My thoughts on it:
I did read the article and I'm not sure what to think. Most points mentioned [as "improvements"] already exist, sometimes for a decade (e.g. Appearance Mod ; but only for the Fo2 engine, I believe). While the quick save/load (mentioned) was already in the original from '98 (F5/F6 according to manual). There is also sfall & HRP which are much more extensive than people may realize. In fact, there is so much in sfall & HRP that expert games journalists can't even begin to imagine the improvements - (that already exist...).
Then the article mentioned the original source still exists (not sure if it means Fo1, Fo2 or Engine...) and could be used. However, the source they gave the community in 2003 was not in a good state. Chris Jones said "I have done my best to put together something close to the scripts that shipped with Fallout 2. However, the source for the scripts was not very well organized and it was difficult to piece together all of the backups into something I could claim was 'it'." And in fact, the community (Haenlomal) had to create an updated version to get an "actual" 1.02d source set (i.e. the Fo2 original). And even that was then further developed by RP Mod and others (bug fixes etc.). Point being, whatever source they have, it's probably not in a good state, and even if, probably a long way behind community standard.
Edit: Although, if they do have the Fo1 source it would be nice if they could publish that (especially if they have a header set up for it). That could be (at least) historically useful... Btw, how does a "Fo1 remaster" rank to a "Fo2 port"? That's another thing that already exists...
It's also questionable how a remaster would work with mods, For example, even a graphics update should skip on models like Sulik in Power Armour. Which means your companions wouldn't adjust models anymore when switching armour. And so on. If a reforged version is not mod compatible (RP, Fixt, FoRes, Nevada, MM etc.) how useful would that be? I don't think anyone plays the originals from 98 (except games journalists apparently). If their reforged isn't RP compatible, I'm not sure it's interesting.
Regarding art, the usual complaint is normally that the new art doesn't fit the old one and not that the old one is bad. There is something very special about the original which may proof hard to capture. This may actually be the quality of a master-piece and a reason to be cautious with any statement of improving it.
And finally the child-killer cliché shows that they would need to make a game they cannot make – which is a problem.
All that said, I don't think a remaster is a good idea. My suggestion would be to leave Classic Fallout to the community who will try to preserve it as they have done for the past 25 years. And personally, I believe that classics should be experienced as they original were – that's part of it.
While Bethesda should do a Fo1 & Fo2 retold. Just rebuild both games using their own engine (3D open world, FPS etc.). This way they can change whatever they need to change, their people can work with an engine they know (rather than mock about with one from 98) and their audience may also prefer a style of game they are used to.
Just make a clean split between the two franchises, which, imo, is already the case as Classic Fallout and Bethesda Fallout are different RPGs in concept, philosophy and style. That's, honestly, the best solution for everyone involved, imo.
Especially, when you realize how well supported classic fallout is, if their remaster tries to compete with community standard (other than simply adding sfall) they may set themselves up for failure. I really wouldn't underestimate the advances made to script, source, engine, art etc. over the past two decades. Competing with that is ambitious and very probably not economical (i.e. modding has a resource advantage (in time & free labour), which crunch can't beat).
Personally, I'm also scared of what "modernizing" by a corporation could entail – forced online, accounts, ToS – that could be a lot of problems. A clean split (into Classic & Bethesda Fallout) may also be the best chance for the originals to become abandoned ware, and that could (?) actually be the best outcome for the classic community. More freedom in preserving, distributing & modding.
At the same time, I do believe that a retold (on a Bethesda engine) is also better for the Bethesda people (all around, devs and players). Especially considering they would get a "proper" game than just a quick AI rehash (which appears to become a thing apparently) of a 98 game that comes with a full new set of 24 ToS.
Maybe I should be more optimistic regarding positives this may bring, but... there are so many snags, I really think they should leave Classic alone and rebuild it on 3d instead. That would be the "decent" and "quality" decision, imo.
Let's not George Lucas the beloved Fallout isometric games, please.
