Hump wrote on Apr 28, 2017, 13:36:

Prez wrote on Apr 27, 2017, 23:00:
The head-scratching decision to call this game "Prey" aside, it looks like it has the potential to be good. Waiting for reviews/Let's Plays.

Their insistence to call this game "Prey" reminds when MS insisted that the FPS game be called "Shadowrun" when, in fact, it was nothing like the original. Shadowrun, while a decent MP game, failed due to labeling a well loved IP something that should never have been. Unless Prey is something amazing, I predict its imminent failure as well.

That's not a good analogy at all. Shadowrun was an established IP before the FPS was released. In addition, it was an established RPG series. As such, there were a lot of expectations attached to the name and a multiplayer FPS was not one of them.

There was one Prey game before this one and it wasn't exactly a big critical or commercial hit. The vast majority of potential players have neither played nor heard of the original game. Even if you have, both games still belong to the same genre (FPS) so that's already a much smaller leap than your Shadowrun example.

People really give too much weight to the Prey name. It's not even remotely as relevant as they seem to think.

MeanJim wrote on Apr 28, 2017, 19:35:
Isn't that the Bethesda formula? Create an unrelated game that could stand on its own, but instead they buy a popular IP and slap its name on it and basically ruin both.

It's not really a formula if there's only one questionable example of it (Fallout). You're also conveniently forgetting that Interplay was already ruining the Fallout brand long before Bethesda bought it. Remember Fallout Tactics? How about Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel? Or the canceled Van Buren? Or Fallout Online? Bethesda's purchase of the IP resulted in New Vegas, which is a far better outcome than anything Interplay was doing with the series.