Modders had, in many cases, to do the job for them. It's part of the reason they made the GECK and other similar kits available to the public. That screams of laziness all-around. Modding should be an extra to a game, not something essential to make it playable. As an example, CDPR also released a REDkit for The Witcher 2, more like an extra, as the game was fully playable without the need for interference. That says a lot.
And the UI they used for Skyrim for example was downright atrocious at least in my opinion. I've rarely seen let's players stick with the original UI, most of them decided to mod the thing.
While some might argue this offers the game(s) more replay value and whatnot, I see it as something lazy. A game should stand on its own. Bethesda, in the current state, is incapable of doing that. Been like that for a decade or more, yet people still do not learn and keep throwing money at them, blindly.

If The Outer Worlds is any indication, that gives us a pretty good idea, combat-wise - as that is very similar to FO:NV, but not entirely. Sure, some stuff's quite a bit different in TOW and all - but that game run, played, and whatnot quite well on Unreal Engine.

Its combat isn't spectacular by any means - but I think it's a lot better than what FO3/4/NV were doing. I actually loved the NV settings & game-world. It certainly had more personality and whatnot going on than FO3, IMHO. That's b/c FO76 remove a few important elements of those games: NPC's offering actual real questing; mods (for players to fix AI, UI, etc; and anything to add more content to the game); and an actual offline mode. Pretty much, all the things that have made Bethesda's even greater - well, went missing; right out the window. And since these games have so many systems and pieces, losing important pieces like these pretty much ruined FO76.

Pretty much - all of Bethesda's game worked b/c of their multiple systems on-going and everything I mentioned above. All of their games were always a "sum of its part make a greater whole" type of thing. It was doing lots & tons of things - and did a lot of them well. You know, similar to what the GTA's have done for years.

FO76 was also supposed to be FO4's MP portion originally (go see the No Clip video on FO76) - but got pulled form FO4 b/c it wasn't ready at that time (i.e. I do think FO4 was kicked out the door a bit early); and FO4 MP's got a life of its own as it kept ballooning in size; bigger than originally planned - so they split it and it became FO76.

I do think FO76 became its own thing b/c they were trying to capitalize on the online-only/MMO market; and b/c they bought out some studios that did some MP-style work. Well, that didn't turn out so good, now did it? [shrug]

Bethesda were never that hot at UI. Namely, Morrowind was probably the last time it was "Okay", as it was. Oblivion and Skyrim were leaning towards something more friendly to a controller and a console than say a PC-style KB/mouse set-up. Same problems also are in Fallout 3, 4, and NV - as the UI just isn't intuitive at all. Best bet - go find UI mods ASAP.

And yes, there's also the unofficial patches that fix lots of quest bugs and issues too.

And if it wasn't modders doing the fix - if there were performance issues and things of that sort....you often just had to wait for newer hardware to blow way past what was out there, to get their games running well.

And also, games like FO3/4/NV need you to mess w/ their INI file or use NVidia Panel just to both force VSync off (OMG, input lag's horrible with V-Sync On) and also cap it at either 30fps or 60fps (since the game's physics go nuts, if you aren't at either for a cap; or if you go above 60fps).

Ah, yes, The Outer Worlds, I liked the general look and flow of it, I tested the PS4 version more than a year ago or so.
While not a fan of Unreal myself, it certainly works better than something like Gamebryo/Creation, no argument there.

I like both the urban and desert/rural setting, but as time went by I grew fonder of the latter. That is a personal preference and at times I think it has to with many factors, such as taking place on the West Coast, being closer to its roots, more grounded and alive. It actually feels lived in, whereas DC/East Coast is more of a perpetual warzone, even 200 years after the bombs fell. There are many inconsistencies in Fallout 3, but I'm not going into detail, not the time or place to do so.
I will say this though: strictly from a setting/the way the world is build, Fallout 3 blows Fallout 4 out of the water. Personally, I never imagined that possible years ago.

Onto the online aspect, since you mentioned Fallout 76, Bethesda was looking into this for a while. I remember around the time of Fallout 3 when people would ask how come there is no multiplayer element to the game, because that would certainly be a welcomed addition. Not only to the Fallout world, but to Elder Scrolls as well. What folk did not realise is that Bethesda was never prepared for such an endeavour, not capable either. They could barely hold the single-player portion of their games, let alone something as complex as multiplayer.
To my mind, Fallout has always been a deeply personal experience, multiplayer would not make sense in this universe, but that's just me.
That being said, Bethesda had to ride the wave and the craze, so eventually they came up with 76. I think deep down they knew it was going to flop, hence the agressive campaign meant to confuse people. It did the trick with some, but the majority pointed fingers and called them on their bullshit. You know, I find it funny that some people opened their eyes around this time, saying 76 is utter garbage and ruined the Fallout franchise. Fact of the matter is that process started years and years ago, in 2004 or so. That's quite something, running a franchise into the ground in 14 years more or less.
Anyway, here we are.

In order to develop a good UI, they would have to be PC-centric, which they aren't, I don't think that was ever the case, more like an afterthought. Also, they would need competent workers, visionaries, creators. Not the case, sadly.

Even now, in 2021, in order to make 3 and New Vegas playable on modern systems, one has to fiddle with settings, ini, dll files, and so on. New Vegas, at least in my case, needs nvse and NVTF to run at 60FPS. Otherwise it goes haywire. Yet that is one aspect that can be easily fixed.
Bad writing and poor world building can't be fixed though (I'm looking here at Bethesda's attempts), that is something that requires skill and ability to understand the universe around the game.

Reply to above:

I actually liked the destroyed DC and Maryland area in FO3; and even FO4's take on both Boston (base-game) & Bar Harbor Maine (Far Harbor DLC).

I know of Maine, despite not been there before; and Boston's very local to me. I've been to Fenway Park, Faneuil Hall, MIT, and other cool Massachusetts-based locations that are in there - so to see those with Bethesda's take on a post-apoc' version of that was pretty cool.

I think FO3 was also better at dealing out interesting quests & choices, too; especially when compared to FO4 (except Far Harbor DLC - the exception to the FO4 rule). We won't even mention the disaster that was FO 76 here in these regards and all. ;)

I think Bethesda makes interesting playgrounds, sandboxes, and open-worlds - but they really often don't give it the context, the would-building, the depth, the character, the narratives, and whatnot that someone like Obsidian (esp. during the Avellone era) would normally give it. A Bethesda world doesn't feel as lived-in, as say an Obsidian world; there's a huge disconnect w/ Bethesda games w/ its game-world; and its characters & stories.

I think what makes Bethesda games special is their sandboxes and tons of stuff to do without having to be online (and offline MMO-type of game, if you will); and their extensive mod community. Once you toss online into a Bethesda game - you basically just lost what makes Bethesda special: the offline factor. Once you toss online into it, it's no longer special; It just becomes another MMO...and this is also even more so true if there's no mod support there like with say FO76 and ESO.

Well if Skyrim/etc come here, I am guessing GOG will push for the most complete version they can....as they have made a number of bad or questionable decisions over the last few years, but one thing they seem to try to stick to is getting more complete versions of games(and if not that, then getting every DLC sold on GOG as well.....*cough* paradox *cough*).

Agreed, which is why I said that they'll likely bring it here once those other income sources run low/dry out.

I have a different approach....if a game is only available via eBay resellers for high prices and the actual rights holders don't sell it(online/on disc), I often (do not) take the y'argh matey route.

Retail copies have one bonus: the license attached to them and how the law sees such in a number of countries

For example, I can buy a disc based game and then download a copy "elsewhere" and use that.....and all legally.....as the disc copy I purchase is in effect a license to play that game.

Probably not, but it can't hurt to try.

In the meantime, I have my own solution: I remove the DRM myself.....which is also allowed under the laws where I live.

Methinks you're a bit too pessimistic.....sure, we're not doing well on our side(DRM free, etc), but the "war" isn't over.

And in the meantime, one can(and should) use the law of their area to get around things like DRM/etc, and give big corps like AAA game companies the middle finger.

It's not only with newer games, even older games get affected. It's the people which cry for shop-specific online features.

Achievements itself never have been a problem, online-achievements are the problem. The good old days when people had a life and did not need online-achievements to brag about...

I don't know how many of you watched this, but I think it says a lot about Bethesda, or should I say about their writers/designers/leadership... With Pagliarulo, Pely and Howard sharing their thoughts, this video pretty much sums up Bethesda's understanding and approach of Fallout. But somehow it goes far beyond that...
Fallout 3: Bad Karma

Proprietary/shop-specific online features:
Also true. I remember when most multiplayer games were using GameSpy - and well, that service is gone. Some games got no new Multiplayer suite; some got moved over to Steamworks; etc etc.

Makes me wish for more games to allow for LAN/TCP-IP support, like in the old days.

Also, I do wish a lot of these skirmish MP's....got re-worked into offline modes w/ bots. Or some MMO's, which are very single-player friendly like The Secret World/Secret World Legends - got re-worked to also work as an offline game.

Achievements:
IIRC, even games like Divinity 2, that had their own Achievement section built directly right into the game. We need more of THAT again. And then, once the game realizes you got the Achievements offline - and then say uploads it to Steam or GOG Galaxy, if it can connect; and if it can't connect to those online servers, it will try again to connect some other time and just let you keep playing.

We've also already got enough madness going on w/ PS3/4/Vita preservation and now w/ the chance that PS4 games in the future, if PSN goes down/gets its plug pulled and it can't connect to PSN - well, Trophies are what can cause your old games to not work. See this here on YongYea about this new mess - https://youtu.be/hNTOLRLUqWw

I'm not an Achievement-Hunter and all - but I do think it's cool when I get one and a pop-up says that I achieved something. Most of the time, I ain't hunting - I'm just playing the game, old-school style: just to play-through.