Why isn't Todd Howard on this?

Because helping to revitalize the Fallout franchise isnt the hallmark of a villain?

idunno, the casualizing and watering down of the games to the most bare bones of features and reselling them as is over multiple platforms with little to no changes or updates is pretty criminal imo

Dude, as much as I love the story, music and art of the first two games, the gameplay was an utter snoozefest and that topdown view was dated by the time 2 came out. You cant even really enjoy the first game because that stupid time limit ruins the ending if you dont hurry through everything. Bethesda turned a great setting into something more than a dozen people on a mailing list actually wanted to play

Tru tru, though I'd argue the time limit was what added the challenge to the first game. Otherwise you'd have even more of snoozefest on your hands. While Beth did a pretty good job bringing the series to next gen, Fallout 3 and 4 were such wasted potential with the VAT system the only fun things I found about them. Everything else was more or less, like I said, wasted potential with crumby and easy combat or limited story with little in the way of branching out.

At least Fallout New Vegas rectified alot of those gripes so in an obvious way yer right about Bethesda making Fallout great, Stranger lol

I don't know, the line-up doesn't sit right with me. I think I would've put colonel Autumn in for F3, if we're going by potential for giving you grief. Or the president for F2, since Frank's mostly just following orders... granted, neither of them would've made a terribly imposing picture, unlike the current selections.

Also, nobody from New Vegas?

I went more with which villains looked more iconic, so if I had used New Vegas it'd have been Legate Lanius instead of Ceasar

Man, this brings back memories... out of all of them the master was my favorite villain his plans were pretty solid but while he wasn't wrong at the same time he wasn't right.