>>716094395>Everything financially successful became that way because it started off genuinely good.That's opinionated as fuck, and I don't believe your take. Plenty of successful shit got that way because it was advertised to hell by a company with money to burn, or came out in a release desert and normalfags were desperate for something to throw money at. There's too many factors to say "IT HAD TO BE GOOD" with any certainty.
And even if we accept your premise, what good does it do anyone? It can BECOME bad by most measures and coast off former good will. Look at Sonic for god's sake. Who does it help that it was good once upon a time if it's been bad for most of its existence?
>Fallout 3 and 4 birthed an entire fandom that showed up to eventually love New Vegas as well,More like 3 and NV. Most normalfags probably don't even realize NV wasn't a Bethesda game. 4 was already coasting off their good name.
>12 million sales for Fallout 3 didnโt come out of blind brand recognition or bad tasteSorry, but it did. Fallout was a big name in the PC games sphere, and Bethesda itself was well-known for Elder Scrolls. F3 coasted off that as well, because everyone owned (and generally speaking liked) Oblivion. You saying it had to be because "Fallout 3 alone = good" is deeply, deeply flawed.