I don't think this is the case.
They rely on hype marketing for sure, but to say that each single game left the previous userbase in the dirt is a lie. At least the way I understand your post (i.e. Morrowind fans hated Oblivion, Oblivion fans hated Skyrim, Skyrim fans hated Fallout 4).
I don't mean that they completely ditched each of their previous fanbase, that would be the extreme end of the spectrum. But you can't deny that subsequent dumbing down definitely turned off a huge chunk of the actual userbase they've built up until the moment before they released a new game. But, like said, I could see why the userbase built by Skyrim would be more welcoming of the changes happened to Fallout 4, because it was already quite diluted at that point (and somehow Bethesda finds a way to dilute it even further). A huge chunk of Fallout 3's fans, though, were actually disappointed; I remember seeing a lot of new members to this forum proclaimed so, and a lot of comments over at Steam reviews and Youtube videos also preached to the choir.
Fallout 3 wasn't hated just because of its writing. It was hated because of how bad the gameplay was.
Actually, both are hated; the gameplay might be salvageable with mods (most especially Tale of Two Wastelands), but no amount of mods could ever hope to fix the shitty writings. Sure, in retrospect after the release of Fallout 4, 3's writing seems acceptable (The Pitt deserves a honorable mention), but shit is shit, no matter how you try to coat it with gold.
I would say that I don't think New Vegas, vanilla New Vegas (even if just using unofficial patches and nothing else) is a good game. That's because Fallout 3 was bad, and New Vegas is pretty much Fallout 3 but with better writing, but in an even more boring worldspace.
For some reason this statement reads vaguely like those dumbasses dismissing New Vegas as merely Fallout 3 total conversion mod, complete with the "it has an empty map" argument. I'm not even sure where you're going with this; what does your perception of the quality comparison between Fallout 3 and New Vegas has anything to do with the way Obsidian is compared to now and then? Are you insinuating that Obsidian has never been good, that people shouldn't be surprised at this point?
New Vegas' faction system is something that I don't think anyone ever expected Obsidian to pull off. I think it's the only truly good thing about the game, and even that I think is fairly overrated as the different faction paths are all... very similar, when you get down to them, telling you to do the same quests but from a different perspective (blow up the monorail instead of saving it, kill Kimball instead of saving him and then again only if you are Legion, as three out of four paths require you to save him). Legion content is notoriously missing, and this is on Obsidian and no one else (as they already knew how much time they had to make the game, so it was a matter of managing it better).
Except the faction system was adapted from Fallout 2; yes, Fallout 2 has a similar system, but since the game's focus is on something else, it was quite rough on the edges and doesn't really do anything (with the exception of, apparently, Sulik refusing to join if reputation in Klamath is negative). It wasn't until New Vegas that the factional reputation does something:
https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout:_New_Vegas_reputations
Meanwhile, the issue you have with the game's questline in relation to the factions, seems kinda nitpicky. I've seen similar complains regarding Fallout 1.5: Resurrection, specifically with Rat Hole and Corath's questline. The thing about this isn't the quest design per se, more like overarching narrative problem (that is, *IF* you see it as a problem). Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with this; when you have an overarching narrative involving different factions pitted against each other with one thing and one thing only put at the stake, it only makes sense that you see the exact same thing, but from a different perspective, i.e. "the other side". Age of Decadence did more or less the same thing, albeit a whole lot more elaborate, with different starting quest and continuation based on the faction you currently joined (and an extra bonus of opportunities to stab them in the back).
Anyone could have expected New Vegas to be closer to classic Fallout in writing, but I don't think anyone expected Obsidian to deliver that faction system, which (again) I believe is the thing that makes New Vegas most memorable.
Once again, you lost me with this kind of statement/argument.
Of course, if we go back to what I said earlier:
Fallout 3 wasn't hated just because of its writing. It was hated because of how bad the gameplay was.
- Rehashing the plot of Fallout 1&2, mishmashing them into an abominable, fanfic-tier version of the stories of those two classic games
- The absolute stupidity of the worldbuilding, from the lack of sustainability; a shanty town made around a still active nuclear bomb (which isn't wrong in and of itself, except people who lives around it was supposed to be 'normal' and not some crazed post-apocalypse cult); a bunch of trading caravans coming to and from absolutely nowhere at all; 200 years and for some reason there are still canned goods and stuff?; there's slavery, but there doesn't seem to be anyone actually buying from them; Little Lamplight; etc etc
- Mothership Zeta
- Instead using GECK to restart civilization like Vault 8 did with Vault City, they used it power up an oversized water purifier; in a setting where absolutely no one has any problem with clean water with an exception of... two bums, each placed conveniently in front of the major 'settlement'
- Oh yeah, speaking of that goddamn water purifier, when turning it on, despite the fact that it was heavily radiated inside, the potential companion(s?) immune to radiation somehow refused to do the job, because it's your destiny (lol)
- Tenpenny Tower, and the absolute retardation of getting trashtalked by 3dog if you don't let the ghouls in, or get your asslicked if you do so let them in, only for the ghouls to kill everyone inside the tower anyway. Oh, and don't forget, that they want to activate the bomb in Megaton, "because it ruins the view" (of an absolute shithole that somehow unable to recover after 200 years)
- What they did to Harold
- Did I mentioned Mothership Zeta?
- Liberty Prime (everyone probably would see this coming, fresh after Oblivion, but my entry to Bethesda games was Skyrim, continued by this abomination of a game)
- And many, many, many more
For someone who've been mingling in this forum AND RPG Codex, you're...absolutely ignorant of what everyone has been saying all these times, huh?
Then you could say, "you never expected New Vegas to be good" (nevermind I played both games after they had already been released, heh). And yeah, if I could forget everything about New Vegas, I could tell you "there's no way a company is going to turn Fallout 3 into a good game with just 18 months of dev time". There's just too many things wrong with Fallout 3's and Bethesda's development philosophy for that to happen. Obsidian would have needed to start from scratch and build an entirely different game, with no ties to Fallout 3, as opposed to a glorified Fallout 3 total conversion with better writing.
I think I see the problem with your arguments here; at least in relation to Obsidian. You seem to forget, or maybe even conveniently ignored, the background of Obsidian at the time they developed New Vegas. I remembered seeing people regards the company as the Interplay/Black Isle reborn (aside from inXile, maybe). These are the exact same people who made Fallout 2; Chris Avellone and even Feargus Urquhart, more specifically. I remembered reading Sawyer having a hand in Fallout 2's development, but that was my memory messing with me; however, the fact that he joined only a mere year since Fallout 2's release, I would assume he played it, learned what went wrong with the development, and then putting all those into practice many years later when they (miraculously) gotten a chance to develop a Fallout game. Even ignoring all these, doesn't it only makes sense for them to go and play the previous entries, including even the abomination that is Fallout 3? And even then, considering that they were Interplay/Black Isle reborn, isn't it only makes sense for them to try and make a proper sequel to Fallout 2? Especially with Van Buren's design doc having been written (albeit I'm not sure if it's, by any means, 'completed'). Yeah, they definitely wouldn't be able to completely, thoroughly, and truly, adapt Fallout 1&2's design philosophy up to the 1:1 scale, considering the fundamental difference between turn-based vs. real-time action gameplay. Not to mention they have to communicate with Bethesda, AND keep the newcomers to the series in mind.
In the end, I still couldn't get what you truly mean by New Vegas "turning out to be
that good." The faction system? Adapted from Fallout 2. They have MCA and Feargus on board, both were prominent individuals of Fallout 2's development, alongside whoever was carried over to Obsidian from Interplay/Black Isle; no matter how we're seeing this, they've had the experience of making a proper Fallout game under their belt. For all the faults found in Fallout 2, they managed to exercised one of humanity's imminent quality, which is learning from mistakes (something that Bethesda has yet to properly learn). Hell, for all we know they may've even gotten in touch with the man, the former myth, the former legend himself, Tim Cain, behind the scene.
So, what gives? Alright, as you mentioned; Fallout 3, and Bethesda's design philosophy in general. Still, your last statement, as I mentioned before, absolutely reeks of dismissing New Vegas as merely a glorified total conversion to Fallout 3. I can see that sentiment coming from either the classical games purist, or some Bethestards refusing to play anything that's not Bethesda's glorified walking simulators. But I can't see you in the purist end of the spectrum (especially since I fancy myself as one, despite the fact that Fallout 3 was actually my first 'Fallout game' ew
), and honestly, I think I know you enough to not be on the other end of the spectrum.