What a clown...

He's like that moron Reynold Sanity...

Truer words have never been spoken.

Yeah, I like all the Fallout games too, 'cept the Burned Game. It sometimes feels weird to me, as a fan of the originals, who played and loved those (and replays them once every year or two), who also loves the Bethesda Fallouts to death, to see the constant biting and scratching between the blended fan bases.

It's like two sets of step-siblings getting blended together into one family. And I'm the kid in the middle, trying to bring peace, and both sides are screaming for me to pick a side.

I know I recall reading that the original devs stated that they would be interested in taking the Fallout universe into an MMO because of the potential it would have.

If I read that correctly, we should be praising Bethesda for acquiring the rights.

Well, 3 and 4 are real/proper/very very good fallout games to me. Besides what makes fallout fallout is a subjective opinion. Also Bethesda simply made their own vision of fallout (how can they make bad fallouts if they made the fallout series into their own vision/interpretation), they own the IP, and to some extent fallout is what bethesda makes it to be. Future fallout's will be made like 3, nv, and 4, so for better or for worse (depending on if you prefer fallout 1, 2, tactics or 3, nv, and 4) this is fallout now. I also do not think that bethesda games are shallow.

Unbelievable how Bethesda argues Fallout 3 lacks on emotional depth because of a silent protagonist... oh my god... These guys, have they ever in their entire lives read a novel ?

On the other hand, the essence of a good narrative is one that appeals on a number of levels. It isn't as though you need to be either elitist or populist; you can craft a narrative to appeal to both.

Sadly, recent Bethesda games seem to have increasingly sacrificed multi-level appeal in favour of shallow populism. Personally, I think that's something to be lamented.

BEHOLD THE DRAWER IN WHICH I STORE MY FORKS!

That drawer is empty. A swarm of drones strapped with powerful electromagnets must have passed overhead and caused all of my forks to fly away.

I therefor have no flying forks to give.

Agreed. I don't understand what all of these people that are whining and complaining about the game really want to get out of this. Game's evolve over time. Not devolve. If we were all still playing the same style fallout game's from 90's, the fan base would probably be obsolete and the dev's would have probably dropped the IP by now.

Is that why all these turn-based or RtwP games are being overwhelmingly successfully funded on Kickstarter across the last three years? Would it be a mainstream AAA blockbuster? Probably not. Would it be doing just as well if not better than the first two? Very, very likely.

It is a too often repeated very strange and shortsighted argument that if it is not a triple-A blockbuster, it would die or that it wouldn't be any good and henceforth evolving mutating into one that forcibly strives for such mainstream success is somehow a must. Most of the games made these days are not AAA topsellers and smaller studios doing smaller games are doing fine with that.

Are you talking Moba games? What is Rtwp? I'm not completely up on all of this jazz.

1. What?
2. "Real time with pause."

Is Bethesda still a smaller studio though? They hire more and more people after every game since Morrowind at least, and spend more and more money on each game. Smaller studios can afford to make smaller games, but I don't know if Bethesda can afford to.

People expect bigger and bigger things from them with every game. If Bethesda suddenly tried to go smaller, with a smaller budget, I fear the fan backlash and rage would could ruin the company. People already hated on Fallout 4's graphics in the trailer after all, because the fan's expectations grow with every game, though I personally don't understand the graphics complaints. I would be happy with Daggerfall's graphics.

Anyway the point is that the stakes have gotten too high. Bethesda can't afford to de-escalate because the fanbase has grown too large, the backlash could wreck the company.

Well I look at the "fun" factor. I have way more fun with Bethesda's version of Fallout than I ever did with the first two games.

I like them but they never kept me coming back to play like Bethesda does.

I'll never understand these sorts of posts. Just state something without really backing it up with anything and expect it to carry some sort of weight? I can do the same...

"Well, I look at the "fun" factor too. I have way more fun with Black Isle's Fallout than I ever have with Bethesda's shoddy interpretation of the series.

I like them in the most superficial way but it's not like I can play them sober."

...and its equally as meaningless.

A game can evolve and still be a ambitious rpg. I dont even expect bethesda to live up with fallout 1 or 2, they dont need to, because they already did fantastic things like Morrowind(alot awesome things to read) or even Fallout 3, Skyrim ->they prooved they can create a nice rpg so I can expect them to evolve on that line, stay true to it. Not align to trends in modern gameplay.

The thing is, I play GURPS. I think it's a great tabletop RPG system that allows for a ton of diversity (and the Fallout universe fits well into it).

But I also love FO3, NV and FO4. To me, a Fallout game isn't about the leveling system, it's about the the world itself. The characters, the story. I think Bethesda has done just fine with making Fallout games.

They are not. But they (gamesas, Zenimax) can still afford to publish smaller obscure (and quite often lackluster and/or flop) games made by others. Such as Rogue Warrior, Rage, Wet, Brink, (and I haven't heard anything really outstandingly positive about Battlecry either)... etc. It doesn't seem to be as much a question of money as it is often posed to be.

They've driven themselves to a corner with that. But still, a good design usually finds its audience (whether it is them branching out of their one single format, or hiring someone competent to do that for them).

No its not.

Everyone likes to talk like all this stuff is so qualitatively objective, like there's one pre-defined Platonic Ideal of the "true" Fallout game and every element can be dissected to fall short or live up to this mythical standard created by universal forces.

In reality most of these discussions is just sharing opinions about intangibles. One can attempt to frame those opinions as if they carry more weight, but I don't think you have to.

There is no such thing as an objectively provable "true" Fallout or any other game. You either like it or don't. You may have preferences about what you want, but in the end it's still just statements of opinion.

So in that sense "I like the game because I enjoy it" is just as valid.

1. The pre-defined ideal, based on a simple logic equation, is the original Fallout. All other games are judged on how close they hedge to the source material. Simple mathematics, really.
2. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. If I were to state that the series has drifted further from its roots with each passing iteration I'd be sharing a tangible, and I'd be correct. And sure, you don't HAVE to frame your opinions, but you also don't have to post on message boards on the internet. If all you have to say is "I like this" or "I don't like that" then why even pretend to converse? I know we're on a Bethesda forum so dialog isn't the focus (just a little Bethesda jab for ya) but in real life people usually don't stop immediately after a vague assertion.
3. Sure there is. The original creation asserts itself as the true entity. It is inherently so. It is not fact that you need to value the trueness, but the trueness is an easily tangible concept.
4. In what world? Can you imagine if politicians weren't forced to back up their claims? This isn't kindergarten here, we're all advlts (or close to it), we should hold each other to a higher standard of discourse.

The truest Fallout is the one that sells the best, and man is this Fallout ever selling wonderfully. Kinda looking like 4 is the "truest" Fallout then.

That's just naive.

Though I suspect you only said it to piss on someones boots.

Merely using similiar logic to a prevous logic to prove a point that's most likely just going to be ignored anyways.


"True product" arguments are completely ridiculous though.

And the sky is yellow and the earth is flat!