A few posters on the forums regularly voice their "displeasure" at Fallout 3 and it's creater Bethesda, typing on and on about how they ruined cannon, how this shouldn't happen and so on. It seems impossible to these dinosaurs in their case of old world blues to think that Bethesda is actually listening to their complaints and will use this feedback to make a better Fallout game. Why do some people think that Bethesda can't make a good Fallout game? There have been worse titles in the series, like "that which must not be named" and Bethesda put a lot of effort into Fallout 3.

Bethesda is a capable developer, not the best beta testers, but capable. To think they didn't take the chance to learn a few things on how to make a better Fallout game from the creators is ignorant and foolhardy.

I look forward to more Fallout on the East Coast, Obsidian can have the West, Bethesda can develop the east where they can make their own bit of Fallout lore. Maybe Obsidian can focus more on rural combat and exploring a desert, while Bethesda can create more urban ruins to explore.

All in all, to believe New Vegas is going to be better than what is presumed to be Fallout 4 because the developers first title in the series didn't sit well with a vocal minority who believe they are beyond redemption is beyond [censored] stupid.

I think the majority of us are in the camp of "I'll believe it when I see it.". Obsidian has proved that they can not just make a good game - but a good Fallout game. Having pessimism about it isn't very stupid considering Bethesda has indicated design choices/flaws/whatever that don't correspond with certain things that are either classicly Fallout or just dumb things down.

The real reason most people want Obsidian instead of Bethesda to make the next game is because we trust them with the series more.

Hey, don't throw all of the Dinosaurs in the same boat as Bethesda Haters, I like Bethesda.

I agree there are a multitude of inconsistancies in F3 but that was their first swing at it, the next game should either be better or on the same level as F3 and NV in every way.

And I think the best choice would be to hire Obsidian to co-develope the story and lore of F4, maybe even world design, and make the best damn game in history (I very much hope so).

But I dislike NV (I used to hate it but after playing the Originals I have accepted that game for what it is, so I simply dislike it) so I guess this does not apply to me.

I don't hate Bethesda.

If you want to see why people don't like Fallout 3 then just look at any number of Fallout 3 vs Enclave topics. There have been dozens of them.

I don't like Fallout 3 mostly because it's black and white, Good vs Evil. Has plot holes, and forces you to join the good guys and you can't side with the bad guys, Talon Comany or Enclave. There is no reputation system, there is no traits, there is no damage threshold and there are no multiple endings, like Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout Tactics and New Vegas have. We can't talk our way out of killing for pretty much every quest. The writing is bad, we have companions that are not effected by radiation, yet we have to go into the radiation filled room and die? We become uber gods way to fast. Level scalling so there are no enemies greater then my ability to kill. There are caps in DC when the west long ago stopped using caps. No one is farming and there are no living plants outside of Oasis, it looks like the Great War happened yesterday, not 200 years ago. I could go on.

I like to think of it as constructive criticism. Also who is to say they aren't playing attention? Bethesda picked Obsidian. A company full of Ex-Black Isle developers. Now why would Bethesda want people that worked on past Fallouts to make a Fallout game for them, I wonder

I loved Fallout 3, as well as New Vegas. I don't care whoever makes the next game as long as it sticks to the facts and is a good game in general.