That's certainly what it looks like.

So it seems. But it's all connected; your point, my point. At least to a degree. Before, they were riding on the success of Oblivion, then Fallout 3 which was basically Oblivion with new paint job, now Skyrim (and there's no doubt Fallout 4 will be a close call to that). Each game the same, and going blander by every title.

On the other hand, if they never change anything but cosmetics and do some futher streamlining to the mechanics; there they remain as a one trick pony.

And on trashing out stuff; despite that they trashed everything that mattered in the Fallout franchise, nobody's really asking them to trash everything they've been doing thus far. There are other ways to adapt their "expertise" to design of a different focus.

I think that's highly speculative.

The problem with Bethesda as I see it is that they're way too passionate about creating a game that evokes the same feeling that children have when playing a game.

These emotions however can't be emulated. As a child I had a great time finding out how high I could fly with my helicopter and where the sky would end, I'd love to fly over the sea and find out whether there are some eastereggs or new land. In GTA. Which isn't a game for children.

Bethesda suffers from the (imo) misconception that 'playing around' is what the audience wants. They regard their games as tools, toys with which the player should be able to do what they want in order to create their own unique experience.

There's some wisdom in that, but I think Bethesda hasn't nailed two problems that arise from here:

1. Exploring the limitations of the game is much more interesting the more reactive the game is.

2. Agency is a grave component of a game. Even Bethesda can't do without agency. But instead of regarding that as another entire space of possibilities for discovery, they disregard it as a mere means to playing around, wanting the player to make their own agencies within the limits (and thus the agency) of the game. Without layers, there's no depth. Without depth, playing around can't fulfill it's self purpose.

Bethesda's games would do well to introduce more layers, a hierarchy of agencies, of consecutive fields of discovery.

Am I the only one who thought the trailer was awesome? Because the amount of negativity in this thread is unreal. We barely know anything about the game yet everybody is acting like it's flop on release.

They got rid of all their old writers and specialists? Proof of this?

To his credit he did say they lost all of it's talented writers, not all their old writers, and a term like talented writer is subjective.
They have though lost most of their old writers, and lots of the better ones, proof being the writing for quests and the main storyline in morrowind in comparison to skyrim, the quality is much lower in my opinion on almost all fronts.

As for the specialists, I don't know if there is any real tangible proof on that. Dwemer ruins for example in skyrim felt much different than draugr burial mounds, so I'd say they still got a few specialists left.

Still, it has been feeling like the passion in their recent games has waned, but that may be due to them having a much bigger team now and more people working on things with different visions of what they want, rather than a smaller group of people with similar visions.

They need to streamline it and remove all "difficult thinking" to appeal to a wider crowd.. like the pre-formal operational and critical thinking stages, or those that can't be bothered with difficult choices and confusion. How else are game developers going to get 20+ million sales? Modern Warfare 3 sold over 26 million copies.

Look at the poll results.

At the time of this reading, the "yes, this trailer meets expectations" option has about 3 times the votes as "no, this trailer has not met my expectations".

Almost all of us who like it are just keeping quiet, since we don't have much to complain about.

I was expecting CGI or still images of stuff relating to Fallout like newpaper headlines and adverts, but we got in game footage which was more than i expected.

I wasn't disappointed with the graphics, as i wasn't expecting them to be a vast improvement over the previous game. They can still improve on them, but i'm not fussed as long as it looks nice, which it does.

There will no doubt be a wide variety of ENB mods to choose from, for PC gamers.

Sarcasm level: Over 9.000!

I think this hasn't been mentioned yet: It seems that the Supermutant on the left is wearing some sort of Power Armor and/or a Power Fist.

From a marketing point of view, the trailer was terrible. The graphics are dated, the character animations are robotic, everything looks like it's made of plastic, and the quick cuts and dank imagery do a poor job of showcasing the one thing Bethesda actually does well (huge sprawling environments). And making the focus of the trailer a dog of all things was a huge mistake. It's 2015, folks; flat muddy textures are not a suitable substitute for fur. If you can't make animated fur, that's fine, but emphasize what you do well. Don't shove your greatest failure in the audience's face. If the trailer didn't have Bethesda's name or the Fallout trademark stamped on it, nobody would give it the time of day.

From my personal point of view...my opinion about an upcoming Fallout could basically be summed up as: "Eh." And after seeing the trailer, my opinion is still "Eh." It reveals absolutely nothing noteworthy, save that it's another Fallout game and that it takes place in Boston, which they could have accomplished with a simple teaser like what they did with Skyrim. The content could otherwise be applied to any of the Fallouts (doesn't help that a lot of the things in it look like they were recycled from FO3), there's nothing here to tell me what it's about, what it does differently from its predecessors in terms of gameplay, setting, or story. Though kudos to them for at least making a trailer made up of in-engine assets. CG trailers need to die in a fire.

And I really hate video game dogs. They've become the go-to source for creating cheap drama. Want to add emotional depth to your game but lack the ability (or desire) to actually write something compelling? Just throw in a [censored] dog and make it roll over. Everyone will eat it up. If I see this dog in this game, I'm gonna eat it literally.

^ That dog is probably Dogmeat. You are not eating Dogmeat.

Have you ever thought that maybe they never ran or sprinted in Fallout 1/2 because it was turn based? Also provide any evidence that would suggest they cannot run or sprint?

What has turnbased have to do with anything?

Ghouls were slow and cumbersome because they were people who were rotting.

I read something about CoD zombies and lamps in their eyes.

I must say that CoD zombies has a very well-written storyline and the ''lights'' in their eyes are totally explainable.

Plus, Treyarch does the game justice.

As to the former question: Almost every human NPC can run and the ghoul scavenger NPC can run. So no, it is not because it was turn-based. It has absolutely 'nothing' to do with it.

As to the latter question: Again, the ghoul scavenger can run and has a regular unarmed hit animation. If Interplay/Black Isle wanted to portray "feral" ghouls like they were in Fallout 3 back during Fallout 1/2 they could have. But they didn't. All ghouls apart from the ghoul scavenger were portrayed as slow and shambling, who's animations suggested that it was a great strain on them to even walk because of their rotting condition. Mindless ghouls, glowing ones and ghoul crazies, the "feral ghouls" of Fallout 1/2, were all portrayed like that.

Again, and I can't believe I have to re-emphasize this: If Black Isle/Interplay wanted to portray feral ghouls in Fallout 1/2 like Bethesda portrayed them in Fallout 3 they could have. But they didn't, because that was not how they wanted to portray them.

In order to leave Vault 111 you first have to open the iconic Vault door with "111" written on it and then enter the elevator platform to get on the surface.

No no no, the world of Fallout we see in the trailer is actually 'inside' Vault 111. We don't go out of Vault 111, we enter it.

and who really cares? those games are 17 and 18 yrs old respectively. does it really matter if they changed the ghouls some? sometimes you just have to let go. those two games are dead and they aren't coming back. either enjoy what the series has become, or walk away.

This.

So it's either eat [censored] or go away?

What's wrong with wanting the series to become better and remaining consistent; everybody does that, new fan or old?

I'll stick around and work for what I enjoyed in the originals. What is wrong with enjoying the product that introduced me to Fallout to begin with; what reason should I walk away from it? I enjoy it so much I want it to stay true to its core. Not be perverted by bad ideas. : )

I don't want it to become something else, I want it to become an even better Fallout!

Bethesda obviously did the feral ghouls because they liked the new age of zombies we've entered and found them cool.

When zombies are no longer cool for them, Bethesda will ditch the ferals. This is the attitude they have when approaching story and setting in general. Not that they'd necessarily do what's cool in the mainstream. But they cater to themselves first, not to the game. They wouldn't create something they don't like even if it's good for the game or the game's universe or predecessors.

Well, I care. If other people don't care that they've changed ghouls then they wouldn't care if they changed them back right?

Besides, it doesn't matter how long ago the previous games came out. Good lore stays consistent to what has been established.

Bad lore changes willy nilly and ends up becoming such a mess that a reboot is necessary because the lore can no longer be cleaned up.

I don't want to see a reboot so that everything I've come to know about Fallout becomes meaningless for future games.

Messing up the lore should be inexcusable, because as long as people don't care and don't mind how much the writers mess it up the lore will continue to mess up.

And either we reach a point where a reboot is mandatory or the lore becomes meaningless because none of the previous games are even canon any longer as their lore conflicts with almost everything with the new lore.

It's a slippery slope and Bethesda's been sliding downhill with a grin on their faces.

But you know what, you're right. I could just walk away and I will if Fallout 4 is as bad as I think it is going to be.

If they learned nothing from their previous mistakes then it is clear that Fallout will only deteriorate as a series.

And I ain't going to stick around for any more of that.

If Fallout 4 is an awful mess then Fallout 1/2/T/NV will be canon to me and anything else I'll avoid like plague.

Anyway, this is a key point about fans isn't it. The ones who 'care' and the ones who don't.

The ones who care want a series to stay true to its source and not deviate too far but still want to see its conception evolve and branch out.

The ones who don't care just want a fun game to play and couldn't care less about how much less of a Fallout game each iteration becomes.

Don't get me wrong, I probably belong to the latter category for certain games.

And I get it. Some people just want a fun game to play with.

The question I have to them is why can't we have a game that is faithful to previously established lore which is also fun to play with?

It's not like any of us Fallout 1/2 fans on here demand that they go back to isometric turn-based cRPG.

Some of us would probably want that, but we know that is not feasible, so we've abandoned that long ago.

All we ask for is compromises. Fair compromises. To bridge the gap between the old stuff and the new stuff.

While I would prefer feral ghouls be retconned out I would definitely suffice with a good explanation for them.

Then they can keep their 28dayslater rip-offs and I won't be as bugged by them because now I know there is a canon explanation justifying their sudden existence.

It has me excited for the new game. Looking forward to what will be at E3...

Graphics were a little underwhelming though. I was hoping for more from the next gen engine... The lighting looked great, big upgrade from the previous engine. However the human character animations still seem a little wonky and the textures are not as good as I was expecting.

But graphics aren't the end all be all, I'm sure the game play will be amazing as always.