I get what you are saying, but operating on this logic New Vegas shouldn't exist. It was possible to merge Elder Scrolls and Fallout gameplay well enough to make both parties happy, Bethesda just doesn't understand how to pull it off. If they could have made New Vegas right off the bat, I can't imagine they wouldn't have.
I wouldn't say New Vegas was necessarily a product of the merging between Fallout's and TES's gameplay. What Bethesda did with Fallout 3 was a transitory conversion of Fallout's gameplay features into TES's template; and as we can see, the conversion is finally completed by Fallout 4. Or perhaps, the keyword here isn't gameplay mechanics, but rather Bethesda's own core design philosophy, because honestly, I've only played Skyrim so I'm not exactly addressed on the topic of TES's gameplay mechanics in terms of the entire series. What I know from what I've heard is that TES's gameplay mechanics was significantly streamlined from ever since the transition from Daggerfall to Morrowind, and eventually it became outright dumbing down to Oblivion and finally Skyrim. They removed gameplay features that initially existed in predecessors, and released a far more watered down version in the successors, to the point where a mechanic is missing completely (see:
http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Levitate. Yes, it seemed like they have an in-game lore explanation as to why Levitation is missing in Oblivion and Skyrim, and even though I'm not exactly addressed in the entire series, it seemed like a forced, tacked-on explanation to the removal of a feature.)
Meanwhile, New Vegas was a product of an attempt to re-convert the result that is Fallout 3's designs into the original designs of Fallout 1 and 2, or at least what can actually be brought back to fit the currently intended template (like Traits, DT, etc etc). Especially since Obsidian had never actually make anything that's similar to what Bethesda's been making, or anything close to it as far as I know, so I don't see how Obsidian were trying
exactly merging Fallout's and TES's gameplay.
This theory that they intentionally tried to leave OG fans in the dust just doesn't hold water upon closer inspection. When you're a developer looking to appeal to essentially 'everyone', that blanket falls on die hard fans as much as it does a casual audience. Todd Howard is just painfully out of touch with the classic Fallout community.
I think the alternative to the arguments that Bethesda was trying to appeal to 'essentially everyone' is that, having gathered some thoughts from reading the discussion between the guys and devs at the Codex regarding Tim Cain's decision to create a new interface for character creation in RPGs (of which the reason number 1 is that Fallout's and Arcanum's character creation were 'too complex'), they were instead trying to ease a wider audience's impression of this new IP they've made. However, it's obvious that you absolutely
can't please everyone; even among the fans of a genre, two different people in it can have two different ways on enjoying a game in that genre, and why. This applies especially much more when it comes to RPGs, and then they're now trying to attract, for example, fans of shooters, obviously there are things that needed to be changed to accommodate gameplay mechanics that is familiar for fans of shooters. Especially since they have to take into consideration that there are fans of shooters that are almost always never really know a kind of RPGs like Fallout 1 and 2, then the changes can include, but not limited to, removing a mechanic or feature completely, and/or replace the mechanic with something that can be taken as similar/alternative. No matter how they try, they can't please everyone. It's why you might heard that some people dismissed Fallout 3 as 'Oblivion with Guns', and in turn, Fallout 4 'Skyrim with Guns'.
Also, if we are to agree that the devs of the games that we are discussing ARE actually, and sincerely, trying to blanket-pleasing everyone, including hardcore and casual fans, then the devs that ACTUALLY do that are Obsidian with New Vegas. With Fallout 3, the intention were there; but it wasn't sincere because, like you said, Todd Howard and the rest of the team are painfully out of touch with the classic Fallout community.
They are. At least when it comes to the things that made Tim Cain and Josh Sawyer smart. This community (myself included) loves to rip on Howard for being evil, but in reality I highly doubt this is actually the case. It's far more plausible he's just a slightly above-average AAA game director who is set in his ways. That sucks for us, but it's the truth. No conspiracy, sorry.
Eh, interpreting the intention behind the design as stupidity is also a conspiracy, as much as saying it's malice. While Gizmojunk's arguments might came out as that, I think his points basically amount to Bethesda were trying to attract newcomers, and obviously their already existing fanbase, into Fallout series, and not to actively trying to piss off the fanbase of the originals. However, since they are a completely different developers compared to Interplay/Black Isle, and their experience was always with making games like TES series, obviously their core design philosophy wouldn't be too far from that of a TES game when they were making a Fallout game, and it shows. In fact, they ARE actually playing it safe by opting to try making a Fallout game using that piece of shit of an engine, instead of using the engine that was used to make Fallout 1 and 2. I wouldn't dispute the fact that they still tried to attract the hardcore fans with Fallout 3, but I wouldn't attribute the method they were using as either stupidity or malice; it was pure business decision.
)
