I read through the entire article, once and rather quickly, and don't think it represents the fallout fans adequately. Furthermore I don't think it depicts Bethesda's relationship with the fcan communities in an honest fashion.
But what bothers me is the underlying theme I see in the article- that fans should be grateful and trusting of a big company that's giving us, the fans, a sequel. Never mind the quality of that sequel, but we should just sit at the table Bethesda has made (pay the $40 for the meal) and smile.
I also don't like the notion that the article accuses of being extreme merely because we have strong opinions or that a few of our members are rather vocal about their feelings. I damn well don't like the tenor that we should be somehow apologetic for our feelings or our members outrage.
Fallout fans are some of the strongest, most out spoken and most loyal out there. Any individual who has made a game that commands such loyalty from fans should be proud of that accomplishment. ANy company that seeks to improve upon that franchise or to make a worthwhile sequel should feel honored that they have a chance to make a game that is respected by those fans. If Bethesda bemoans the fact that Fallout Fans have such strong opinions, than perhaps they should have known what they were getting into before they bought the license.
That the fans are outraged with what Bethesda has promised and has failed to deliver, than Bethesda should consider carefully that criticism and utilize it constructively.
What galls me about the article is the notion of the article that such communities might have such strong opinions. The gall! As if we should all be numbed down by prozac so that we honor mediocrity.
We are a community fan site, a large a rather open community with a few rules that we govern by, and which supports and encourages thoughtful argument. Are we rabid? Some of us are. Are the feelings justified, generally. Should they have the right to be articulated- absolutely. We encourage debate and discussion- and if that is emotional or unpleasant to developers, so be it. Yes, we say things that are not fit to print. But at least we speak from honest emotion and sincerity.
"The whole reason we wanted the license is that we're fans as well" Says Howard, "Reinvention is one of our core philosophies" so they decided to make a Bethesda game.
Hey, asshole, most fallout fans could give a fuck about a Bethesda game. In fact, they ccould give a fuck about Bethesda. What we want is a Fallout game.
We're Fallout fans, and many of us had concerns when Bethesda picked up the license because we knew we weren't going to get a Fallout game but a Bethesda Game.
We have our objections and we have our ideals. What we want is the best Fallout possible. And yes, we hold developers to a high standard because we are formed as a community due to our shared admiration for what many consider one of the great CRPGs of all time.
High standards is a good thing because it makes high demands and accepts few compromises. Critical feedback is a good thing, especially for a company like Bethesda which, so far, has shown a rather poor appreciation of what Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 were about.
Instead we get Pete Hines, "If you don't want us to make this game, you're going to be disappointed, because we're making it, and if you're not willing to give it a shot- well, then we appreciate what you want, but we're going to move on."
Which we can rephrase to- Bethesda is going to make a Bethesda game, and if you don't like it, fuck off, because we're going to do it anyway. Add Howard, "Oh yeah we love it so much we're going to change it."
(Sorry Howard- did I call you asshole? Oh, that's terrible. But maybe if you didn't have your head up your ass, I wouldn't call you ASSHOLE). How fucking stupid do you have to be not to "get it."
Hey, what about that love of fallout you were talking about? What about the "we listen to the community" stuff? What that all... what's the word.. bullshit?
I am not sure which is worse- being called a rabid fan because we use "bad words"? Or is it a company exec working for a multimillion dollar company lieing to a community of fans who have been waiting ten years for a real sequel and thus have maintained the value of the brandname of the game you multi-million dollar company has bought. Look, you want me to respect your commercial avarice, ok. But at least respect our admiration and love for this game.
So tell me, am I justified if I call Peter Hines and the Bethesda staff a bunch of lieing fucks? Or is that impolite, to give voice to how I feel. Should I be so sensitive to your feelings when your ambition is to make millions by spinning off a chip exploitive game based on what I think is valued?
Hey, you want respect- earn it. As a member here I was one of the "let's see what happens" crowd. But I have seen enough. I know what Bethesda wants to deliver. And they haven't respected our feelings. And its' not just me saying it. Bethesda's own forums say that loud and clear.
And as for our concerns about Bethesda-
Have the concerns and fears of the fallout fans of this site been generally realized? Absolutely? Has Bethesda done much to allay your fears and concerns? No.
And its not a matter of wait and see anymore. We have seen. We had to go to Leipzig for ourselves to see. And what we see isn't much for Bethesda to be proud of.
Games for Windows? Yeah, as posted earlier -
jfreund said:
The Xbox is the worst thing to ever happen to PC gaming. It used to be that console games and PC games were well separated and each group of gamers got what they wanted. There were PC ports of some console games (most crap, some good), and rarely a PC game ported to a console (there was actually a Playstation port of Civ2).
When M$ started selling a PC (running Windows CE) as a gaming console, things took a sharp downhill turn. The first thing M$ did was buy Bungie in order to make Bungie's in-development PC/Xbox FPS into an Xbox exclusive (though there was eventually a poor PC port). I can see how Halo is a huge deal to a console gamer, but after playing it on a friend's Xbox, I was underwhelmed. It's the same basic FPS mechanics PC gamers have been enjoying since Wolfenstein 3D (limited by a console controller), though it does have the actual 3D environments PC gamers have had since Quake I.
One of the idiosynchrasies of the console gaming market is that hardware manufacturers will (especially at the launch of a new console) take a loss on the hardware of the console and make it up in royalties from game developers who will pay the console manufacturer to have their game playable on a particular platform. So now M$ has convinced a lot of PC game developers that the PC is not a profitable gaming platform to develop for, and gotten them to go "cross platform", i.e. dumb down their games to accomodate console controllers and gamers accustomed to all the depth and complexity of Super Mario Bros. Even M$'s "Games for Windows" initiative is a hoax designed to drive developers to Xbox and PC users to Vista. One of the requirements for a game to carry the "Games for Windows" logo is that the game is designed to use the Xbox 360 controller. We PC gamers are used to using most of our 10 fingers when playing a game, not just our thumbs and index fingers.
Bethesda drank the Xbox Kool Aid (or Flavor Aid to be more historically correct) starting with Morrowind. Morrowind was still a decent PC game, but Oblivion was clearly an Xbox game with a PC port. For reasons incomprehensible to rational human beings, Bethesda spent around 6 million dollars to acquire the Fallout intellectual property and turn it into yet another Xbox game with a port to the PC. The true fans of Fallout are casualties of the unholy union between M$ and console gaming.
I think the most we Fallout fans can realistically hope for now is success for the independent developers/fans who have been working on the type of RPGs we enjoy playing. Age of Decadence looks promising, and FIFE looks like a great asset waiting for an ambitious execution. Unfortunately I don't have the programming/scripting/art skills to contribute to such efforts.
Bethesda lies like the Republican Party and the Bush administration. Why? Money. Considering the investment in this game and Window's interests, are we to be faulted to raising issues of conflict of interest in all of this? Should we not wonder if some venal interests at underlying this article?
Honestly, I hope that the independent developers are the ones who resurrect the Fallout Franchise, because I have little faith in Bethesda.
And a tactful mix of both can confuse and dismay the proponents of our superior logic and knowledge. 
