First off, please don't be offended by this, I don't mean to troll or insult anyone. This isn't about which is better either.

I originally came to this forum after finishing FO3 and NV, but I've been hanging out in the Skyrim forum a bit of late.

I've noticed a massive difference between the hardcoe fans / regular posters of the 2 series.

Consider that both series started in mid 90's and both are at around no.5. The majority of new fans in both series have only played the last couple of titles, with smaller group of long term series fans. Both series have undergone a change from a more stat based style of RPG to a twitch RPG. Of course I recognize that fallout has had a bigger change in game style, which brings it closer to TES, but Bethesda has stated they've actively taken note of what worked better in Fallout 3 (& NV maybe?) and adapted it for Skyrim.


Here's a couple of difference in attitude I've noticed:

Lore and Canon: There's obviously at least as much TES lore as Fallout, but on the skyrim forum while people may discuss it, I've never seen any idea dismissed because it would break Canon. I don't have to tell you how long such arguments go on here. Is it just that you guy care more about it? Why would that be?

Skill, Attributes and RPG: Fallout fans are very defensive of the SPECIAL system and at least keeping the number of stats, but for the most part the TES crowd are happy with ditching attributes entirely. It did truely svck in Oblivion, but I'd have expected the majority to want the system fixed, rather than scrapped.

Member's narrative: In the Fallout forum, it's quite common to post complete storylines, factions, maps of the area etc. as ideas for future games. In the TES forums, they don't seem to do this at all. Instead, they tend to put it all into writing complex back stories for their character to share with other forum goers.


So what's the reason behind all this? I very much doubt it's because TES fans are all simpletons who are prepared to play whatever Bethesda throws at them (although that might be a running joke here). It's certainly not that they don't care as much about role playing as the Fallout fans.

I'm wondering if it's the group mentality of the forums themselves. If you arrive at a forum with a vague set of ideas about how you want the game to progress and talk to others who agree with some of your points, are your opinions reinforced without you really noticing? Do your opinions change subconsciously so you fit into the group? Could this become more dogmatic? (again, no offense meant here). Do you write your metapost fuure game ideas because everyone is? I know I came very close to writing a lengthy character back story on the Skyrim forum, but then I thought "why am I doing this? What difference does it make to me if I tell a number of strangers how I'll play the game?". I've also notice my opinions on some matters changed by the general consciousness. Is this because I'm genuinely swayed by convincing arguments, or am I really just trying to fit in? I'm honestly not sure.

Just as Fallout is a microcosm of the world with different factions representing countries, I believe we can see the same process going on in on these very forums.

So what do you think? Am I talking rubbish or is there some kind of Vaultesque conditioning at work (ie basic human nature?). Is this why noobs always get such a hard time on any forum?

In counter arguments feel free to use examples of differences between the games, but please don't try to score points on how Fallout games or fans are better than TES. That's a bit childish.

Mods: I understand if you think this is not exactly a fallout discussion. I believe it is, but if you feel the need to lock or delete the thread, then so be it.

I doubt there is any conspiracy behind all this. Fallout is just built around mystery-upon-mystery, so speculation and liberal use of imagination are natural byproducts.
On nature of the fandom itself, the series had a long leap of several years and before these forums Fallout discussion was housed in many, nowadays apparently declining forums. There are a lot of differences between "old" fans, "new" fans, and in-betweens (like myself). If someone dislikes something in a certain Fallout game (usually Fallout 3), it's more likely about hating something because of a principle, not so much as for taste, quality. The term "good game, bad Fallout" is the very embodiment of this mentality. I suppose it's just a primitive remnant of human territorial behavior.


5 edits so far..

Conspiracy isn't really what I'm talking about. Closer to a kind of conditioning on a subconscious level. We are pack animals after all, it's in our nature to fit in with what we perceive to be the norm. Well, most of us anyway.

Of course it doesn't just apply to fallout fans, but just about any sort of community. There are differences of opinion and subgroups in all social structures of course.

But you need something of a certain level of complexity and interest to discuss in the first place, such as a compelling game world. No one would bother arguing about something they don't care for.

And I'm not dismissing anyone's opinions at all, if that's how I'm coming across. Just curious about this kind of thing.

I think this is because in Fallout the starring character is the wasteland... Maybe some don't actively realise it but Fallout is the story of a place as much as it is about the player character.

I don't spend time on the TES forums, I am Fallout exclusive. I came to the forum because Bethesda owns Fallout, so there is a chance what I have to say will be heared. Mostly I started out reading the forum, but what finally got me to become a memeber was two things. First being the number of topics that asked to post "your ideas" for many things like special random encounters and locations and so on. I had/had tons of ideas so I thought it was time to share them (and stop bugging my friends with them). Second being the amount of people not knowing anything about Fallout, other then Fallout 3. Maybe a third reason, to spread the word about Fallout Tactics.

Canon to me is important because it sets the ground rules and its fun for me to learn what officially happend. It adds replayability for me. Its like reading a series of novels, learning more info as you go. If they are all totally different from one another and even contradict the ones that came before, that just ruins it for me.

I also think the main reason why people post alot more ideas for locations and map, is because Fallout takes place in America, real world locatons. People want to see what their home region would be like in the Fallout Universe.

My personal theory is that this tendency arises from the fact that TES lore is typically unreliable and self-contradictory. Not to imply this is a bad thing, per se - it's actually pretty realistic and does a lot to make the TES setting seem big and expansive - but when you've got all the Daggerfall endings having happened simultaneously or the different interpretations of the story of Nerevar, consistency isn't really as important.

TES lore is dependent on interpretation and perspective a lot more than Fallout lore, so it's pretty easy to shoehorn in almost anything you want while still remaining lore-compliant. Just say that it's the truth from a different point of view, Jedi style. A lot of the lore in TES comes from the in-game books, which are written in-universe and thus can be argued to be biased/slanted/not completely informed/unreliable too.

Ultimately, I think TES is more "legendary" for lack of a better word. The narration is looser, with more room for different interpretations, just like real legends. This means that the lore is a lot more mutable, with more options for players to craft their own personal narrative within the wider setting.

Fallout lore, meanwhile, is a lot more solid and less open to interpretation. The narrative facts are laid out with a lot more reliability. The narration itself is firm, with the only interpretation being the moral ambiguity and what ending the player got (usually the good one.)



Yeah. See, SPECIAL is one of the key unique traits about Fallout (along with highly reactive endings and deep character-based roleplay). In TES, the stats are pretty generic and forgettable. The closest I can think of to SPECIAL in terms of importance to the franchise is free-roaming in TES. A Fallout game without SPECIAL is like a TES game without free roaming. Or possibly nords.

The importance of stats in Oblivion is roughly equivalent to the importance of... I don't know, alien blasters in Fallout. It's something that's nice to have, but it's not utterly necessary to the core of the game in the same way SPECIAL or Free Roaming is for Fallout/TES.



I think it's because Fallout tends to have much more distinct factions. TES' factions are typically fairly generic. Y'know, Thieves' guild/fighter's guild/mages guild/assassin's guild (Dark Brotherhood or Morag Tong), etc.

Compare the Oblivion factions to the Brotherhood of Steel, the Enclave, the NCR, Caesar's Legion, etc. The Fallout ones tend to have more unique flavor and traits than the TES ones do.

People write stories about the Brotherhood because they're interesting and have features that set them apart. People don't write stories about the fighter's guild because they're generic and have little to set them apart from any other RPG fighter's guild. Even their name is generic.

I think a large reason Fallout fans ( like myself ) are so protective of Fallout is because Fallout was somebody else's baby and it was taken. Beth made TES so the fans can't complain and say it would be done better by so and so company. It plays a big part, I'd say.