In regards to one portion of the discussion being closed, I will respect that. However, other points do need to be tended to. I will agree with Jebus that your follow-up post to me was...well, I'm being honest here, given your initial post.
Bootcut said:
Oh, and by the way, those games I mentioned ARE turn based at their core. They are! I'm not lying, I promise.
You actually believe BioWare's hype machine? Just because there are regular intervals in a real-time game and that it can be paused to issue orders or automatically paused when certain conditions are met, that has nothing to do with turn-based mechanics. At the core, it's still a RT system, just like how DikuMUD is RT but with command and event intervals initiated by a "heartbeat" timer. That's all BioWare's games tend to be, and they have shown no interest in developing anything but, yet will not hesitate to crow about how great they are. Once their hype machine slips, it will likely go downhill, especially if someone else does something akin to the depth of character playability as Fallout and issues BioWare a plate of humble pie. Hopefully it will be unlicensed work, to further show that BioWare is working towards fanservice. Not the good kind, in expanding the gameplay, but in whoring Drizzt and every other popular thing in (double-bladed lightsabers, when it was supposed to be a unique thing, as well as the many other munchkin-esque Monty Haul things they've done), regardless of design.
So, seriously, how do you expect people to believe that BioWare is a good choice when they will undoubtedly kludge the game's original design to fit into their trend chasing? And people are being cynical for expecting a sequel that does credit to the original? How the hell does that logic work?
As for the remark about nose candy, that was the only conclusion that I could come up with how you could easily accept that NWN = RPG, when it's in fact more like "a heavily kludged version of D&D, made to run on auto-pilot like most of the generally control-passive BioWare games". Just because something uses the D&D rules, that doesn't inherently mean it's a CRPG, unless you go by the "stats definition". I go by the definition of how the damn genre got coined, as it was a mix of the adventure genre with dungeon crawlers and while having aspects of both, didn't fit into either definition and had the added ability to play in a variety of styles. BioWare's design has often been far too restrictive, their ability to portray evil is often hackneyed, barely there, and in a good-for-hire method, and that doesn't suit Fallout's setting at all. Try playing evil in Arcanum sometime.
Fact is, the role-playing capabilities of NWN only esist with the user-made modules, chancy as that quantification is, and not in the core modules (the first was especially noteworthy, in that only the character would be saved between chapters, no location states). KotOR was a good start, but they still have a bit to go in order to provide from something other than their usual generic playstyles, 99% of which is kill everything on the screen and collect "phat loot", then talk to someone with the outcome already planned, as speech often has no affect whatsoever on a regular basis. Rarely, yes, but not regularly.
If you're going to go by the logic that Diablo and NWN are great simply because they sold well, I wouldn't want to be in your shoes. Are those are indicative of is that any moron could pick up the game, play it, and recommend to their friends to play together, and they did well for their own reasons. Fallout has a respect and following for it's OWN reasons, which are not congruent to what Blizzard nor BioWare are wont to do.
Hey, I appreciate Diablo for what it is. A dungeon crawler that friends can get together and have some fun.
I like many FPS games, strats, racers, and generally quite a few genres as long as the game is created right, without slipshod polish added over it, and no smoke and mirrors approach to development. Frankly, for all the self-fellating and excuses (please do check up on one of BioWare's LEAD DESIGNERS, David "Exponential Boy" Gaider, over at RPGCodex - especially the interview where he makes excuses about why BioWare's design is so simplistic), and outrageous claims that they are "advancing the role-playing genre" (when in fact everything they've done has been done before, often better, and years ago with more creativity), I don't have much respect for them as developers, especially when the two main hype queens start spewing their PR dreck.
BioWare's games often don't hold any interest to me since they feel like the same annoyances with different wrapping, as they do to others, so that is why quite a few don't care for their style of development, especially so when their style and Fallout have about as much ability of mixing together as oil and water. Jagged Alliance 2 has more in common with Fallout than BioWare's work.
So...why should BioWare develop a Fallout 3? Because they they have profitable games? Because they can develop for console? Because they have the hype machine for the moment? Because they prefer to develop in real-time? Because they half-ass ripped off Fallout's speech system and are still trying to figure out how to develop competently with it, or at least somewhat close to what was developed 10-7 years ago? Because their idea of development is nauseatingly similar to many poor dungeon hacks I've loathed to see pop up from the minds of munchkin ten year-olds in my years of DMing?
Sorry, but you're going to have to try a LOT harder than that to have people believe BioWare would have any good touch upon the Fallout license. This isn't to continually rag on you, but you have to understand that we're far from new to this situation, we've been here before, and unless someone gives us a good reason why we should believe someone would/could competently develop outside of their chosen style, we will be more than a bit skeptical. 8)
However, I have to thank you, because thats all I was looking for. I like to argue, so sue me. Hats off to you for shutting down my "answer for everything" machine. 
