Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Keldon Mor <Keldon@********.NET>
Subject: Re: FASA Interactive
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 02:08:34 -0600
>> As you may or may not know, Microsoft is buying FASA Interactive this
>>week (according to people who work at FASA and other sources). FASA is
>>getting big money for this deal supposedly. Has anyone else heard anything
>>else? Will FASA have a little extra money now? And maybe put Corp Wars out
>>next year? Or is SRTCG dead beyond any resurrection? I heard that FASA may
>>print out their Dragon sourcebook then call ED dead (to recoup some lost
>>money maybe). Perhaps the same will go for SRTCG?
>>
>> The downside to this (besides Microsoft buying up another company) is
>>that Shadowrun: Assassin will be canned since Microsoft is already
>>developing a similar game. Argg.
>
>Okay - do you have any source for this other than the article which
>appeared on www.gamespot.com a week or so ago? Because if that's your only
>source, it's by no means a done deal - that article was very vague and
>'maybe'ish.
>
>And, for future reference, FASA does not own FIT. The same group of people
>own both companies, but that's NOT the same thing.
>


I saw the article in gamespot a while ago. I live in Chicagoland and know
someone whose wife works for FASA so I asked them. They said it's a done
deal and the papers will be signed this week. Since it's not done yet, It's
still a rumor so to speak but so was ED being cancelled and corp wars being
discontinued. I'm also aware that FASA and FIT are two separate companies
owned by the same people but they're still privately owned and if one
company is making good money, the other still benefits. If the owners have
cash in their pockets and one could hope that they might be in a position to
take a little risk like printing Corp Wars, no?

Peace,
Keldon Mor
Keldon@********.net
http://ww2.netnitco.net/users/keldon

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.