The Fallout fanbase is one of the most divided fanbases out there. When Fallout 3 was released, millions of people who had never played the originals were added into the fanbase, and a very clear split was formed. When New Vegas was released, the split got even worse, as most fans of the old games liked it, most fans of the exploration and atmosphere in Fallout 3 didn't like it, and even more people who were new to the series came into the fanbase. With the split worse than ever, I'm curious, does it bother any of you at all? Or do you not really mind being part of a fanbase which such differing views? Personally, I think being a Fallout fan is just plain unpleasant. We don't have true discussions, we have arguments, or discussions that will eventually devolve into arguments, and there's almost nothing we can all completely agree about enough to have fun discussing it. If I were to get into a discussion with an Elder Scrolls fan, even if I liked one game and the other person didn't, we could still have an enjoyable discussion of the series as a whole. That's not possible in this fanbase, it seemingly always ends up as an argument over the other person's preferences.

Yes it bugs me.

I don't agree about there not being "true discussions." These Fallout forums have alot of them. People just need to stop making the damn VS threads.

It really doesn't bother me until someone either tries to refute my opinion, calling me "stuck in the past" or something, or when they rag on FNV for being more like the originals, then they bash the originals, and i wont stand for that.

Yeah, is starting to get annoying

BTW

Not like that our fanbase was the onlt broken

plainly put, yes, I wasn't around when FO3 was first released and (gladly) missed that bout of head clashing

When F:NV was first released it seemed the arguments were contained within their own threads but as time goes on the arguments tend to spill into completely unrelated threads. Both of the fan bases are as bad as each other imo.

It's just tiresome to read the same old arguments constantly and how heated they get, but people will be people I guess

Yes, it can get annoying. I won't throw the blame towards any side of the fanbase, because there are idiots and reasonable people on both. When you bring up Elder Scrolls though, the same thing didn't really happen that did with Fallout.

Not really

Some people still discuss about Oblivion

Right, but my point is that the Morrowind vs Oblivion split is much, much less severe than the one in the Fallout fanbase. For example, most Elder Scrolls fans, regardless of which games they liked or didn't like, are excited for Skyrim. If Fallout 4 was announced right now, only one side of the fanbase would be totally happy if Bethesda was making it, and only one side of the fanbase would be totally happy if Obsidian was making it.

I mean, there was nobody to acquire the franchise and change it completely. The Elder Scrolls has evolved since the first one, but Fallout did with Fallout 2 and was going to with VB, it's just that VB would have been more true to FO1 and FO2.

And to anyone who was thinking about it, no this is not anything that is supposed to "bash" Bethesda or FO3 and you should not reply to it with an argument. Come to think of it, that would be really ironic in this thread.

I don't think thats 100% true at least not for me. Who makes the game does not decided if I like a game. If Bethesda worked on their writing and keeps the improvements like hardcoe Mode and reputation system and adds a level of progress to the wasteland at least to the point of Fallout One then I will be happy.

They also need to stop leaving things so open ended.

It's pretty dogmatic at times, isn't it? I've sort of vented about this before but, despite trying to be balanced about it, got a thread closed, with some help from a busybody. I don't know how long this one will last.
I've concluded that it's as silly to be bothered by it as it is to contribute to it.
It's the internet, where everyone is anonymous to some degree and there are few barriers to expression. A lot of the arguing is for fun, anyway. It's sort of an internet tradition to stake your claim and be unmovable.
I'm emotionally and philosophically opposed to dogma and partisanship, so sometimes these boards can be a real slog through the mud. Honestly, if I see another Fallout 3 VS Fallout New Vegas thread I'll... well, I'll just skip it unless I'm bored. But it's tiresome.
For a supposedly 'intelligent' series, Fallout has certainly attracted a lot of people with inflexible minds. Everyone, please: your opinion is not a fact, and a disagreement with your opinion is not an insult (necessarily). I truly believe that all of us have more in common than we do in difference and if we took the trouble to calmly discuss things rather than act like bickering 10 year olds this would be a... well, crap, a slightly more boring place, probably. But more satisfying, and easier to justify spending time in.
Damn you, xxAntibodyxx, You made me rant.

It's to be expected. Fallout 1 and 2 are radically different games than 3. Morrowind to Oblivion wasn't nearly as radical. Sure there were some big changes, but the games ultimately have the same basic build.

Fallout 1 and 2 fans have always been very passionate, even before the release of Fallout 3, or even Tactics. A lot of them have been waiting for a Fallout 3 for 12 years, so they passionately clung to Fallout 1 and 2.

Now, Fallout 3 is finally announced by Bethesda. A lot of hype is driven up. Most of the fanbase is very excited: Fallout 3 is finally going to happen. The rest is skeptical, and predict that the game will be like Oblivion rather than Fallout.

Fallout 3 is finally released, and to the majority of Fallout 1 and 2 fans were pissed at the results. The game was indeed more like Oblivion than Fallout, so they dubbed it 'Oblivion With Guns'. It had bad-writing, horrible continuity errors, and didn't seem like a Fallout at all. The more and more they looked at the game, the uglier it got.

However, there is a large influx of new fans, a lot of them fans of TES. To them the game is a blast. It's a lot like TES, but in a post-apocalyptic setting. There's nukes, muties, power armor, guns, lasers. To them the game had everything.

This is where the rift occurs. Fallout 3 fans thought it was the most awesome thing since the invention of six. Fallout 1 and 2 fans were thoroughly pissed that they waited 10 years for 'Oblivion With Guns'. Flame wars ensued accordingly.

Two years later. Fallout: New Vegas comes out. Some Fallout 3 fans were upset that the game wasn't as 'epic' Fallout 3, though most weren't. Fallout 1 and 2 fans were mostly pleased with the game, because it seemed a lot more like Fallout 1 and 2, but still bothered by the fact that the engine was still 'Oblivion With Guns'.

I just had a logical vent rant in another threat about just this subject, and it ANNOYS me to no ends! I will not repeat myself, i am A LOT calmer than when i ranted before, but i want to start seeing some unity here in these forums, it would make me a happier Paladin, and for once, i can just reply to threads and just enjoy the threads without VS. arguments, which i am guilty of myself when i am angry and get bashed for having my own opinion and told i am wrong. So please, Brotherhood to Legion to NCR to Talon Company to Enclave to whatever faction or game, can't we just get along for once? :fallout:

It is hard to stay civil when people will refute opinions with a startling ferocity, this is present on both sides, but more common with the new fans, but more fierce with the old fans.

Try to look at it this way -- if an obviously obnoxious person drags you down to their level, you automatically lose no matter how well you construct your counterargument.
If you answer a ranter calmly and with a bit of humor they are generally disarmed and a real conversation may result. Does not apply to crazy people.

That......Is one of the sanest post i have heard all week! Ice cream for you, compliments of the Brotherhood! :icecream:

The split will never get better if people keep distilling opposing arguments down to things like that. Most Fallout 3 fans who were disappointed in New Vegas were disappointed by the poor quality of exploration, and you know this, yet for some reason you chose to lie about it and say they were actually disappointed that it wasn't as "epic." Why? What does lying accomplish? Do you think you're telling the truth, in which case, how exactly do you think that quality sandbox gameplay is "epic?"

Oh, and no, it wasn't "some" Fallout 3 fans that were disappointed with it, many were, so many in fact that it's become common to answer people who want to play a Fallout game with "Fallout 3 for exploration, New Vegas for better writing."

Edit: Sorry folks, didn't mean to start an argument, I just don't take to kindly to someone flat out lying in my thread.

Is it coffee flavored? I like coffee.

Of course, we aim to please.... :thumbsup:

Yeah that mended fences nicely, saying people are flat out lying when stating an opinion. Good Job :goodjob:

That wasn't an opinion, that was lying about the opinions of others. You're an active member here, do you really think that the opinions of the Fallout 3 fans who don't like New Vegas because of it's exploration and atmosphere can be summed up as they didn't like it because "it wasn't as 'epic' as Fallout 3?"

Im glad iv played every fallout game F1,F2,Ftacticts,F3,FNV but i agree that in every forum there's an argument and sum times the arguments aren't even revaluant to the forum!!!!! (its like dissfunctional family)

I would agree yes that bigger complaint is the atmoshphere and exploration but I have been reading alot of threads lately where people complain that New Vegas does not have enough combat. There was even a thread about New Vegas not being EPIC enough. I would not have not called it out right lying, just maybe a poor choise of words.

Can I respectfully suggest that calling someone a liar is not very constructive, either?

Perhaps you have missed them, but there have been threads about the perceived lack of 'epic' in New Vegas. The opinion on most of those threads was, indeed, that while New Vegas was less flashy than F3, there was much in Vegas that could be considered 'epic'.

I believe it's safe to say the exploration issue is a separate one.

I agree that there is much distillation of opinion and I question the science. Maybe we need to establish a point of reference? I know nothing about Fallout fandom except these boards. If you ever hear me say 'fandom', this is what I am referring to. What about the rest of you? When you refer to a body of fandom opinion, what's your source?

Edit: Eh, Styles beat me to it.

There were a number of threads complaining about the lack of epicness in New Vegas, and I thought I did a fairly good job at remaining unbiased while criticizing both sides.