Escapist Magazine calls Bethesda killers of Fallout

[RangerBoo]

Ok, but Fallout 3 is the reason I discovered Fallout. My friend rented a copy of Fallout 3 from Blockbuster in early 2009, more than a decade after Fallout 1 came out. I'd never heard of the series before that. Even if you consider the game to be a husk or a cuckoo bird, I'll stand by my belief that Bethesda deserves credit for bringing the series more notoriety and exposure than it had before.

Also a ton of merchandise, for people that collect that stuff. Fallout Monopoly has two sides of the board dedicated to locations from Fallout 1 and 2 in it. I thought it was cool.

Sounds to me like you maybe blinded by nostalgia. I would like to point out that Bethesda has no respect for the original Fallout's or New Vegas. Shit, that fucking Monopoly game didn't even mention New Vegas. Does not surprise me given that we all know that Bethesda hates New Vegas for out staging and being more beloved then their poor excuse for a Fallout game. Bethesda also tried to retcon the hell out of the original Fallout with Fallout 76. Also, a lot of people out right hate how whorish the marketing and merchandise for Fallout has been under Bethesda. One of Fallout's themes was how the consumer and corporate culture helped lead the world to ruin. Not to mention the nasty stuff that corporations like West-Tec and Vault-Tec did for the Enclave. Now, under Bethesda, Fallout has become a parody on what it used to satire.

 

[Norzan]

I'll stand by my belief that Bethesda deserves credit for bringing the series more notoriety and exposure than it had before.

I already said this, but all it did in the end was create a rift between the people that like the first two games and the people that like the 3D games. Was it really worth for that? This rift wouldn't exist if Fallout 3 was made in the same vein as the first two games.

I'd rather the franchise dropped into obscurity but still be loved by many with two very solid games than being bought by a greedy ass company that doesn't give a shit about the franchise and produced two of the worst RPGs in recent memory. Was it really worthy for that too? To spawn Fallout 3 and 4? I'd say no.

So, not gonna give any credit to Bethesda. Hell, i'm gonna hate them more for that because the franchise could have been eventually picked after the franchise went dormant by an indie company that cared about the franchise and then produced something worthwhile. Wasteland was picked up, so Fallout had as much chance to be picked as that franchise. I'm gonna hate Bethesda for robbing the franchise of that possibility.

 

[Risewild]

It created even more rifts. There are the Classic Fallout fans VS the 3D fans rift, there is the FNV fans VS Bethesda Fallout fans rift, there is the FO3 and/or FNV RPG fans VS FO4 Shooter fans rift, there is the Single Player Fallout fans VS Fallout 76 fans rift, there's the "coherent lore" fans VS the "LOL lore nerd!!!!" fans...

Bethesda grabbed an IP and keeps diving the fans all the time.

 

[Black Angel]

I'd rather the franchise dropped into obscurity but still be loved by many with two very solid games than being bought by a greedy ass company that doesn't give a shit about the franchise and produced two of the worst RPGs in recent memory. Was it really worthy for that too? To spawn Fallout 3 and 4? I'd say no.

In the second most ideal timeline, not only the franchise rest in peace after two all-time classics, but ALSO all we'll be having from that point Fallout of Nevada, Fallout 1.5: Resurrection, Mutants Rising, fanmade Van Buren, Olympus 2207, etc etc. None of those TC mods would be gone even if Bethesda didn't buy the franchise, they're kinda like the constants of the multiverse, the incline that rippled through space and time.

Except for one thing, if Bethesda didn't bought the franchise, What Remains might actually still continue, or even released years before, if only it wasn't hit by C&D for whatever fucking reason.

 

[Norzan]

It created even more rifts. There are the Classic Fallout fans VS the 3D fans rift, there is the FNV fans VS Bethesda Fallout fans rift, there is the FO3 and/or FNV RPG fans VS FO4 Shooter fans rift, there is the Single Player Fallout fans VS Fallout 76 fans rift, there's the "coherent lore" fans VS the "LOL lore nerd!!!!" fans...

Bethesda grabbed an IP and keeps diving the fans all the time.

I just mentioned the first rift because that's what started it all. But yeah, now we have all those rifts and the fanbase is pretty much fragmented into several camps and it's all Bethesda's fault.

 

[mannawyadden]

Sounds to me like you maybe blinded by nostalgia. I would like to point out that Bethesda has no respect for the original Fallout's or New Vegas. Shit, that fucking Monopoly game didn't even mention New Vegas.

I'm blinded by nostalgia? I'm only stating a direct cause and effect correlation, nothing more. [Bethesda released Fallout 3] -> [I discovered Fallout 1]. I personally am grateful for that because I had a great time playing FO1 and FO2.

And yeah, the Monopoly game doesn't mention New Vegas. It doesn't mention Tactics either. Maybe whoever developed the board game just lazily thought "4 sides to the board, 4 numbered Fallout games. Easy money!". There is a New Calfornia board game that seems to revolve around the original games, which I'm sure could interest some people.

I just mentioned the first rift because that's what started it all. But yeah, now we have all those rifts and the fanbase is pretty much fragmented into several camps and it's all Bethesda's fault.

I thought I read a post somewhere on this site saying that Fallout 2 and especially Fallout Tactics caused a rift in the fanbase as well. Well, doesn't really matter I guess.

I mean, I get it. People used to argue over Star Wars Originals vs Prequels, but that's nothing compared to the fracture Disney caused. I hate what Disney has done to my fandom. I can understand the struggle.

But you can't put all the blame for a fanbase being fragmented on a company. Some of the credit goes to the fans for using their brains and voices and rejecting what the company produces. If all of the fans just mindlessly gobbled up everything the company produced, there would be no rift.

 

[BigGuyCIA]

I thought I read a post somewhere on this site saying that Fallout 2 and especially Fallout Tactics caused a rift in the fanbase as well. Well, doesn't really matter I guess.

What I hate about this is that its constantly used to denigrate the position of people that hold up older Fallouts. It comes up without fail essentially implying the community is always mad about something. It's also observable in the TES franchise where someone mentions how people are always in a tussle between the most recent game and the one that's about to come out.

A lot of people are just passionate about some things and can't be faulted for it. Otherwise we might as well just put sunglasses on and sit in a gray room staring at a wall - completely devoid of any and all emotion.

Star Wars probably has the most fragmented fanbase I have ever seen and this sort of thing never comes up.

 

[Aboyandhisdog]

It's kind of too bad Bethesda DID buy it out. Beamdog or someone else might have been able to release an updated version like they did for the Baldur's Gate series. Remember when they started calling Fallout Oblivion with guns?

God I can't stand the pathing of these NPC's. Kills the game everytime. Then I look at smaller titles like "State of Decay" where settlement management is streamlined, but also gets the job done. Sometimes you have to search for a rare item or two, but you're not literally knocking plates and stuff off shelves when trying to sit down in a chair. You literally search a random general area, find a pack or dont, and bring it back and drop it off and tell the settlers to build. Easy enough. While they put a serious amount of depth in FO4 into the settlement building....my god. MAKE IT STOP. And FO3....little lamplight....seriously?

I remember back in FO2 when a kid picked my pocket. I didn't realize he stole anything until I went to draw my submachine gun I just bought to cap the annoying Dunton brothers, and realized it wasn't there. Sure enough I found the little shit and tried to take it back. When that didn't work he attacked me and the whole town went ape-shit. Then one of the little bastards threw a grenade at me.

Luckily he missed. Long story short, I got my gun back, but was ran out of town for awhile.

There are no comparable stories from the newer franchises. Some of the mod's make the game's have some awesome moments, but again, the effort of independent workers, not the Evil Empire.

Bethesda is also contracted by the National Government, let's not forget. They need revenue to fund their real projects.

 

[Aboyandhisdog]

This, exactly. In the original Fallout, these three things were symbols of a flawed, consumptive society that destroyed itself; a society divorced from the reality it resulted in. Bethesda seems to have turned those cheesy corporate logos into icons to be venerated, which is almost as ironic as them turning nuclear weapons into fun toys.

This too. I couldn't stand the "Junk Jet", idea. I remember some stupid loading screen text along the lines of "Hey! Kill your enemy with a Teddy Bear!".

Too bad you have to work to get it in game, like find the schematic and build it or some stupid idea like that. Then pick up all this useless garbage for ammunition. Meanwhile, you walk into a dark den of cannibals with corpses hanging from spikes and the mood is too muddled to create any sort of consistent idea of "Am I supposed to laugh at the skeletons of half eaten corpses while Raiders talk about essentially raping and eating their prey?" Oh I know. It's Teddy bear time.

Nope. Mod up. Time for a silenced shot to the back of the head. I wanna see pink mist.

Keep it dark and moody. It makes the jokes better that way. But hey, let's face it. The whole franchise has become one. *drumroll, exit stage left*

 

[Norzan]

Fallout Tactics is a spinoff, it can do whatever it wants. And sure, there are people that like Fallout 1 but not 2 and vice versa, but each side still appreciates the other game. Fallout 2 players appreciate the first for laying the ground for the series and Fallout 1 players appreciate some of the improvements in Fallout 2. There a few that hate one but like the other, but they are such a small minority that it hardly counts for anything. There are no huge rifts there unlike now with the recent games.

Meanwhile you have fans of Fallout 3 saying the first two games suck because they are ancient and Fallout 3 is better because it "evolved" the series (it did the opposite). I think New Vegas fans are the most receptive for the first two, even the ones that can't play them because they don't like turn based.

 

[Risewild]

I thought I read a post somewhere on this site saying that Fallout 2 and especially Fallout Tactics caused a rift in the fanbase as well. Well, doesn't really matter I guess.

That "rift" wasn't really a rift, there were people who preferred one game or another and some liked Tactics. And no matter the side or preferences, the community mostly agreed on the general Fallout stuff. Like, Fallout 2 had a lot of silly stuff, some people didn't like it, others didn't mind it, a few enjoyed it. But no one, or almost, would try to change others mind, no one would defend Interplay or Black Isle when they mess up either. People still agreed on most stuff and what they disagreed about wouldn't devolve into a flame war or hurling insults around.
All in all, it was still one single community. With plenty of things keeping it together.

 

[mannawyadden]

I thought I read a post somewhere on this site saying that Fallout 2 and especially Fallout Tactics caused a rift in the fanbase as well. Well, doesn't really matter I guess.

I mean, I get it. People used to argue over Star Wars Originals vs Prequels, but that's nothing compared to the fracture Disney caused.

Just to clarify, I understand and agree with what you guys are saying. The bolded part of the above quote was me acknowledging that the discussion over the original games doesn't compare to the heat Bethesda's games have caused.

People still agreed on most stuff and what they disagreed about wouldn't devolve into a flame war or hurling insults around.
All in all, it was still one single community. With plenty of things keeping it together.

That sounds ideal. Isn't it possible for things to be like that again? I'm new here, but so far I haven't felt flamed or insulted even though I've taken unpopular positions.

 

[HydroFlame]

Ok, but Fallout 3 is the reason I discovered Fallout. My friend rented a copy of Fallout 3 from Blockbuster in early 2009, more than a decade after Fallout 1 came out. I'd never heard of the series before that. Even if you consider the game to be a husk or a cuckoo bird, I'll stand by my belief that Bethesda deserves credit for bringing the series more notoriety and exposure than it had before.

Also a ton of merchandise, for people that collect that stuff. Fallout Monopoly has two sides of the board dedicated to locations from Fallout 1 and 2 in it. I thought it was cool.

Fallout 3 was my first Fallout as well. Yes, I like the game but it has flaws. After playing the first one, I saw that they really messed up the lore. Storytelling is a huge deal for me in games. It's the main reason I don't like racing games, or games like Minecraft. Now granted, I will play games to hack, slash and shoot at shit, but that gets boring after about an hour. Also, if a game markets itself as an RPG, well, YOU should have choices. Not choices you think you have that might have some impact on the storyline(s) only to be disappointed that they didn't. Looking at you, FO4.

And one last thing... and anyone can feel free to dispute my next claim... I wouldn't say Bethsda adopting Fallout made the games more popular. I'd say them being released on consoles made them popular. Any studio could have been in the picture... and frankly, could have probably put out a better product.

 

[Deleted member 116891]

Is it possible for things to be like that again? I'm new here, but so far I haven't felt flamed or insulted even though I've taken unpopular positions.

You are in the minority, as far as I see. There are plenty of threads or posts where users have felt personally insulted by disagreement from the main pack. As long as you can take disagreement well, you are welcome here. That's why I chose to join after lurking for so long, posters who disagreed were treated respectfully.

And one last thing... and anyone can feel free to dispute my next claim... I wouldn't say Bethsda adopting Fallout made the games more popular. I'd say them being released on consoles made them popular.

Given I was just replying when that posted-I doubt people will dispute that here. Maybe Beth has a talent for console products since Oblivion and maybe even Morrowind? I guess Fallout 3's ease of use and obvious signposting (black and white morality) will agree with the lowest common denominator, but most other companies have morality work the same way.

 

[Risewild]

That sounds ideal. Isn't it possible for things to be like that again? I'm new here, but so far I haven't felt flamed or insulted even though I've taken unpopular positions.

I wish it could be like that, but the truth is that doesn't seem the case.
You go to most gaming or Fallout communities and try to have a reasonable debate about the shortcomings of the games, and depending on the place you're posting you will get shut down or it will quickly derail into flame wars.

I remember seeing a lot of people that posted about what Fallout 4 could do to improve itself on the Bethesda forums, and an army of rabid fans just turned constructive threads about suggestions in a war zone. Same with places like Reddit and even Steam forums.

That's the thing these days... People feel like any kind of critic to a game/company they like to be a personal attack against themselves.
We, the old fans that have been around for ages know all the shortcomings of the classic games, we debated them over and over. We know what could have been improved and what didn't worked out very well. We know the faults of the games we love. And we never took that kind of criticism as an attack against ourselves. We love something so we are highly critical about it.

I think that is the difference between now and back then.
Having this mentality, most "newer games" fans will not be willing to accept the faults and criticism of the games they love and will take up arms against anyone who says even the tiniest thing about those games. This makes it impossible for "fan factions" to be able to get together and make up a giant community.

 

[Norzan]

Isn't it possible for things to be like that again?

If you mean for the fanbase as a whole, pretty much impossible at this point. The rifts are pretty much permanent and the fanbase will be forever fragmented.

 

[Deleted member 116891]

If you mean for the fanbase as a whole, pretty much impossible at this point. The rifts are pretty much permanent and the fanbase will be forever fragmented.

I dunno, kinda a pessimistic point here. But as time goes on,the fewer of us left who see Fallout 3 as the start of the end. Some users see it too positively in my mind already.

This shall move to Fallout 4 eventually. Most will then see that as the start of decline of the series. Then 76 when the next one comes out etc.

This is why it's so important for those Glittering gems like Norzan etc. to stay active. I've always admired they're stance against Fallout 3 and that later entries do not lessen that game's true crapness, This cannot be destroyed in this forum.

We must be opposed against Beth from start of their Fallout tenure.

 

[Jabberwok]

I dunno, kinda a pessimistic point here. But as time goes on,the fewer of us left who see Fallout 3 as the start of the end. Some users see it too positively in my mind already.

This shall move to Fallout 4 eventually. Most will then see that as the start of decline of the series. Then 76 when the next one comes out etc.

This is why it's so important for those Glittering gems like Norzan etc. to stay active. I've always admired they're stance against Fallout 3 and that later entries do not lessen that game's true crapness, This cannot be destroyed in this forum.

We must be opposed against Beth from start of their Fallout tenure.

Thing is, the rift between Fallout 1 and 2 and F3 is more than just a mechanical disagreement. The game changed genres, changed engines, changed art styles, changed creators, and the 10-year gap between releases is large enough to be a generational gap. The people who played 1 and 2 when they were young versus the people who played 3 when they were young are from different eras (especially in video game terms). And the vast majority of those who enjoy modern Fallout aren't likely to go back and play a 20-year-old game; and will see it through a distorted lens even if they do. Even without all the other differences, that time gap makes a rift in the fanbase inevitable.

 

[Stampedo]

Bethesda should stick to Elder Scrolls.

 

[Aboyandhisdog]

What's everyone's take on the tribal influences they utilized in Fallout 2?

Fallout 2 was my introduction to the series, then I went back and played 1 (this was before Tactics was out, which I enjoyed for what it was but...NO DIALOGUE? WHAT?!?).

Anyway, where the hell is the tribal influences in FO3 and FO4?