Problem is; Fallout ain't Elder Scrolls.
Fallout is Fallout and whatever development studio is in charge of a Fallout game should design it according to Fallout rules.
Tactics weren't really an RPG either but they got a lot of lore and feel right excluding some minor inconsistencies.
Fallout 3 on the other hand was nothing like a Fallout game should be.

Not saying you're wrong in liking Fallout 3, we all have our own preferences when it comes to games, but Fallout isn't forcing it's gameplay, lore or mechanics onto Skyrim now is it?
So why should Fallout have a bunch of stuff forced onto it that doesn't fit there?
While I would rather have it go back to isometric turnbased I can accept FPP and 3rdPP, and I don't mind exploration but there should be a map node system combined with the exploration aspect.
Compromises can be made so that both sides are satisfied or at least have less to complain about.
But Oblivion, Elders Scrolls, Skyrim is not superior to Fallout 1, 2, Tactics or Van Buren.

So even if Fallout now belongs to Bethesda doesn't mean that they have the right to [censored] up the franchise by pleasing Elder Scrolls fans and screwing Fallout fans over.
Fallout 3 earned a lot of new fans due to it's change in gameplay, sure, but now it's time for the franchise to slowly move back to it's roots.
Cause Fallout and Elder Scrolls aren't the same thing, no matter how much you like Fallout 3 and Elder Scrolls.

And dude, please, hit the [Enter] key when you write a post.

This

Doubly This!!
Perfectly put :tops:

Though legally they did buy the right... Its just not 'right'.
It was predictable though. I put Interplay at fault in this, not Bethesda.
Bethesda just did what they do, its Interplay that allowed this to happen.

Imagine if it had been Enlight or Cosmi instead of Bethesda. :shocking:

Why would fallout move back to its "roots" as you call it, when the series is at an all time high after FO3 and NV? adding more exploration and action has obviously helped the series. The older gamers need to move on and accept that fallout has moved on from a pure RPG game. Those types of game only appeal to the minority. And what exactly is 'fallout rules'? Where is this rule book kept?? If you have a copy maybe you should post it to bethesda lol

you weren't a wasteland god by level 5 in FO3, thats totally not true, at level 5 you couldn't get in most of the locked doors or pc terminals and you didn't have your skills maxed out at level 5, so thats a huge exageration and you know it, but in new vegas you are a walking terminator by level 20, once you have good weapons and some good perks, you're just as powerfull in new vegas as you are in FO3, unless maybe you put your intelligence to 1 and don't bother getting any good weapons, both games you're super powerfull by level 20, in new vegas the human enemies are very weakly armed... ceasers legion using spears and macheties? oy vey.. powder gangers using varmit rifles and hatchets? ncr using service rifles? its just the facts, why aren't enemies using more plasma rifles? or marskman rifles?or multiplas rifles? or sniper rifles? or missle launchers? or gatling lasers? or heavy incenerators? or tri beam lasers? or bushman rifles? it is what it is. this isn't arguable, its just observations about the lack of well armed enemies in the game.

Why even call it an RPG then?

Why even slap the label "Fallout" on a game that resembles NOTHING of what was established?
You really need to look around you then, if you think only a minority is pleased with pure RPGs, there are plenty of people that love them.

Also, how in gods name has exploration and action helped the series?

That's right, it hasn't.

You compare using the Lockpick and Science skill on a low level to fighting people on a low level. In both games you're not a divine at all when it comes to things that takes non-combative skills at a low level. Because there's the 25-50-75-100 thresholds (which is rediculous, you should constantly get better at the skill and not just have "levels". Should be like "Hey, here's a hard door, and I have 42 in Lockpick, I could try and I could succede but it will be harder than if I had 68 for example.)
But if you count combat - try to fight a Deathclaw and a BoS paladin in both games on level 5, see which one you will easily manage and which one you won't.

Some people say that they have faith in Bethesda.
Considering how FO3 turned out I don't.
Fallout is the one and only gaming franchise I absolutely love, it's the only series that I discuss about on forums and the only series I really feel I want to explore it's lore in depth.
They get one more chance with FO4 but I'm not going to blindly say "oh it's going to be even better than New Vegas!" because the only thing I've seen from them was Fallout 3 and it didn't impress me one little bit.
If it's Skyrim With Guns then to me it's obvious that they can't design a game unless it's an Elder Scrolls game and that they should sell it off to a competent studio which can handle two different types of games or just let Obsidian develop it and just collect royalties (And give them more time to develop the game and not push it out the door.).
Might seem premature but I really don't care, I'm normally skeptical about things but when it comes to FO4 a picture of me would be next to the word "cynical" in a dictionary.
Of course, Fallout 4 is probably like 3 to 5 years away from now so all I can do is wait. :confused:



Unfortunately they have the right to put in whatever they want to, from unicorns to lazor unicorns that shoots plasma out of their eyes and pee extra-terrestrials.


1. Because Fallout isn't suppose to be an Oblivion clone, Fallout 3 earned new fans, if the series slowly moves back to it's roots then the new fans can adapt and the series can get on the right track again.
2. Fallout is about action?
3. Why should we? As I said, this is the only game franchise I deeply care about, there is none to move on to. So no I won't accept it.
4. Riiight... How many games are released in the main stream market and are like the older RPG's? Not many, if any at all. Why? Cause it "might" be a risk and it could result badly for the development studio if they placed a lot of money on a risky project. We don't know if hardcoe RPG purists are in a minority or not because those kinds of games are hardly made anymore.
5. Look back at other FO3 vs NV threads and read the posts from us elitists/purists/old-schoolers/original-lovers. I feel that this has been repeated enough already and feel no desire to repeat it again.

i agree, FO3 and the way obsidian makes their rpgs does appeal to more people, i like how bethesda makes games and i like how they made fallout, they made exploration and fighting enemies a big part of the game, even though FO3 was lacking some elements of earlier fallout games they still made a widely popular and fun game, and for their first attempt at a fallout game, they did great...FO3 is rated at 9.0, one of the top 10 all time xbox360 games, so why some people are trying to trash it so much is laughable, bethesda is gonna make more fallout games and they'll be just as good if not better than FO3, and people wanting them to make the games exactly like the first fallouts is kinda like wanting the new cars to be made like model t fords...they revived the franchise.

So what? uh... That's what genre is for... You can't please everybody when their tastes are often mutually exclusive ~unless you split your efforts into genre. Blizzard made Warcraft 3, and World of Warcraft. They did not try to graft both games into one. Relic made Dawn of War, and are making Space Marine ~they did not try to graft both games into one. Fallout was not a politically correct game ~now it is, was a turn based series ~now its not; was a game where the PC could permanently affect the world ~now folks complain when NV even attempts this, and they might just drop that for the next deviating game in the series.

Point is that Fallout was an established series with an established game system, and an established fanbase. Why ruin that instead of inventing something original?

Tell me if you are you saying that you consider those minority groups undeserving of a game they can enjoy, and should rather change their tastes to suit the common palette. Is that what you mean? If it is not, then that is why studios should still make pure RPGs, and that's also why Fallout should return to it's roots. :shrug:

But theres even MORE people that prefer a mixture of RPG, exploration and action. So thats the way fallout will go. Exploration and action have been proven to help the game by the sheer success of FO3 and NV, and the fanbase will keep growing!

Minority????

Yeah sure

I can even asure you that some people Hate Morrowind and Oblivion too

Helped???

Helped in what??

We dont need to accept nothing if we dont want

The past was fun and the present, not so much, I will never accept this,

God help the RPG genre if this was what you want

they are pretty much doomed by that logic




Our fanbase keep whining if you havent noticed yet

They dont have even pleased with NV

And West.....

Ratings,

Ratings doesn means nothing

YEAH, FO3 got GOTY and top 10 XBOX games,

I dont care

FONV is game of the year according to PC Gamer USA

You dont care

Looks like that you only care the achievemnts of Fallout 3, Like I only care the ones of FONV

You catch the drift???

If you didnt

Its just MATTER OF OPINION

what are you talking about? bethesda makes games their own style, if you play elder scrolls and FO3 would have a great idea on how they make games and if you don't like their games, not sure what to tell you, but they make open world,sandbox type games, thats what they do,. they put an emphasis on dungeon diving, exploration, enemies to fight etc, they also make massively popular games usually all rated between 9 and 10. so you want them to make a game thats only gonna appeal to a few people who played old fallout games, FO4 is gonna be tons of exploration and a good amount of combat and dungeons to explore, thats just how they make their games, a post apocalyptic game should had tons of exploration and combat, they hit the nail on the head here. they aren't gonna change how they make games to make a few people who played the old fallout games happy...they won't be taking out exploration and combat.

Why is that right, and where does that mentality end? Its rather terrifying to consider all aspects where that can be applied if it becomes common sensibility.
(but I'll stick to games)

This is the main problem.

I like Elderscrolls, and I like Fallout 3, and I like the Fallout series as a whole ~and I don't like Fallout 3 as a Fallout series game.
(Think of it as if they were tools, would it make sense to have a 3 piece plumber's tool set of two pipe wrenches and an airbrush? Think about that for a second.)
An airbrush is fantastic... but it doesn't belong.

Then they shouldn't do any more Fallout games.

Yeah, I honestly preffer this

Maybe the new games want this

But hey, old gamers are part of the market you know,

I enjoy and play pure RPG games but im happy with the way fallout is going. The fact is pure RPG games are becoming less popular. Fallout isnt just for the PC RPG gamers anymore. Its for a wider range of gamers

A pure RPG can't be for the wider range of gamers?
Why?

A complex system can be worked in with consoles. (RPG mechanics complexity)
Point and click can be worked in with consoles.
Longer dialogue, more dialogue options and better reactions can be worked in with consoles.
A complex RPG isn't exclusive to the PC, it can work on the console as well.

Well. some of us dont like it, And AGAIN, we dont need to accept it if we dont want it



Proof???

Dragon Age and the Future Dungeon Siege 3 wants to say hi too

PURE RPG arent becoming less popular

But we have games like Mass Effect who likes to put the shooter element

And simply we dont need it to have a RPG



Honestly they should stayed in PC,

Yeah I said that

That's nice.

Roleplay me this... Pretend you are the TES player who finds that the Dreamcatcher CEO won the lottery and bought TES, and made it a AAA Farmville clone. Wait that's cruel. They made it a turn based Sacred 2 clone. How does that turn out?

That's their fault
If given the choice of a Fallout 3 like endeavor ~by any studio or no Fallout endeavor at all by any studio... Guess.

Ive posted this on numerous threads about this topic,ive quoted myself up top,and i will make my point as clear as day

You cannot compare them,they are two different genres

Uh, no.

If anything, hardcoe pure RPG fans outnumber any of those types of fans.

In my city, there is a group of 400 people that LARP and roleplay in games.

Sheer sucess proves that exploration and action help a game..

Yeah, based on what? Lots of people love Fallout: New Vegas because of the STORY and the PLOT, not exploration.

Dragon Age dont have exploration too

Not like that this stoped for be loved among some fans

Well, 2 posts from post limit, is this thread worth a thread #2?

No, abandon this topic.