They're just really good games, and I can't stand to go backwards and play worse games. Don't have the time to waste. The only game I have played since skyrim came out, is skyrim, its getting kind of tiresome to be honest with you but any time I try to play another game I find I can't because it is so inferior to skyrim and I quite literally can't stand it. Naturally I am in desperate need of more games like skyrim. Its like if wolfenstein was still the only fps, a fan of the game would be going crazy begging for more, but luckily for said fan they did bring out more- doom and unreal tournament and halo and cod and literally thousands of other improved wolfenstein clones. Said fan is now in gaming heaven. All this time I've been in gaming hell, but finally they made games for me, and now its my turn to be spoiled with a thousand improved clones. Maybe you need to understand that I hate... HATE all other games.

I don't see why this has to be an either/or issue. Why can't Bethesda make Fallout 4 for the fans of the newer games and give Obsidian the go-ahead to make an isometric Fallout for the fans of the older games. Obsidian could work on an isometric Fallout while Bethesda works on Fallout 4 DLC and TES VI. I bet Obsidian could even fund most or all of it through Kickstarter, as they did with Pillars of Eternity. I'm sure many of us would chip in for that.

That would neglect the fans of NV - which balances good exploration and good storylines. It may not have done landscape exploration so well in the base game, but the DLCs have the landscapes as good as Bethesda IMO with the added bonus of great characters, voice acting and RPG mechanics.

No matter what Bethesda does, they wouldn't be able to please all fans all of the time.

This is BoguS. Neither game can compare to the other; it's like trying to compare boxing to dog shows. You appreciate only one, and haven't a care for those that appreciate the other or both. For us, it's like buying a season ticket, only to have the venue change the event on us [permanently] after two shows into the season.

@sesom: And it seems you'll like Fallout 4 no matter what, even buy it no matter what. That's just as respectable as giving it no chance at all. I will wait and get all the information I need before deciding to reinforce Bethesda's whatever decision.

@Tonedog: Has there ever been something like Skyrim before for you? I'm not talking other TES games/Fallout 3.

@Jaramr: Vegas and Skyrim are two different animals. The direction that Vegas took was imo the favorable one.

When we see the first images of Fallout 4 and they look like Fallout 3 (environment-wise) then I'll be pleased for a minute.That could mean the game has other things going for it than visual variation from it's predecessor. If we are shown snow, lava, underground cityscapes, mutated jungles or whatever, I'll be suspicious.hdi

@Envy: They can't please all the fans, but they should at least try to please themselves. They are creative people, not 13 year olds with a console in the basemant, playing m-rated Bethesda games. They do have the intellectual capacity to know what big of a chance they have and could/not throw away. If they lack the competence in one or the other department, they need someone else.

I disagree with that. I would say that in cases of an established task, that the decision to work on it should hinge (in advance) upon whether the task is something they want for themselves... and not that they should redefine that task to better suit their own preference.

Think: Art restoration. That is what Obsidian did with Pillars of Eternity. That could pass as a Baldur's Gate 3; and evokes sad lament that the same wasn't done for Fallout 3 back in 2008.

So you think making games that you don't like but you are only making because your target group demands it are better? I disagree... a lot....

Obsidian wanted to make Pillars.

HELL YES! Of course; but it's a choice.
No one has to make a project they don't want to ~unless it's their job to do as they are told (by their employer); and I would say one should not take up a project one doesn't love ~especially not one that's already beloved by others. It's them that are trusting that the developer will deliver and not harm.

I recall a new developer once that got the rights to an old series' 3rd title (an RTS by Bungie Studios), and what they did was interview the community to make sure that they understood what the game was about, and that they could retain that in their sequel to it.

Note: It should go without saying that I'm not implying that Bethesda should have interviewed the Fallout fanbase; they claim to have been fans themselves [not new to the series]... still, it boggles the mind if FO3 comes of their personal session in Fallout 1 & 2.

@Gizmo: I imagine them as people who do a job. The better they do the job, the more pleased they should be.

What the job is is another question.

So do I. It's not the programmer's fault, or the artist's fault, if the project's direction is off; nor even the gameplay designer's. You do what they pay you for.

Project direction is allegedly in BGS' hands. They have as much freedom as possible to create whatever games they like.

I just can't imagine them being satisfied with a mere TES.