Not sure about that. Though I suppose not too many games are like fallout where you can try violence, talking, and even seduction (If your cha and skill is high enough). But games like God of War were far more explicit, plus had far more boobs. Depends what people are looking for to censor I suppose.

@mrstickball
Fallout 1&2 never had any nude or sex scenes. The Witcher, if I recall, had the nude cards that you get after you banged a chick, and in the game the women could be viewed as objects, due to the sexist nature of the design.

Are you kidding?  You can become a professional porn star in Fallout 2.  Fallout 2 was also the first place I ever ran across the word "fluffer."  Go ahead and look that one up. ^_^

While Fallout had a lot of explicit content, a lot of it was in text and in the meaning behind things. As such, it would be considered far less risque than stuff like hot coffee.

In general I am still hopeful for this game however the words "Nuclear Catapult" make me a little fearful.

I was reading up on interviews and came across an interview Gamespot had with Obsidian Entertainment's Feargus Urguhart who was asked:

"GS: What was your reaction to hearing that the Fallout license was picked up by Bethesda?"

"FU: Good Luck! That's probably somewhat horrible to say, but I think the team at Bethesda has their work cut out for them. This is mostly because there is almost nothing that they can do that will make the Fallout fans happy."

I'm looking at the responses and understand every concern but I also get the impression that almost every one of you have some real love for the child killing, prostitution, and other highly taboo material in the game. Was it really that essential? I mean I could do without GTA having prostitution anyday they feel they need to change it, and the same with the sex minigames in God of War. I think mr. stickball nailed it by asking if that content could work 10 years later with a game that is going to show up on two major consoles that will feature a lot more immersion than simple text. If they included those features, they were going to have to be visual, and child killing in gorgeous high-def 3D would have been an AO rating ready to happen.

After reading all the interviews, Bethesda seems to really love the franchise and wants to re-invent it, which is understandable as it's tough to make a direct follow-up to a game 10 years old and not rock the boat a lot. Look at what Nintendo did to Metroid after shelving the series for 8 years. I don't think Bethesda would have bid and paid upwards of 6 million for a niche franchise, and still kept the "3" in the title to keep it authentic to the storyline if they didn't feel passionate about the series.

As far as Troika, didn't they go out of business around the same time they were bidding for the license? Wikipedia has them going out of business in February 2005 after making three games, none of which seemed to live up to Fallout critically, and Bethesda announced they had the license in July 2004. If Troika were given the bid, it would have put them out of business even quicker. We would have never seen a Fallout from them seeing as how they didn't last a single year as a company since bidding for the license of Fallout.

Your response is the typical of one who does not know shit about Fallout. Fallout 1&2 portrayed alot of modern societies' believes and behaviours, one being the outcast of chidlkillers (even among criminals child-killers are outcasted). It wasn't mindless killing, if you killed a child in Fallout you would be hunted down by the people who were aware of what you did(aka. the town the child lived in). This holds true in modern society.

Infact, this game is much less mindless than GTA or Oblivion, because all your actions had consequences, and if you did alot of evil actions you would get hunted down by bounty hunters everytime you stepped outside town. In Fallout the only way for you to stop being hunted is to start doing good deeds; while in GTA you could just wait for the police to stop looking after you, and in Oblivion you only needed to bribe the guards.... so tell me, which games were mindless, and which game actually showed you that evil deeds had consequences?

Answer:

Mindless killing: GTA and Oblivion

Not Mindless killing: Fallout.

 The only games who ever got AO rating (and weren't sex games) were The Punisher and Manhunt 2, and the reason was both had explicit torture scenes. Fallout 1&2, even though it had alot of adult themes, did not show anything explicitly other than the perk that gives the kills more gruesome deaths, and the rest was softened to the fact that NOTHING is mindless in Fallout, including the mass murders.

So far Bethesda did not show ANYTHING about re-invention. Worse, they are destroying alot of what made Fallout great. Bethesda getting the bid was really just for the name, since Fallout is known to be one of the best RPG franchises ever.

If I remember correctly, There were companies interested in financing the development if Troika had been able to get the franchise (Atari was one of them)

Shio, as I'm only marginally through the original, and I haven't even encountered much of anything outside of some Raiders and Rad Scorpions, I'll just take it as Bethesda is trying to ruin the franchise from you guys until I can judge for myself. I still stand by the fact that it would have been an AO rating for Fallout 3 if they allowed child killing in the game, and that's without a doubt, which would have made development on the game pointless.

As far as the bid goes, I think Interplay should be the villain here, not Bethesda. Interplay still owns the IP and could have licensed the game out to both Bethesda and Troika if they wanted to, or any other number of interested parties, but decided to award sole licensing to Bethesda. It's the same situation with EA and the NFL license. You can blame EA for not wanting to have to directly compete year after year with Take Two, or you can blame the NFL for wanting their license to become exclusive, as it's ultimately their choice.

I just feel it's better to have some Fallout 3 than no Fallout 3 as I don't think Troika would have ever had the means to make the game, no other parties were interested, and even if they did make it, there's almost a certainty it would have been littered with bugs like their previous three games were. The fact that this game is even being made, will allow gamers to go back and play the originals that they missed out on. Those that don't want to play this version of the franchise can just choose to ignore it. After 10 years, who would have really expected any developer to bring out a Fallout game that closely resembled the other two?

 You seem to have missed the response to your post. Troika HAD financial backing for a Fallout 3. Since they were unable to obtain the license, the financial backing isn't given and so they went out of business. However, had they had the license, there would have been no issue. 

 As for people only being interested in child killing, rape and prostitution, read my original post again for additional reasons for the disappointment. Those things are marginal compared to the abandoning of the setting, dismantling the dialogue and a complete restructure of play that puts a greater emphasis on run and gun gameplay. 

@Onyxmeth
You are just really giving excuses. There is no way that Fallout 1&2 would be AO rated today. There have been several games throughout the years that had mindless child-killing, and none of them ever got banned, and they were worse than Fallout.

Games that allows child-killing: Deus Ex series, Morrowind, THE SIMS 1&2, FABLE, Black & White, SUPER SMASH BROS series, etc.................

Bethesda is possibly trying to make Fallout 3 Teen-rated, just like they tried with Oblivion.