Considering you are the one making the claim that Bethesda is going to "bat the crybabies away like flies, and not feel any ill effects from this" maybe you are the one who should put fort an example of a company who has done so in the past as Bethesda is doing now and somehow was not affected by it financially.

The burden of proof is on the one making the claim.

Farming out a IP to an outside developer is a hit or miss scenario. It really could go either way, even Nintendo farms out their IPs with mixed results: handing over Metroid and Donkey Kong to Retro Studios has produced nothing but high quality games while handing Metroid to Tecmo's Team Ninja produced one of the worst Metroid games in memory. As for Capcom's own IPs handled by outside developers Dead Rising and DMC managed to pull off great games while Dead Planet and RE: Operation Racoon City fared quite badly. While I do concede that indeed Capcom has lost focus of their own legacy trying to follow annoying trends such as the military shooter craze that polluted last gen, it all comes down to Capcom refusing to listen to customers complaints and treating them like cows to be milked out of every penny that has come back to bite them in the ass.

See how long Bethasda is going to last if it decides to go the same route of greed over customer satisfaction. What possible benefit there could be for Bethesda removing the old Fallout games off of GOG? If anything this is bad press over bad press. Remember that last year they sue Mojang over the use of the word "Scrolls" which not only Bethesda lost and managed to make themselves look like arrogant pricks in the process? Public perception is important and no matter how you put it, when a company puts itself into a bad light before the eyes of its customers that will affect them financially in the end, no matter how you look at it.

Well, crap.

Please jump down....
Editing for brevity only...
First, thanks for the correction on Steam, that they don't insert the DRM. I was referring to managing it, but my point was the less they actually do, the more they are just a download server (a napster, so to speak), and not worth the money. THanks for the corrections. I forgot about Valve completely, and used to wonder if they were related to Steam.

I understand about the person with the tweets. However, my dehumanizing corporate experience has shown me how the communication chain works. That's why I pointed at Bethesda and not the individual who executes their tweets. I agree with your sympathy toward the "poor" technician. I also agree with your 3rd response about emotions, both the initial post and the edit. :) I am emotional over my hobbies as well. That's why I need to keep perspective. I have an affection for some games, but share them. My Dad was trying to keep us kids from falling into the changes in society, that emotions define reality and rightfully (according to the bad philosophy he was trying to keep us away from) overrule reason. No, our emotions are not reality itself (that's psychosis), and the proper place for them is as motivators, not to replace thinking. Hey, I guess I miss my Dad, but he had really good things to warn us about as kids.

Again, thanks for the response and correction.

--------------

(I write this for your general use, and not to treat FenixP like an idiot.) The content of corporate communications (e.g. Tweets) often comes from and/or is approved by those on-high. Most often, a standard statement is issued from above regarding a topic and the poor tech is allowed to say thing shaped a certain way (vague and ambiguous) within the original policy/statement. We call it Corp-speak (corporate-speak) after Orwell's 1984. For better examples of corp-speak BS'ing (excuse me), see the recent "apology" issued by pastor Mark Driscoll. He says he is "deeply grieved" be recent, controversial events. The "deeply grieved" statement is so overused and common in any statement from a church elder or pastor, that if you did the math, they'd be weeping so often and so long that they wouldn't get anything else done, like writing sermons. When a corporate statement is cliche' loaded or trite with popular sayings, you know it's empty. (I know my example is very off-topic for here, but it's all I could think of ATM.) I've been disciplined at my old job while troubleshooting a desktop issue for telling the end user that I didn't know what the solution's timeframe would be while I was at his/her desk. One user complained that I was not able to guess, having barely looked at the machine in the 60 seconds I was there, while other users were fine with such answers. The reprimand I got was to make something up--lie. Funny, when my honest estimates turned out short and a repair took longer, I got reprimanded that I should have just said, "I don't know," in the first place when I thought I did know--that is, a reprimand also that I should lie but in the way opposite of the other reprimand to lie. The point is that corporate culture has become Feminized (not feminine, but the political movement, if you study Feminism closely--it does not mean "respect for women" but is something else completely) while also adhering to the policies of "management guru" Peter Drucker, a classical Fascist. (Drucker's 1 single disagreement with the Nazis had to do with the nature of afterlife and was irrelevant to his earthly politics and philosophies. The Drucker Institute emphasizes this disagreement by emphasizing to people, "Peter disagreed with the Nazis." People walk away with just that headline. If you investigate the substance of the disagreement, you discover it's irrelevant.) You'll find this mostly in "HR", no longer called the "Personnel" office. We're a "resource," not a person, to Drucker. The result is how Corp-speak is now the norm--a weird dishonesty that everything must be some kind of unrealistic, happy, positive existence at all times. This is the environment that the poor tech who executes the tweets may work in, or is at least how corporate statements and communication function, minimally. If we start to recognize the language, then we know who's hiding things. And FenixP is correct, it's Bethesda and not the Tech, per se. However, for our own moral dilemma, the Nuremberg Trials helped demonstrate and explain how "I was just following orders" is illegitimate. I hope this second long bit will help younger folks recognize more specifically what they already pegged as corporate and political BS'ing in statements.

To me, the Fallout games were THE example of why GOG needs to exist. :(

Then by all means, prove your claim.

I see you don't get it, you claimed this is not going to affect Bethesda which I don't believe, you are the one that has to prove it to me since the original claim is yours.

May I remind that this whole conversation began because you replied to my original statement "I have another reason to hate Bethesda." Which is no claim, but a personal stance I need to prove to nobody because it applies to me alone therefore needs no outside legitimizing.

If you are going to try to bypass backing up your own arguments by playing coy, by all mean, this conversation is over.

24th September 2008
Yes, I just checked (purchasing date sorting does not work by the way) : It's the very first game I bought in GoG.

I renew my sympathy for you, GoG pals/gals, especially in front of this kind of big machine "stupid" decision.
I smell another "enhanced" horror movie or perhaps a package. Whatever...
Let's have a look of the last additions...

I so agree with this. I hate to see Steam getting into a p***ing contest over games like this.

Here's something that has been happening on Twitter
https://twitter.com/Bethblog/status/418871493129302016

I really wish that Bethesda and GOG would join their forces and at least we could get the rest of the Fallout games here as well :)

This was not a new decision and it is not Bethesda being evil or anything like that. This is the result of the original IP purchase deal between Interplay and Bethesda. Most people already know that Bethesda purchased the Fallout IP from Interplay. When those two companies made the deal, part of the deal was that Bethesda would allow Interplay to retain the rights to sell the original Fallout games for a specific length of time. Well, that time ran out at the end of 2013. On one hand it is sad, but on the other, it is great that they were available for the time that they were and it is always possible that Bethesda may decide to offer them down the road, or Interplay could decide to try and re-license them again (yes, they are still around contrary to popular belief).

Considering the legal brouhaha between Interplay and Bethesda, I find that option even less likely than Bethesda finally realising that selling a bunch of 15 year old games DRM-free isn't such a bad thing after all.

Also, if Bethesda were to ever license the rights to another company, I'd certainly hope that company would be inXile Entertainment. After all, inXile are the true successors to the Interplay of yore and they also offer their games on gog.

Highly doubtful, why cut another dev in on profits on a game years since completed?

Bethesda sucks ass. I'd pirate one of their new games now, but none of them are worth the band-width ....

Would love to see symbiocom/synfactor somewhere.