Mustakrakish
In 'Node' We Trust
Because you said :
As if FO was a long-standing Bethesda giant and they always went the safe way with it.
Despite Fallout not being a Bethesda franchise to begin with, FO3 being a stark change (2D isometric turn-based to 3D real-time action-based) and FO4 finishing to change Fallout from a RPG to an action shooter.
That's pretty big changes from where I'm standing.
If you consider NV unmemorably similar just because it uses the same engine...
What can I say ?
Really? You haven't noticed me talking about FO and TES? That makes in my example (not taking Morrowind into equation) Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim, Fallout 4, that's more than enough to make my point stand. 4 games and 10 years of sandboxes and those games as I said just change scenery and no true changes happen. I don't see what's your problem here and still don't get how exactly and what the hell does FO1, 2 have anything to do with what I'm talking about? When I'm specifically talking about Bethesda development philosophy. Do explain. It seems to me like you're very hard trying to put words in my mouth. It's like you want me to be that guy who thinks FO has always been Bethesda? Do tell where I ever claimed FO1,2 being Bethesda's creations or that there have been no real change between 2 and 3. WTH? I'm really confused tbh. So I repeat, how FO1, 2 and the stark change with FO3 has anything to do with what I said? Did the said stark changes happen between oblivion > skyrim, FO3 > FO4? What exactly is the problem here? If your problem is that I didn't specifically mention that FO1 and 2 is not Bethesda's creation... what can I say? I'm not exactly cpt. obvious nor here to state the obvious.
As to:
"If you consider NV unmemorably similar just because it uses the same engine...
What can I say ? "
I'm not gonna go along with that condescending tone, because:
1. it is for me at least a clear matter of opinion how unmemorably similar or not the games were. Did I like it more than FO3? Definitely. Do I consider it being "starkly" different? No, crazy eye or not
2. I still don't think there's a problem here and you simply misunderstood