with the clause of "must start work by (date)" is that each side can arge what constitutes work. Does research count? What about concept art and storyboards? Most developers would say that these are crucial stages and represent the beginning of a project, a publisher (and remember that it's Bethesda Softworks, the publisher, that we're talking about here, not Bethesda Game Studios as a developer) might disagree and say that work hasn't begun until game assets are created. It's an issue of semantics of course, but courts love semantics.

    As for the possiblity of Interplay taking the franchise back, in terms of game content and design it would be a great thing for Fallout fans who will get to return to the lore and story writing that made Fallout great in the first place. It would also be a great thing for RPG fans who might finally get some decent RPG mechanics to sink their teeth into rather than playing an action game with a stats screen, something which has sadly replaced the entire RPG genre it seems. As great as it would be though Interplay lack the funds to create the AAA that the fans want so they'd have to win a publisher for the game and with the risk averse nature of the industry at the moment that's not going to be easy.

    Best thing for both companies would probably be to call of the suits and get round a table and discuss options, but I think the time for that passed long ago, there seems to be more than a little resentment between the two of them now and that's going to keep this circus running until a judge decides that one is right, and the other wrong.

  • Kami #26 1 year ago

    Exactly Murton, this legal battle is like two parents fighting over their kid. Sure, sitting down and talking about it like grown-ups would be the most sensible thing but the time for that is long since gone - they've gone too far with their utter hate of each other and now the child - Fallout - is the one who will suffer.

    If either of these companies loved this franchise the way they claim to, they'd swallow their pride, fire the lawyers and call a truce. Instead, they're using it as a weapon to score points off each other.

    In short, both sides would make lousy parents...

  • bratmandu #27 1 year ago

    Beth should just just buy em out and co develop the mmo together. It's not like bethesda have done much in the way of multiplayer and if interplay have as much framework done as they suggest here, there's a chance that there's the guts of a fallout mmo out there ready to go, so why not have everyone make a buck off it? If interplay go off on their own with an mmo it could be an unmitigated disaster both financially, legally and gameplay wise - if they give Bethesda a look at it maybe it could be adapted into the engine they're using for Skyrim.

    Sooner or later Bethesa are gonna have to modernize and take Elder Scrolls and Fallout into mmo territory, a compromise here could pave the way for something great someday.

    Besides, I'm told that someone has already modded Fallout 2 into a pretty good mmo. Anyone looked that up?

  • arcam #28 1 year ago

    And the judge said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the judge. And the judge said, Divide the game in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other. Then spake Bethesda whose the game was unto the judge, for their bowels yearned upon their game, and they said, O my lord, give Interplay the game, and in no wise slay it. But Interplay said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it. Then the judge answered and said, Give Bethesda the game, and in no wise slay it: they are the developers thereof.
    Edited by arcam at 21/01/11 @ 11:01

  • Cid #29 1 year ago

    The studio behind the first two games doesn't exist anymore, so a return to Interplay wouldn't necessarily mean the return of old mechanics and ideas.

  • Spekingur #30 1 year ago

    @Moribundman: We don't know what kind of Fallout game Interplay's MMO is going to be nor do we know what Bethesda's next Fallout game is going to play out. We are in the dark because we are only given little snips of information - or non-information. Everything else is just guesswork.

    Here is one list and here is another list of games that Interplay has had a hand in making or publishing. Notice how the list includes quite a few gamer favourite games. Before we go on about Interplay destroying the franchises we should thank them for giving Black Isle Studios and Bioware the leg up. Otherwise we would never have gotten Mass Effect from Bioware because they wouldn't exist.

    So, yes. I am very interested in seeing what Interplay might have to offer us in the form of a Fallout MMO. At least, I am not as readily dismissing it as some are.
    I don't even care if the MMO doesn't get released, I just want to see what they are doing. For myself I would just want a multiplayer Fallout in 3rd & 1st person in a similar gamestyle of die2nite :-P

  • Captain_Jono #31 1 year ago

    I really hope this is a misunderstanding between Interplay and Bethesda about precisely who owns what rights. If not, then one or the other party is pulling the Immelman of dick moves!

    Without seeing the contract, we won’t know who is making the valid claims. At the very least, this case should remind the industry of the need for simplicity and clarity when drafting contracts.

  • GamesConnoisseur #32 1 year ago

    Thats the problem with licensing there.

    Who would in utter stupidity agrees to only get the right to brand name and almost nothing else from that universe?! Pip-boy etc are intergral to Fallout experience but not able to use?

    So it seem to me that Bethesda already set out to 'disable' Fallout MMO from the very start if that was part of the agreement?

    I too doesnt care much for MMO aspect but only questioning the spirit of the agreement, if the clauses are so restrictive?

  • arcam #33 1 year ago

    this case should remind the industry of the need for simplicity and clarity when drafting contracts.

    If Bethesda win, it will probably remind the industry of the benefits of vagueness and ambiguity when drafting contracts...

  • DirectAim #34 1 year ago

    I find it funny that people are passing judgement without even knowing what the initial agreement was, know one knows who is right or wrong, stop thinking you know who is right simply by which games you prefer!

  • Moribundman #35 1 year ago

    @Spekingur I would in no way dispute that Interplay WERE a fantastic publisher to whom Black Isle and Bioware owe a lot. I was an obsessive fan of the Baldurs Gate series, Icewind Dale, Planescape, the Fallout (canon) series and loads of their old RPG/adventure games. I was also a fan of all the old Lucasarts point n clicks, but I acknowledge that these days if it wasn't for George Lucas' money and the Star Wars franchise Lucasarts wouldn't have a leg to stand on, and they drove the originality and talent out of the door.

    I think the original Fallout devs are the ones who matter in coming to an arrangement with Bethesda, and not the publisher (which has changed hands since those old games anyway). Josh Sawyer was the project lead on New Vegas and brought with him a lot of the drive and ideas behind Van Buren which Interplay cancelled after cutting Fallouts throat with the awful, awful, awful release of Brotherhood of Steel, which was developed by a complete third party with little regard or respect for the universe of Fallout. Sawyer was never an outspoken fan of the changes Bethesda made in FO:3 but it seems he and Obsidian/Black Isle have resolved a number of their differences and buried the hatchet with NV.

  • Monkey_Puncher #36 1 year ago

    @Monkey_Puncher: Fallout 1 and 2 come to mind.

    Yeah, back in 1998. You don't seriously believe that Interplay are the same company almost 13 years and one bankruptcy later do you?

    I'm not even convinced they have the staff to make this much talked about Earthworm Jim sequel, let alone the man power to create and run a good MMORPG.

  • Spekingur #37 1 year ago

    I have no idea what developers Interplay currently employs. They might have brilliant ideas. I am willing to give them the benefit of doubt until we see some sort of material from them.

    If Interplay has an in-house studio that might later get a new name which might then become a studio on their own and make awesome games then I am all for it. The more the merrier.

    I do agree that Interplay has made quite strange and bad business decisions from a gamer's perspective. But again, we don't know the full story. Not behind Van Buren, not behind Interplay's inner workings, not behind the license agreement of Fallout.

  • makeamazing #38 1 year ago

    I loved FO3, but the DLC was a pile of crap, NV isnt much better in some respects, it just hasnt grabbed me like FO3 to be honest.

    So I dont care who gets it, as long as Fallout 5 or 6 or whatever its called is better than the bugger mess that just looks like the same game with some missions game that we already have had.

  • UncleLou #39 1 year ago

    I doubt they have the know how to put together a AAA game

    No difference to Bethesda then in that respect. As much as I liked FO3, there really wasn't much "AAA" about it.

  • Moribundman #40 1 year ago

    Regarding the back story (Van Buren, details of agreement released to date etc.) you should all check out http://www.nma-fallout.com

  • uzivatel #41 1 year ago

    I dont see how Bethesda could stop the Fallout MMO unless Interplay itself breaks the contract.

    As for Interplay, I am not thrilled by the idea they could be doing more Fallout games. The reasons have been mentioned by others.

  • kongzi #42 1 year ago

    If either company releases a good post apocalyptic RPG in the style of fallout, i'd consider it.. regardless what it's called. Publishers put way too much stock in their IP's. The fallout brand didn't save fallout: brotherhood of steel from being crap.

    Good IP/story doesn't make up for bad gameplay - Good gameplay doesn't even need a backstory/IP.

  • jake-123 #43 1 year ago

    dont bother with fallout. bit boring if you ask me. we need new IP!

  • coomber #44 1 year ago

    I can't see how Bethesda can win this. There is no way Interplay would buy the rights to the name Fallout without any of the intellectual properties (Pip-Boy, Vaults, etc) that implies.

    Unless they used the same lawyers I used to try and sue the dickhead Romanian plumbers who arsed up my bathroom.

  • Alestes #45 1 year ago

    redbarony: Interplay were amazing
    Indeed they were. But now they aren't and haven't been since Coen been in charge of Interplay. Or do you seriously think that Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel is better than Fallout 3 or New Vegas?

    Interplay stopped being Interplay in every sense but in name years ago. All the good people left and formed Troika, Obsidian Entertainment and inXile Entertainment. And who's fault is that? Coen. Not Bethesda.

  • goatjugsoup #46 1 year ago

    i have no idea on how possible it is but maybe bethesda should just try and buy out interplay who would then have no argument.
    i'm sure interplay makes good games (though i can't remember playing any of their games) but i'd really rather they not get the fallout liscense back, also i dont think a fallout mmo is a good idea, neither would a TES one be.

  • kqlol #47 1 year ago

    redbarony, Bethesda has been around for about as long as Interplay, the Elder Scrolls series is older than Fallout. Contrary to Interplay they gradually improved in their 25 years history, or why by your logic are they still around? Go play Pinball Yeah!

    Interplay saying "anything we show will help Bethesda in their fight" is a testament to their incapability of making a decent Fallout title - after all they dismiss most of Beth's claims and already released screenshots showing material would "help Bethesda in their fight". Still, I really hope this game will happen and all fanboys can stay in their tiny MMO world.
    Edited by kqlol at 21/01/11 @ 23:04

  • DogbarDust #48 1 year ago

    Interplay are full of Deathclaw Doo doo, everyone that said they are just tryin to grab some cash because Bethesda has made Fallout a big name again are one hundred percent correct, i was gonna say i don't care who mkes the fallout games as long as the are good and interplay won't be able to do it, but Bethesda did make them big again and deserve to keep on doing so.

    What the F**K have interplay done lately anyway? Apart from scrabble around in the radioactive dust lookin for a decent length fag butt.

  • Lord_BeeJee #49 1 year ago

    Interplay now is only the name interplay, nothing of what used to be interplay is left, its just the remains of Titus relabelled.
    check on wikipedia how the company has been dismantled before defending them.
    Edited by Lord_BeeJee at 21/01/11 @ 21:53

  • Centrifugal #50 1 year ago

    It's a bit petty. Bethesda bought the franchise off them, a franchise which, might I add, was years dead at the time, and now after Bethesda made the series a success again they want in on the action.

  • arty #51 1 year ago

    ..and now Obsidian killed it again. New Vegas was dreadful.

  • DrMGinius #52 1 year ago

    I think they are both wasting the potential of their IP. So much potential I think Fallout has, yes.
    Edited by DrMGinius at 23/01/11 @ 18:05

  • vaughan42 #53 1 year ago

    I didn't really enjoy Bethesda's Fallout. It was just an inferior Elder Scrolls in a barren landscape. Stick to ES Bethesda and give Fallout back to Interplay, they were better at it anyway.

  • Chewy2nd #54 1 year ago

    Funny how people are moaning about Fallout New Vegas since a lot of people from Obsidian used to work at Black Isle studios (the people who made Fallout 1&2)

    If Interplay get the series, then what? I doubt they'd have enough money to create decent Fallout game, then franchise would then die instead of flourish like it has done with Bethesda