An Open Letter to Bethesda Fans

[RetroAmerica]

To whom it may concern,

Now for whatever reason, and granted most of them are probably not particularly good or thought out ones, you seem to think that it's a good idea to share your rabid and over the top obsession with a community who generally either did not like the handling of the franchise, or downright just did not like the product which was being produced. Generally, most even minded and functional adults, would realize that you cannot and will not change the minds of the posters of NMA, by declaring Bethesda's product to be "better", and by simply hurling abuse at them, or ranting on about sodomy or other strange tangents, will not somehow win them over to your side of the argument.​

Considering the fact that many of you are fanatics, who think that by loyally standing up for Bethesda/Zenimax, that somehow you've made the product better, or that you shall be rewarded for your efforts. Well guess what, you won't! The producers of the Bethesda line of Fallout products don't particularly care about you or your selfless defense of their product line, they simply want you to buy their product. But the fact that you hold Bethesda's Fallout, as being this almost sacred cow, beyond critique, does not actually make the product any better, but moreover you're simply providing Bethesda/Zenimax with free advertising.​

Todd Howard, and his production staff are not your personal friends, and they honestly don't break down in a flood of tears nightly, simply because members of NMA do not like their product. So for the Bethesda Fallout Crusader/Defender, you don't have to feel like somehow you or your family has been slighted, as at the end of the day Howard and his staff are in the business of making computer games to make money, and not to provide you with a replacement for a social life, religion, patriotism etc.​

Finally, please for the love of God, stop using the argument that because something is new, it is by default immediately better. We've seen throughout history, that from defense, to consumer goods to heavy industry, that the newest innovation has not always been the best, and in some cases has instead become a flat out disaster of epic proportions.​

Well rabid Bethesda supporter, I hope you've learnt something from this letter, and maybe it's even opened your mind, but moreover hopefully it will engage your critical thinking skills, and perhaps you'll start to question your undying loyalty to Bethesda/Zenimax and its line of products.​

 

[PossibleCabbage]

The world as a whole would be better off if people just stopped going to bat for giant corporations. There's no benefit to anybody except the corporation here, and it's unlikely that any video game publisher sees its consumers as anything more than numbers in a ledger. Todd Howard probably doesn't care whether or not I die, which is a fairly understandable perspective to take since we've never interacted in any way.

 

[Gizmojunk]

...by declaring Bethesda's product to be "better"...

It's worse than that; it most likely comes of a genuine inability to conceptualize the appreciation of something they simply cannot fathom as anything but inferior by default. It's like [to some] trying to laud utter destitution as in any way 'better off' than having money.

And yet...

Spoiler

It's a sad fact that for all that Bethesda's misguided attempts at Fallout do offer the player [some of it being really good], they generally offer nothing that I would seek out a Fallout title by name for; and seem to purposely discard the priorities of the IP in favor of servility to the player. This comes at the cost of there ever being another proper Fallout title under their stewardship. Bethesda's idea of Fallout is basically "New Coke" in an age that seems to actually prefer it.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Hear, hear! Good on you Retro!

Sadly they won't see it...

 

[TheVaultKeeper]

The problem I have with this forum is that most of the "old timers" have judged Fallout 4 before it's even out.

Now - for the record I personally rank the Fallout games like this: F2>NV>F1>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>F3

And that's based purely on how many times I've played them and how much I enjoyed them. And going by that I don't have particularly high hopes for F4. I feel that it will probably be a one playthough kind of deal.

That being said a lot of people on here seem to forget that Bethesda has only made ONE Fallout game. That's not a trend, that's a single data point. I'm prepared to give them a chance to create a good game and not judge F4 before it's out. Maybe it won't be Fallout "like you want it", but a good game with replay value nonetheless.

And besides - all you old guys ranting on about how the Bethesda Fallout version isn't the real Fallout universe. Well - I'm sorry but it is now. They own the franchise, that's how it works. Get with the program.

 

[PossibleCabbage]

That being said a lot of people on here seem to forget that Bethesda has only made ONE Fallout game. That's not a trend, that's a single data point. I'm prepared to give them a chance to create a good game and not judge F4 before it's out. Maybe it won't be Fallout "like you want it", but a good game with replay value nonetheless.

They have, however, created a number of other RPGs before so we have a pretty good idea where their design priorities lie. And "good game" is only meaningful of the sense that "I like it" so if it's not something I don't like then whether or not other people do is pretty irrelevant.

The "replay value" thing is questionable too, since Skyrim, for example, had very little replay value for my money since you can do almost everything your first time through the game, there are few opportunities for actual roleplaying, and it has unlimited procedurally generated quests, so what reason does anybody have to play it twice?

 

[Dr Fallout]

The problem I have with this forum is that most of the "old timers" have judged Fallout 4 before it's even out.

Now - for the record I personally rank the Fallout games like this: F2>NV>F1>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>F3

And that's based purely on how many times I've played them and how much I enjoyed them. And going by that I don't have particularly high hopes for F4. I feel that it will probably be a one playthough kind of deal.

That being said a lot of people on here seem to forget that Bethesda has only made ONE Fallout game. That's not a trend, that's a single data point. I'm prepared to give them a chance to create a good game and not judge F4 before it's out. Maybe it won't be Fallout "like you want it", but a good game with replay value nonetheless.

And besides - all you old guys ranting on about how the Bethesda Fallout version isn't the real Fallout universe. Well - I'm sorry but it is now. They own the franchise, that's how it works. Get with the program.

Replay value? The average now is ONE.

But hey leave us to our ranting! XD

But seriously, have a look at our Fallout 4 discussion. We know what we're talking about.

 

[Courier]

Stop trying so hard to fit in.

 

[Practicat]

The problem I have with this forum is that most of the "old timers" have judged Fallout 4 before it's even out.

Now - for the record I personally rank the Fallout games like this: F2>NV>F1>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>F3

And that's based purely on how many times I've played them and how much I enjoyed them. And going by that I don't have particularly high hopes for F4. I feel that it will probably be a one playthough kind of deal.

That being said a lot of people on here seem to forget that Bethesda has only made ONE Fallout game. That's not a trend, that's a single data point. I'm prepared to give them a chance to create a good game and not judge F4 before it's out. Maybe it won't be Fallout "like you want it", but a good game with replay value nonetheless.

And besides - all you old guys ranting on about how the Bethesda Fallout version isn't the real Fallout universe. Well - I'm sorry but it is now. They own the franchise, that's how it works. Get with the program.

I was optimistic about Fallout 4 closer to the debut trailer. I'm judging parts of it already because it is fully known how the character system works - traits are gone (which is very Bethesdian) and there's no longer any need for careful consideration in choosing perks and specializing your character build. It's built on their overall philosophy of not locking the player out of content, which does not work for the Fallout series.

The next major thing to judge will probably be the writing, and I'm not expecting to be extremely impressed.

 

[TheVaultKeeper]

All I'm really asking is that you hold off another month until it's launched, and then another couple of weeks so that you can play it, before you start bashing it.

If you then don't like it... bash away. Nuke that shit to the ground if you want. l might even join you. But you're judging a product before it's even out, I simply think it's unfair.

As for replay value I've played Skyrim probably 4-5 times with different characters and mods, and I've played New Vegas also 4-5 times with different characters and mods. Only played Fallout 3 once though and no desire to go back.

So yeah, might join you in the bashing of Fallout 4. Just think it's too early. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now.

 

[Deleted member 86723]

All I'm really asking is that you hold off another month until it's launched, and then another couple of weeks so that you can play it, before you start bashing it.

If you then don't like it... bash away. Nuke that shit to the ground if you want. l might even join you. But you're judging a product before it's even out, I simply think it's unfair.

As for replay value I've played Skyrim probably 4-5 times with different characters and mods, and I've played New Vegas also 4-5 times with different characters and mods. Only played Fallout 3 once though and no desire to go back.

So yeah, might join you in the bashing of Fallout 4. Just think it's too early. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now.

Just wanted to say, you're not alone in your stance. People exaggerate too much on the internet, usually. In real life people likely wouldn't be so critical. It's become a standard to unconditionally hive-mind. It's become deafening how outrageously biased people are here, supposedly to counter a far worse side by being far more harsh and condescending than it. It saddens me immensely, seeing how much impact this community has on the entire classic fandom only to be gargling in gallons and gallons of gall. Some people have sense, lots of it, but they're certainly drowned out by an incredibly vocal minority. I wish we were just a more united community, maybe try to make peace with what we like and don't like, rather than both sides constantly trying to drive a wedge deeper and deeper with such hostility. People are already having at Fallout 4 enough to last ages, so I don't have any hope if it turned out at least decent they'd accept it anyways. It's easier to hold a grudge to the very end.

I have no words to express how depressed the state of the fandom makes me. And I just fear it's going to get worse.

 

[Practicat]

I'm certainly willing to give Fallout 4 a chance at release. If I really like the game, I will mean it, and despite the hive-mind bias against Fallout 4, I truly believe the essence of it, though not the unconditional hate, is not without valid reason. It didn't have to be this way. If BGS had done and marketed the game differently by doing things like the following, they could have gotten a warm reception from the NMA community by large:

• Enhancing and refining the skills system instead of merging it with perks
• Bringing back traits, confirming ammo types and a primary needs mode
• Talking about some inspiration they got from Fallout: New Vegas
• Discussing RPG design and the paramount RPG concept of choices and consequences
• Having a more Fallout-like debut trailer (think of FONV's) vs. the one we got

 

[frajaq]

Skills in all Fallout games were terrible though, merging them with perks is the correct way to go. I agree with you on Traits though

 

[generalissimofurioso]

The problem I have with Bethesda is that they can seemingly get away with everything.

They've done shitty piecemeal DLC.

They've got terrible writing.

They've horrendous quality assurance.

If EA or Activision came out with a game in the same state as Oblivion or Fallout 3, people would be up in arms, but apparently, Bethesda is able to sail off into the distance with no one daring to criticize them.

If Fallout 4 is amazing, hell if it's even just great or above good, I'll be the first person to admit it.

But from their track record, it just ain't gonna happen.

 

[TheChosen1]

Skills in all Fallout games were terrible though, merging them with perks is the correct way to go. I agree with you on Traits though

Skills were horrible in the FP prespective, they worked relatively fine in iso. Now the whole meaning of perks has been turned from a rare boost that makes the game slightly easier, into a general boost in damage or whatever you get per level. Just another step towards it being Skyrim with Guns

 

[Dr Fallout]

Stop trying so hard to fit in.

Ugh, this has to happen. Can we stop with the edgy comments and supposedly cool 'you don't fit in' shit.

Leave that to other forums.

 

[DarkCorp]

We heard the bullshit, 'Don't knock it till you have played it before'.

We heard it when talking about the soulless eyed SMs, ghoul 'zombies', and white knight plate armored BoS of Oblivion With Guns.

Years before that, genre change apologists tried to defend Fallout: Piece Of Shit.

Some chuckleheads even told us if we supported FPOS, we would get a proper Fallout. We now know What the fuck Chuck and friends had really planned to do, make FPOS 2.

I'll feed the troll even though its been fucking mentioned since, I dunno, forever.

If you don't give a flying fuck about the classics fine. Just please don't peddle your arrogant, apologetic opinions here. You know, a Fallout fansite that CLEARLY, doesn't enjoy the idea that the series has been dolled up and pimped out to the mainstream for bucks.

PS: All I hear in every description of F4 is, MOREZ ACHUNZ. I mean, who gives a fuck games like CoD and Halo, blah, blah, do it better because they, are actual shooters, instead of some bastardized hybrid.

 

[AgentBJ09]

The problem I have with this forum is that most of the "old timers" have judged Fallout 4 before it's even out.

Now - for the record I personally rank the Fallout games like this: F2>NV>F1>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>F3

And that's based purely on how many times I've played them and how much I enjoyed them. And going by that I don't have particularly high hopes for F4. I feel that it will probably be a one playthough kind of deal.

That being said a lot of people on here seem to forget that Bethesda has only made ONE Fallout game. That's not a trend, that's a single data point. I'm prepared to give them a chance to create a good game and not judge F4 before it's out. Maybe it won't be Fallout "like you want it", but a good game with replay value nonetheless.

And besides - all you old guys ranting on about how the Bethesda Fallout version isn't the real Fallout universe. Well - I'm sorry but it is now. They own the franchise, that's how it works. Get with the program.

One Fallout game, yes, but as Cabbage pointed out, it's not their first FP-RPG. Four TES games came before, each one taking aspects away in service to new mechanics that didn't work or were unbalanced, and some of those issues in Oblivion were fixed by the community.

Me, I'm remaining critical of Fallout 4 not just for reasons of lore and bad streamlining. Remember the paid mods fiasco from this year, when Bethesda was pocketing money that was going towards modders who had fixed and optimized Skyrim for the PC? That's one reason, because it will be coming back. Them taking aspects of mods like Wanderer's Edition and turning them into "new features" for Fallout 4 is another.

As for them being the ones who now make the canon, that's only true by being ignorant of who did create this IP; without the Interplay team, Fallout would not exist, and speaking as someone who does make creative works, if I had to sell an IP of mine off to someone else, I would never look at the second team's creations as equal to mine, or a part of mine. They are not me. They didn't create what I did.

 

[PossibleCabbage]

All I'm really asking is that you hold off another month until it's launched, and then another couple of weeks so that you can play it, before you start bashing it.

I think it's reasonable though to examine critically those things we know about the game, because we've been shown them or Bethesda straight up stated them. For example, the removal of skills, the immortal companions, the fast leveling, the lack of a level cap, the 500 weapon mods, settlement building etc. are all things we can talk about in terms of whether they're good RPG design, good game design, or appropriate for the tone or theme of the game.

So you can say "Fallout 4 got rid of skills, and I don't like that" you just shouldn't extend that to "I don't like Fallout 4."

 

[Gizmojunk]

All I'm really asking is that you hold off another month until it's launched, and then another couple of weeks so that you can play it, before you start bashing it.

But we know what it is already ~do we not? If Michal Bey made an adaptation of the 'The Tell-Tale Heart', we'd all pretty much know what to expect in advance... and who the movie would be targeted at. (...and that it would not be as interesting or engaging (or thought provoking) as a Terri Gilliam film of the same story.)

Bottom line: Bethesda does not want to make a good Fallout game; they want to make a popular game using the Fallout IP; these are not always one in the same, and one can make a good Fallout game that is not popular, and/or a popular (even good) game that is simply not Fallout; (which is what they do). I think Obsidian could make a good Fallout game that is also popular, but I don't know if Bethesda is capable of making a good Fallout game at all, because it's against their interests... It's not what they do, and it would reduce their sales.

Listen to their PR; their high points are usually the very polar opposite of what they should be... they strive for servility at the expense of mechanics and game-world credibility... because their games are essentially (and intentionally) 'yes-men' that fawn on the player to keep them.