Brother None said:
I don't know if "orthodox" is supposed to have some negative connotations for whomever, but it certainly doesn't for me. It's an interesting term to choose.
All orthodox means is "straight in belief", i.e. people who stick to one faith and are consistent in their belief system.
I've called us "orthodox fans" myself. It's a pretty applicable term.
Yeah, I know really. It was just an excuse for a craptastic pun on my part.
I'm not offended by the use of the word
orthodox because it is utterly correct in this case - although I suspect it is synonymous with
archaic or
unimaginative for many commentators.
Still, it is an interesting turn of events that our orthodoxy is defined by the extremely conservative nature of
Bethesda's approach to developing
Fallout.
At the risk of just semantically reframing the issue to recast myself as the open-minded pioneer I always knew I was; I'd say the
orthodox fans are actually looking for something much bolder than
Bethesda seem intent on delivering. So far, every graphic, plot point, and piece of design seems to come directly from another source, be it a
Fallout game or design document, some hackneyed bit of post-apocalyptic fiction, or else
Oblivion. The only radical move they appear to have made is to switch from one well-established gameplay mode to another. Most of the tinkering with RPG mechanics feels retrograde; equivalent to a roleplaying step down from PnP to
Fantasy Gamebooks.
The
orthodox fans hunger for a recapitulation of the radical soul of the original, whilst the the supposed revolutionary upstarts are likely to deliver a bland and familiar rehash (only set apart by the complete mangling of gameplay mechanics).
There's probably some irony in there for anybody mad enough to spend any time looking for it.