This is a fairly subjective answer though. While I do appreciate graphics, they are not the most important thing to myself and many of my friends who I play games with. We appreciate gameplay, because it will outlast the graphics. I have played many of the newer games with realistic graphics, and while it was pretty, the game play wasn't impressive at all, and I go back to games that are more interesting.
The importance on great graphics became more apparent with the younger generation of gamers, and companies are catering more to them than anyone. They sit there and trash games that have quality game play but mediocre graphics, and refuse to play anything other than Crysis for instance. It is a terrible state for gaming, and it is one that is slowly turning me away from the hobby after 26 years. I have a huge passion for video games, but they have become so cookie cutter. If I had the ability to, I could make some FPS game in a futuristic/alien setting, make sure the graphics are of the highest quality, slap a sepia filter over it and a few gimmicky weapons, and dedicate a half day to the dialog (not much). It will sell like crazy to the younger and console based gamers easily.
I personally cannot wait for Left 4 Dead. It is on the aging Source engine. It does look good, but it obviously is no Crysis. I could care less, coop zombie apocalypse shooter that relies heavily on teamwork, that description alone stole my heart. Some companies are learning it isn't about graphics alone, and I fully support them. Valve and TF2 is another example, with cartoonish graphics and unrealistic gameplay, but it is extremely popular among PC FPS lovers.
Good gameplay can sell, the problem is, many developers today do not understand that or know how to even do it. They just work on games that show off their engine, with terrible dialog and gameplay, relying on the younger kids who don't know better to buy them

I'm sure many of you have already seen this but for those interested here is a video of what Fallout 3 was going to be initially.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uuDKrY7eW0
As you can see it's much more in the style of the first two games with a graphical update and what looks to be the option for real-time combat. You'll also notice it's significantly different than what we've seen thus far from Bethesda.

Well, on the bright side, whatever Fallout 3 turns out to be, maybe it'll get some people who never played the originals to come to GOG and try them.
Learn them young whippersnappers 'bout QUALITY, I say.

Depends on how you define "Interplay". Is that the same Interplay that believed console action-RPGs would save their CRPG franchises? That obviously didn't work out too well for Baldur's Gate 3 and Van Buren.
Hmm? Interplay sold the Fallout IP because they were in a horrible financial situation, and doesn't own it anymore. Bethesda does whatever they want with it, and Interplay has no say in it. There's a part of that contract where Interplay is allowed to make an MMORPG based on Fallout if such-and-such conditions are fulfilled, and even if/when that comes out, they'll have to pay royalty fees to Bethesda.
That 'something' would be six million dollars. Do you think Square-Enix would even be interested in the IP of some CRPG most of the people in Japan never even played?
The original creators were, though.
You yourself realize the problem here by putting "sequel" in quotes. When you hear Todd Howard condemn FO:Tactics and FO:BOS for not being what the fans wanted, and promising a true sequel this time around, you'd expect that they would not try to do something completely different from Fallout 1/2 yet again.
Can't argue with that.

Hmmm Fallout 3... this will be a good FPS game ,but a bad RPG Fallout titled game ;/

Certainly did for me.

I loved both Fallouts and Morrowind, so I don't think Bethseda is going to mess thing up. They said 'no level-scalling in Fallout 3!', which was the biggest problem of Oblivion (that, and fact you could become head of thieves guild and head of fighters guild at once... Since I'm RP player, I never did that, however it's really not way to go in deep RPG.), so I guess they will be able to do not just a great game, but even a very good Fallout. Not as good as old ones, there's too much nostalgia included, but still...
Betheseda proved they can do good non-TES games - like Call of Cthulhu, which is most terrifying game I have ever played..

Level-scaling is still in, just less aggressive now. The details are fairly vague, but the main quest is supposed to scale to your level. There will be optional areas that'll require you to come back after you've gained a couple of levels, though.
Developed by Headfirst Interactive, Bethesda was merely the publisher.
And yes, it's an excellent horror game. I wish it had less FPS and more adventure/RPG elements, though.

You have crushed my dreams :-(
Hmm, scalled main quest... That's an annoyance. Well, what can be done, we'll just have to hope MOD will get out someday, the same as with Oblivion. Anyway, that's a big minus for Bethseda and Fallout 3! But truth is, I have never played Fallout for main storyline... We'll see and I will pray!

you might want to get your 'talking out of the arse' detector looked at.
I wasn't being sarcastic, so you probably really didn't clearly have a clue that I had no real idea what I was talking about, but I did make multiple edits to my original post.
I still think some of my points were valid, but oh well. I suffer from this weird problem where I take the opposite side in any argument

While graphics are getting more and more important, graphics will never be uber realistic. I don't know why, but people always seem to think that one day graphics will match real life. That isn't going to happen, because what we see in real life is interconnected with so many things, the atoms, the molecules, the light of the sun, that we would have to simulate a universe in a computer to create it exactly like it is. Photos and games are imitations of real life, not the real thing and therefore, can never be the real thing.
And Fallout 3, I really don't understand why they would ever change the original gameplay. Fallout 1+2 was isometric and more strategic, yet they decided to make a TPS and call it Fallout 3. Huh?

I'll buy the game, that's sure. But I really am worried seeing all things already published about it. So far for me F3 = Oblivion with guns.
Portable atomic hand cannon thingy? Fixed age? 20-hour plot? Awww gimme a break, dammit! Only mods can save it i'm afraid... And with 3D graphics it rather won't have the gameplay area with properly big size.
/me dreams of REAL F3 made by the old team, with iso graphics and old mechanics.

I'll probably pick up Fallout 3 eventually, I'm just not sure when. Could be on launch or in a year or two when they release the inevitable "Game of the Year" edition at a discounted price with whatever expansions they make for it.

I don't know, I might pre-order fallout 3, only because Ghostbusters lost it's publisher AGAIN and my money is already sitting in their stinking hands, it might as well go towards a game I'll actually see...

I hear you about Fallout 3. I will be buying it. I did like oblivion for the most part but i wish the third was made by the original team.