Then resorted to nonsense bullshit like "people only hate Fallout 3 because it's made by Bethesda". Not the exact words, but pretty much implied.
I wasn't trying to imply that. Sorry I upset you. When I used the word "Bethesda" I was careless and what I really should've said was "Bethesda's games", but that isn't much better either. I don't care about the company and neither do you. Its an easy blanket term to quickly refer to 3, 4 and 76. Maybe "Modern Fallout" takes the implication about the company out of the dialogue. And when I said you were biased, I meant because you hate the game so much, its hard to see anything positive about it.
I mean fair enough, but feeding into his whining only makes it worse. It's less for his sake and more so the thread doesn't get derailed.
Yeah, I was whining about the fact that the purpose of this thread was just to cry about the way Super Mutants were handled without actually giving any discussion to the topic. In that case, it would just inevitably degenerate into "Why Modern Fallouts Suck Thread #9001". Everyone agreeing in a thread is boring, so I wanted to argue that the scenario we got is better than the alternative, and to disagree with OP saying the FO3 mutants should've been part of the Master's army.
Unfortunately it's hard for me to discuss modern Super Mutants, because as Norzan said, me not playing several of the modern games makes me unable to have the proper context or information. And I didn't research the games because I didn't want to get spoiled.
All they had to do was come up with a new mutant type. That's it. I don't care how iconic Super Mutants are or they wanted to just reuse elements from the previous games, they just needed to come up with a new big mutant type.
<...>
And i already said this, but they did nothing with Super Mutants. They are just ogres, they don't have personalities, motivations or goals. They are factually worse than the West Coast version because they lack everything that made the West Coast ones even remotely interesting and don't have a single thing replacing the things that were removed. So, what is there to discuss even?
They could have designed a new mutant type, and they almost did by inventing another species that has basically nothing in common with the West Coast mutants. It's only visually they are superficially similar to the old mutants because of the game's marketing strategy, like Gizmojunk said with his food court analogy.
I do agree that the best thing for Fallout would've been to design a completely new type of Mutant visually as well and use that instead, but from a business standpoint we know that wasn't going to happen.
Look at it like this - a company buys Star Wars and goes to make a new movie. They're definitely going to use the well-known images of Stormtroopers, TIE Fighters, Star Destroyers, and a black-clad Force User wearing a mask and holding a red lightsaber.
So they can either:
1. Take all these things and copy and paste them directly and say "This faction is still the same Empire", and then fans of the original movies get to see their beloved Empire get portrayed poorly and hit with retcons
2. Say "This faction is called the First Order, they look a lot like the Empire but it's not them, the old Empire dissolved and these new guys are actually a group of extremists that was hiding outside the galaxy."
Scenario #2 is contrived and it's obvious that they're just recycling Stormtroopers and TIE Fighters, but Scenario #1 drags the Empire through the mud. There is no Scenario #3 where the movie has a brand new faction with new soldiers and spaceships, even if that is the most creative option.
This is all just me trying to explain why the having completely separate mutant strains that only share an appearance is by far preferable to having Fallout 3 desecrate them by saying they are the same species and retconning an interesting and iconic faction from Fallout 1 into one dimensional morons.
Except Fawkes and Uncle Leo, who are apparently anomalies?