Too bad it's not entirely true. Over the years of my posting on these forums I've been pretty critical of Bethesda and their handling of both TES and Fallout. Not only have I criticized them, I've also plainly stated that I still enjoy their games and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Posting criticism of Bethesda and the handling of their games is perfectly fine, just the same as pointing out the good things they do with them is fine too, but sometimes there are those who seem do nothing but bash everything they do. Same thing happens with those who can't seem to find any fault in anything they do.

Bethesda is a company who isn't afraid to take some risks while developing their games, sometimes it works out great, sometimes it blow up on them. Nothing wrong with criticizing and/or praising them, it's just how you do it that matters.

It is true. 90% of the times any kind of doubt/criticism starts a huge debate that ends with a mod locking the thread. At least here the argument IS the thread.

Not really, I see it all the time. Most of the time the discussions remain pretty civil. Sure, there are some who come across as if their opinions are the only ones that matter because they are right and you are not, but one thing to remember is that written words often times have a way of getting misinterpreted.

If that's true, then guide me there. Must be a good place to be in.
Also, people never always misinterpretate randomly. I bet some people can't wait and quickly read trough a post just to respond with negativity.

Ah, the old proper vs not proper FO thread.
Meh. If you don't like how gamesas handles it, that's your call.
I do still get a chuckle every time is see Oblivion/Skyrim with guns.
I have 3 copies (2 free, mind) of Skyrim. And maybe a total of 40 hours put into it. I have thousands of hours in F3 and NV. With the combat not really being a shooter in F3 or NV, it certainly isn't the "guns" that make it great for me. "Skyrim with guns" is a lazy comparison, IMO.

Ive found that these forums have got a lot better recently, not that they were bad to begin with. A lot of the people who seemed to only post blind hate don't seem to be posting nearly as much or at all anymore.

Ive also become a lot more chilled out as time has gone on. I used to find that some of the stuff here made me a little mad, and I would respond with equally as salty things which wasn't really helping anyone. Maybe its part of aging, but I find I take everything in life a lot less seriously than I did however many years ago.

Ive seen people say some really awful things about Bethesda here, and OP was really nothing like that. The word "proper" is what I think set a lot of people off. We're all a bit jaded from people who used to post that their opinions on how Fallout 3 was Sauron and Satan made manifest is undeniable truth, and I think people kinda jumped on that without really thinking. Hell I probably would have done it too a couple of years ago when I took things a lot more srs bzns than I do now.

The thing about gaming though is that with Kickstarter and Steam we have a environment where every type of game can be funded and distributed to make a profit. I did actually lurk the 2K forums for a little bit which others have talked about here and I noticed a few things that they talked about, but what I also noticed was that people who may have shared my tastes with not liking the new xcom very much never really talked about Xenonauts, which is really the best translation of the original to modern game complete with new content that I can think of. I think a lot of people are more wanting a particular company to make a game for them, and not so much trawling the internet for games that already exist that fit the gameplay bill. That applies for fans of original Fallout, which I'm not a fan of, and original X-com, which I am a huge fan of, just about equally in my eyes.

A game combining the best of Fallout 3 and NV, though? If that was someones stated goal and they had the giant piles of money and manpower that this sort of game requires then I would absolutely be buying that game full price whenever it came out, or even preorder it.

Agreed. BGS should get praise and criticism, because while they do some good stuff, not everything they do is perfect. I think everyone wants the best FO game.

I need to re-read the game informer article, but I think I read something in that which would explain to me why the writing in BGS games isn't that good, and why the exploration and environments are. Maybe I was dreaming, but I'm pretty sure they said they create the world/environment etc before they even work on the story. Which, is, imo, why the stories are weak. At the very least, I think they should create a rough outline of a story first, the characters, motivations, etc etc. I did this when I was a GM and when I write, then I would go and create the "dungeons", maps, world, etc. It is then much easier to go back and make changes to the story, add characters, etc. Just seem to me putting the story(thus all the quests and npcs) on the back burner and working on that after you create the world is backwards, especially when creating the setting is their strong point.

I have played all of the Fallout game as they were released. I consider all of them to be "proper" Fallout games save one. But...

If you want to talk to the purist in me, only the original was a "proper" Fallout game. Fallout 2 tried too hard. It tried to out-Fallout Fallout. It suffered horribly from sequelitis.

Basically, if you want a purist answer, there has never been and probably never will be a "proper" Fallout game other than the original Fallout.

Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed all of the Fallout games (except for Fallout: PoS) and the non-purist in me considers them all "proper" (again, except for PoS) even Tactics.

Blind positivity is just as bad as blind negativity, to me. In fact, it's probably worse. Seeing someone be overly negative about Fallout 4 leads me to thinking they can't be disappointed and will most likely be pleasantly surprised by the game. Criticism means you're thinking about something and anolysing it. Seeing someone be overly positive about Fallout 4 leads me to thinking that they'll either be disappointed and will most likely dislike the game for a while. Either that or they'll enjoy it and ignore all of it's flaws, praising Bethesda and pushing Bethesda to continue with stuff that the fans don't even like. There needs to be a healthy balance of the two and I've never found a place on the Internet where users aren't either overly positive people who criticise negativity or overly negative people who criticise positive people.

I have to say that you're overly positive about people. Some of them completely set them up for hating the game and badmouth it to the point that they cannot even admit if they like the game. Most of the people don't have the guts to do that. They'll revel in hating the game.

Getting pleasantly surprised is only if you objectively dislike some of the aspects. If you 'hate' the company and the game, there's no turning back from that. I know because I deal with those people daily.

i enjoy bethesda games quite a bit but i understand that some people like some of the elements from the earlier games and there's nothing wrong with being critical of some things, there's parts of their games i wish was a bit different, overall i love their games and have never played more immersive games then what BGS makes, i do think they try to implement certain features to please as many people as they can, i thought the serena and ciscero characters were fleshed out quite well in skyrkim and i would like to see that with some of the npc's in fallout 4

If you are itching for some more gameplay like Fallout or Fallout 2, you can give Fallout 1.5: Resurrection a shot.

It is a free fan-made fallout mod based on Fallout 2 a quite lenghty (around 25 hours of gameplay) and well made at that. The english version of it should be ready by now I believe.

Have fun!

I could never get into NV and never understood why because it was better in gameplay than FO3, however i did finished FO3 and enjoyed it a lot, but i just couldnt finish NV... EVEN with mods, and i finished FO3 without mods...

And just recently watching one of those hype youtube videos one dude was playing FO3 and i understood why i didnt liked about NV watching that gameplay in the background... FO3 had BIG buildings and remnants of a city and you could even actually go to the subway if i remember correctly, NV was a [censored] [censored] boring dessert with nothing that ressembled a post apocalyptic world at all...

I just hope FO4 is more similar to FO3 in that regard since its Bethesda doing it, because seriously NV world was a disaster, a boring one.

Can't complain about this. I love the game immensely, but the city of New Vegas is a royal disappointment. Not only is it tiny, but it does not even feel like it was saved from the missiles. Don't get me started on the fact that I still don't know where people from Freeside and the Strip even live.

Granted, for me the story makes up for it... a shame it did not work for you.

Anyway, Beth is great at making pretty worlds so I am pretty sure that FO4 will look nice.

I think the OP is basically wanting more of FONV with "grey morality" and "choices that matter", which many claim is a problem with FO3. The big debate- which game is better, FO3 or FONV...which started the day FONV was released. Everyone better get ready for round 2, FONV vs FO4. It will start in just a few days.

FO3 is a horrible comparison as the whole black&white atmosphere is the whole point of that game's storyline. Aka, it is intentional rather than a result of poor writing (Beth generally has less good-evil separation than Bioware and Obsidian tend to have).

And yes, people will compare New Vegas and FO4 and praise Obsidian as usual. That Obsidian did not have to develop the entire engine and could pour all their effort into story-writing alone will be conveniently ignored.

Of course you're "allowed" to make negative comments. That doesn't mean folks will necessarily agree with you. Saying that a game isn't a proper Fallout game doesn't make it so, any more than someone else saying the reverse makes that so. As you yourself said opinion is subjective. If you want not only freedom to state your opinion, but to increase the chances of agreement, there are certainly forums when more share the OP's view.

I also think it is an issue of timing. Right now folks are eager and glad to share their eagerness with others. By its nature constructive criticism tends to be a post-release activity. Part of being constructive is not pre-judging and in the case of games that generally means actually playing the game.

I agree. They both have strengths and weaknesses. I loved playing them both but it is obvious its more than just "comparing". It was as if there were two camps of fallout fans. I dont know how many times I've heard "FO3 crapped on Fallout Lore".

We must've played different versions of Fallout 1&2, because the only " good dialogue " choices I remember were on my low Int playthroughs or the options to troll npcs. Admittedly, I do think Bethesda has room to improve. But, I would happily take another of Bethesda's " Skyrim with guns " than the other 90% of cookie cutter role playing games that come out nowadays( jrpgs don't interest me ).

Perhaps you should just mosey over to nma.
http://www.nma-fallout.com

Their blind hatred of Bethesda would suit you nicely.

Why assume that it's his way, and not simply a matter of fact comparison with the definitive Fallout title? A proper Fallout title is simply a game that fulfills the same intentions ~scratches the same itch; and does so in a reasonably familiar way [IE mechanics].

Fallout was a game that allowed the player to do what they wished, but live with the consequences of it. FO3 (and probably FO4) did not enforce living with consequences... In fact the majority of actions were forgotten by the game relatively quick. I don't see any 'proper' Fallout game ignoring this tenet ~and FO3 very clearly does.

Fallout was a game that held the player to the limitations of their developed character... We all know that FO3 treats the character as secondary, and that the player routinely compensates for lack of development ~and gets away with it. Also FO3 devalues the SPECIAL attribute system, and perks, by making the stats easily changed, and the perks be profusely given. I don't see any 'proper' Fallout game devaluing SPECIAL, and perks for player favor ~and FO3 very clearly does.

Fallout was a game of methodical choices ~especially in combat. FO3 is a game of obvious choices and run-n-gun combat that doesn't particularly rely on the PC or their specialties. I just don't see that as proper Fallout at all.

What I do see is two games that use the general assets to offer a loose simulation of the game world for the player to ~basically inhabit; and people love it... They call it Fallout ~because they love it; even if it's not...and they don't care. Fallout is depressing as hell ~with just barely the dark humor needed to lighten the mood. The original marketing execs at Interplay freaked out that the music was so depressing, and were told that it's supposed to be; everybody is dead, and the world is a mess. Yet in FO3 and FO4, the game plays upbeat 50's tracks (of all things).

So no I certainly don't see them as proper Fallout; merely what's left of the once grand RPG series ~made mass-marketable. Officially they are Fallout games... But IMO that's more depressing than Fallout ever was.

Wow. Uh, you'll be pleasantly surprised...? Aha.

I hope so; and would be among the first to applaud/laud, and recant my opinion if they did surprise and impress in any way but with graphics and sound.

(But I do not expect to be; because I don't think they want to.)

Let inXile and Obisdian co-produce an isometric Fallout

You're able to talk about video games without casting your opinions and interpretations as universal truth and talking as if a video game was responsible for murdering your dog, you know. Thats why you always have people in conflict with you, its not because they are contesting your points just for the sake of contesting them, as you often say, its because you come across as aggressively hateful towards something as great as a video game.