In my world it is a BETHESDA game, and Todd Howard is the voice of Bethesda.

There is no Todd Howard company.. He is one man among many that create the games.

BSG or not, Fallout was not done, because of it's awesome fanbase: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFI4tALHE5s

Yeah, the only name of a single person I can really accept being tagged on a game is Kojima, and in that incident Kojima Productions is the name of the company, which is probably the reason why his name is used exclusively.

Why? Why is it unrelated? Because the gameplay is different? It's the same universe, Dawn of War and Space Marine are related, and they're two very different game. The car is still the same car, even if the art style is different. Fallout being ruined is a subjective opinion, just like how I think World of Warcraft is utterly ruined by now, yet some people still like it and still play it.

Notice how Spacemarine isn't Dawn of War 3; notice how World of Warcraft isn't called Warcraft 4.

*Yes [very much yes] about the gameplay; but ~no the gameplay was not what I meant.

Would you consider Spacemarine as a suitable Dawn of War 3? How about if the upcoming Halo Wars 2 were launched renamed as the official Halo5? [In place of Halo 5, and the current Halo5 scrapped.]

There are quite a few Warhammer 40k games, but very few if any are suitable as DoW sequels.

Bethesda [and TH]... have they not ~in your opinion, basically made a Spacemarine [FO3] as a sequel for a Dawn of War [Fallout]?

Obviously people that are drawn to a 'Todd Howard' game, are interested in TPP/FPP open world games... and both Fallout and DoW were neither.

And Fallout and Fallout:2 are not Fallout:3 and Fallout:4.

Did you ever notice that? Different developers, different company, different vision, different gameplay...you know, different. And all of them are good in their own right. And they all should be respected for being true to what they are.

Just as you and I would make very different masks if indeed I was a maker of masks. And we would both want our mask to be respected by the other.

While you may feel slighted by the changes, many are thrilled by those same changes. Again, why must it be as you or others with your opinion wants it? And why would anyone argue with what is? It's all history now. Water under the bridge. What's done is done and there is nothing left to do but to accept it or forget about it and move on.

Gizmo, will you be buying and playing Fallout:4?

Honestly, people have had 7 years to accept that Fallout has changed....it's an irrefutable fact. It's changed, and it's not going to go back to the style of the originals. It's ok to be skeptical of Fallout 4, to voice your concerns... but seriously, if you feel Fallout 4 isn't Fallout anymore, it might be time to just move on.

No, Fallout is still the universe. Space Marine is a 40k game, as is Dawn of War. WoW and Warcraft 3 are both set in the warcraft universe. And Fallout 2 and Fallout: New Vegas are also in the same universe. So they are related, even if the gameplay is different.

Dragon Age: Inquisition is a dragon age game, even if it's inferior to Dragon Age: Origins. Halo Wars 2 is still a Halo game. etc.

It's ok to like one and dislike the other, but it is the same universe so deal with it. Sure it might svck that it's the format the series is in, and you might want some of the old stuff back, but sometimes that just never happens. And in those cases you can either learn to enjoy it, or move on.

You have answered me by exclaiming 'no' (at something?), and then ignoring the point of whatever it was that you quoted.


The last mask I made was a commissioned 'Imortan Joe' mask. It was not to be a copy [leather, not resin/composite], but I had to study the original carefully in order to design the mask with a likeness.
I am honestly of the opinion that entering into a series should come with a high degree of respect for it, or one isn't the right person to be doing the job. You can't know it well enough to please its fanbase unless you are one of them and are just as enamored with it.
Bethesda was enamored with TES.

I don't buy into 'for the greater good' scenarios; especially when the perceived greater good comes of direct deprivation by corporate fiat.
It's easy here (but ineffective) to paint the same fate to the Elderscrolls, and ask the same question of its fans ~were TES 6 to release as a Might & Magic clone, how would they feel, wouldn't it be okay since there are many others that are thrilled by it?
But it's ineffective because they want an FPP sandbox of everything under the Sun and see any deviation from that as insane and impossible to be popular... so the 'for the greater good' argument tends to fall on deaf ears with them.

It's very hard to create an impactful example to illustrate this...when you can't know what matters to the reader.

I could ask what if the country banned commercial sale of milk and only allowed almond milk or soy milk substitutes in markets? Milk drinkers may feel slighted by the changes, but the many lactose intolerants and almond/Soy drinkers might be thrilled by those same changes; or at least unaffected by them. And while perhaps private goats are allowed, the stigma could become pervasive and socially unacceptable
(as Fallout's roleplaying precepts and gameplay currently seem to be ~here.) I don't ever see that as a good thing, I see it as an abuse of power. I see it as brazen hubris to stomp all over an IP series; even as many here would immediately pounce on that statement and accuse me or anyone else who dared say to it of the same [hubris]. But Fallout was established and well defined; Fallout was Fallout, TES was TES, and they ignored that in favor of their own self aggrandized re-imagining of it as a TES clone to market AS the Fallout series to the modern action gamer.

Ah... I know what it reminds me of... It reminds me of when Michael Jackson out bid Paul McCartney for ownership of the Beatles catalog.

*Come to think of it... I presume that ~as the owner, he could have remastered the whole catalog with his own vocals, and took the previous versions off the market. So if he had done that, wouldn't the hardcoe Beatles fans have felt slighted, and definitely not okay with it ~even though there would have been an imminently vast new audience that was probably thillered with it.

If I do, it will be after the GECK releases, and will depend on how much of the game is really moddable. It'd be an interesting exercise if FO4 could be converted to a VB style treatment (by a team), and/or with NPC rewrites if needed.

Quote

That's a 'no' then...

(Only if it's modded fundamentally to play like Fallout 1, I imagine.)

I'm sure the moderators would encourage our tolerance and respect of all sorts of different views and opinions

but could we have some threads between now and when the GECK releases that don't turn into an angst-ridden discussion about why fallout 3 and 4 are not Fallout please?

Well, I could say (an assumption) that people play Todd Howard games for none of the reasons they would play Fallout or Fallout 2; and I think I'd be pretty close to correct on that... and on topic.

Fair enough

Todd having had nothing to do with FO 1 & 2 I assume...

I've only experienced a total loss of faith in a franchise once (Myst - I could not abide the 5th part and just walked away from it at that point).

I've also joined franchises without having played all the instalments, The Witcher (from part 2), Tomb Raider (from part 7), and Fallout from Fallout 3.

But I've enjoyed Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, so I am very supportive of the output of Todd and his team.

No, you said that Fallout 3 and NV weren't related to the other two, that's what I was demonstrating. And hell, even Warcraft 2 & 3 were different or Dawn of War and Dawn of War 2, I know people who don't like those sequels too, but they're still part of the series.

And wether the sequel is suitable in someones opinion is irrelevant. The star wars prequels happened, were they suitable? No, but I can choose to not watch them and just deal with the fact that I don't like them as much as the originals. And just like with the Star Wars prequels, there comes a time where you just have to move on.

Or to take something recent from another section of entertainment, Warhammer Fantasy was recently rebooted and some people hated it. And some of those people complained and others got over it and played the older editions. While others loved the reboot.

Just because you don't like something doesn't mean that it's objectively ruined.

To be honest a lot of old fans didn't move on, like, at all. They still think they're bad.

http://i.imgur.com/DKJhx9l.gif?noredirect

For real though the pretension displayed in this thread is kind of amazing. Like when did NMA start leaking holy moly.

We're the ones buying the game, I'd say we have the right for that.

Yeah, but just because they didn't doesn't mean that they shouldn't.

Its a Bethy game not a Howard game. There are other people in the company that are contributing to the development of it.

Why would they? If they think that the first 3 were perfect, why settle with 3 other, less than mediocre movies? Doesn't matter how much time passes, they won't become any better. Time just slowly destroys their hope for another good movie. And I forgot to mention, they are not only things to watch in their eyes: they're much, much more.

Yeah, sure, if you ask me I would say that they were pretty bad, but I think people who dwell on things they don't like waste their time and energy. I would rather talk about the original trilogy than the prequels. And I would rather talk about Dragon Age: Origins, than any of it's sequels.

I stand by what I said, people need to move on. You don't need to like the changes, but dwelling on what you don't like won't change anything, it just takes up time you could enjoy thinking of and doing things that you actually do like.

It's hard to let go (and begin again) of the things you've learned to love and put your time in. Especially if it heavily changes from what it was before, and people start coming in to see these changes, walking over the dead corpse that was your experience.

Still, it's something that's good to do. I don't even think about the prequels on a regular basis. Or the movie adaptation of Avatar the Last Airbender, or whatever. I haven't had the chance to play the early fallout games yet, but I think the same applies. And the experience is only a dead corpse if you stop playing the game.

Not really, the corpse is dead because the crowd walked on it.

God such a bad metaphor, I had to think about it twice...

Let's watch it with the broad generalizations guys.

I play Todd Howard (and everyone else who made these games possible) games because they haven't let me down yet. I get hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours of entertainment for just $60 dollars. Simply looking back at the amount of enjoyment I got out of the past games kind of makes any complaints I might think of seem pretty piddly.

I play all games for the basic reason that I fine them entertaining and a fun way to get through the long dark winters. Some games get me through an entire winter such as every Fallout game I've ever played thus far. I also play for fun. I don't play for a certain style of gameplay though I have my favored styles. I don't play for a certain genre though I do have my favorite genres. I've played some games that I couldn't make it through more than two or three hours of gameplay merely because I found them awful. "Wet" produced by Bethesda, for example, was one I just couldn't force myself to play through until the end.

I really don't see why our reason to play games are much more than that. But I can see why some would want to limit themselves to the types of games they enjoy best. What I really have a hard time understanding is why people believe a group of developers can't make the games they want to make regardless of how they came across the game.

While you feel betrayed as a fan, I feel blessed by a bit of the past turned into something new and different. I like Fallout:3 and I hope to like Fallout:4. I loved Morrowind and Oblivion and while I like Skyrim, I do not like it as much as Morrowind or Oblivion. Should I take it personal that Skyrim changed things I enjoyed? I don't believe so.

Everyone should do as they think best. I think you should understand that but you may not think so at all. Nobody can really decide what another should do. It's really not our decision nor our business.

While I sort of agree with you because I would love to just have discussions with those who like the games and share in the excitement of this new release coming up, I do understand to a point that people feel better if they express their disappointments. And most especially if they have one shred of hope that they can change enough people's minds to influence the direction something is going.

But after 7 years one would think they would accept that minds are not so easily changed. I've read posts of some of those posting here hating on the game for 8 or more years now and can say that the posts today are near the same as they were all those years ago. If that much attention and determination went into making marriages work the divorce rate would plummet. Then again, maybe that sort of repetition is what causes broken relationships in the first place.