Sorry man but in a modern context Fallout 1/2 are boring as sin to play. New Vegas isn't a first person shooter. It's an RPG, through and through. And a vastly, ridiculously better game than the first two.
I suppose my opinion is invalid because FO3 is my first FO game, but FFXV won't be a simplistic turn based RPG, and FO4 won't be a turn based isometric game. And thank god.
/"casual"
No, no they are not. They're just different. I agree, I want Fallout to continue as is, but that doesn't make the old games bad. They are different gameplay and maybe you don't like turn based, but that doesn't make it "old/boring". Just means it's not your style of game.
And I also agree with you that Fallout 3 and New Vegas aren't shooters. That's what makes them great, they are RPGs with shooter elements (I like shooter gameplay but I get bored quick of a game where that is all you do).
And I wouldn't say 3 is a vastly, ridiculously better game than the first two. Even if you don't like the game style the first 2 (particularly the second) had far better writing, far better quest lines, more choice in how you played your character, more varied things you can do. They were honestly better RPGs than 3 was (particularly 2 but I'm a tad biased as 1 was my least favorite Fallout of the ones I've played and 2 is rating as my second favorite behind New Vegas). The only thing that is "better" really is exploration and if you prefer the type of gameplay/combat (which I admit I do but I still enjoy turn based as well). Vegas was definitely better as it was a good combo of good story/quests with the gameplay I enjoyed better (though it still wasn't as good in the first as 2 at least). I wouldn't say 3 was the worst of the Fallouts (Even of the popular fallouts, 1,2,3, and New Vegas). For me I think 1 was the one I enjoyed the least. But it certainly was in the last 2 (and I loved 3. Fallout is just that good that even the "not as good ones" are still great
).
In the end, 1+2 aren't dated more than they are different and people are going to enjoy different games. As the people I was arguing with who were pissed what Bethesda did to fallout pointed out, you still have games coming out today with that game style that people buy and enjoy.
(as I said, I'm sick of both sides scoffing at the other type Fallout just cause it's either not the original and how dare it be different or alternatively, "it's old and outdated". They are both good games though different styles so some people aren't going to enjoy both).
It would sell over a million easily on PC alone assuming it was developed by Obsidian. I mean D:OS nearly did 1mil despite being quite mediocre.
Would be kickstarted in a matter of minutes.. lead design Tim 'father of fallout' Cain, lead writer Chris Avellone. Internet would shit-itself.
It would be kinda cool if Bethesda the publisher decided to do a small project of Fallout old style on the side. I mean it's not like Interplay didn't try some different stuff with Fallout (Fallout Tactics ?). Just cause the main games will be first person/third person perspective RPGs with FPS gameplay doesn't mean they can't do some other smaller fallouts on the side
(though I would hope they'd let Obsidian do another Fallout in the new style cause i love the combo of new style Fallout with the better writing/story/characters/gameplay that Obsidian did with New Vegas).
I mean since it takes so long to do the main games, maybe they should put out some side projects like a Fallout old style to tide fans over in the meantime.