Fallout 3 vs Oblivion

[Mrsoupcup]

Fallout 3. Oblivion bored me quickly. Also, Fallout 3 had a very good atmosphere about it. The DLC's weren't that good, however. *Stares at Anchorage and Zeta*

Well Anchorage had a redeming factor. An armory full of game breaking weapons/armor, and you could take all of it without consiquence. *Stares at steath suit and winterized T51B) Although Zeta was pisss poor. I mean BBBAAADDD. no real story, re-skinned versions of previous and notably better weapons.... (The achievements looked perty though)

 

[Nikajo]

I like both but my favourite by far was Fallout 3. I just preffered everything about it. Really looking forward to New Vegas!

 

[Yureina]

Fallout 3. Oblivion bored me quickly. Also, Fallout 3 had a very good atmosphere about it. The DLC's weren't that good, however. *Stares at Anchorage and Zeta*

Well Anchorage had a redeming factor. An armory full of game breaking weapons/armor, and you could take all of it without consiquence. *Stares at steath suit and winterized T51B) Although Zeta was pisss poor. I mean BBBAAADDD. no real story, re-skinned versions of previous and notably better weapons.... (The achievements looked perty though)

I don't think i've met anyone who liked Zeta. Anchorage either, but that does get a little bit of tolerance because of how it fits into the story.. sorta.

 

[jamescorck]

Fallout 3 is waaaaay better than Oblivion. I won't go childish on this just by saying that Fallout 3 has guns, so I will say what makes Fallout 3 a better game than Oblivion.

-Fallout 3's world is smaller and so it's easier to navigate and move around. While it can be a problem when you reach the city areas I never had any issue with going into a subway tunnel and emerging from the other side. Except that ghouls scared my ass out of it.

-The story is more involving and it developes faster, with a very thing veiled linearity that you barely noticed, due to all the freedom you have.

-Better voice acting. Okay, we have Patrick Stewart in Oblivion, but Liam Neeson was more time in Fallout 3, and I think he is a better actor.

-Better level up system. Stream-lined XP level up system. Gather "this much" to reach level 14. Understandable.

-The environment is familiar, being this Washington DC, and so it's actually kind of cool moving around places you have visited (or like me, seen in postcards).

-It is really immersive. Mostly because I am a pussy, but I scream like a 10 year old girl everytime a Mirelurk appears behind me. That's how much this game draws me in.

-And finally, guns. Yes, it is so much fun to blow up people and super mutants with the VATS system, or load a massive Mini-Nuke on some scared fire antes just because you are bored. It makes great fun to vent up steam.

So yeah, Fallout 3 has a lot of reasons to be better than Oblivion, at least in my opinion. I am not saying that Oblivion is worse, hell no. Oblivion is as good as a fantasy RPG goes, it's big, fun, filled with stuff to do and has a good storyline. But Fallout 3 hits closer to home with me, with the guns, the nuclear devastation, the mutants and the whole post-apocaliptic setting.

 

[theSovietConnection]

I found in Fallout 3, I was better able to advance in the quests, but in Oblivion, my character felt, I dunno, more like me, for lack of a better way to put it. I was better able to create my own narrative in the Oblivion world then in the Fallout 3 world, I guess I'm trying to say.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

As I said in the other 300 threads like this one: I love them both, but Fallout just pips it for me because of the improved engine, ugly/beautiful aesthetic and more immmersive, varied world.

 

[Mrsoupcup]

Fallout 3. Oblivion bored me quickly. Also, Fallout 3 had a very good atmosphere about it. The DLC's weren't that good, however. *Stares at Anchorage and Zeta*

Well Anchorage had a redeming factor. An armory full of game breaking weapons/armor, and you could take all of it without consiquence. *Stares at steath suit and winterized T51B) Although Zeta was pisss poor. I mean BBBAAADDD. no real story, re-skinned versions of previous and notably better weapons.... (The achievements looked perty though)

I don't think i've met anyone who liked Zeta. Anchorage either, but that does get a little bit of tolerance because of how it fits into the story.. sorta.

I'm not crazy for it, but at the end of Anchorage you get so much good loot and Exp it has some redeming value. (I liked it more than the Pitt only because the Pitt was so glitchy when I got it)

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Fallout ftw. More original than "Ye olde medieval quest #384". Better ambiance and connection to characters. Also, nukes. ^_^

 

[Yureina]

I'm not crazy for it, but at the end of Anchorage you get so much good loot and Exp it has some redeming value. (I liked it more than the Pitt only because the Pitt was so glitchy when I got it)

I never had glitchy problems with the Pitt, though i've heard of people having troubles with it. I actually had far more problems with Point Lookout and Zeta than any other parts of the game. I've had to turn on noclip or something like it everytime I do Zeta or Point lookout because of bugs or game crashes.

Broken Steel is the obvious winner since it extends the game, but The Pitt is my favorite DLC environment-wise by far.

 

[Mrsoupcup]

I'm not crazy for it, but at the end of Anchorage you get so much good loot and Exp it has some redeming value. (I liked it more than the Pitt only because the Pitt was so glitchy when I got it)

I never had glitchy problems with the Pitt, though i've heard of people having troubles with it. I actually had far more problems with Point Lookout and Zeta than any other parts of the game. I've had to turn on noclip or something like it everytime I do Zeta or Point lookout because of bugs or game crashes.

Broken Steel is the obvious winner since it extends the game, but The Pitt is my favorite DLC environment-wise by far.

The Pitt is really good don't get me wrong, its just the first few days it was out it was so glitchy textures were missing and about half way through it would freaze all the time. (If you can find IGN's review on it they talk a bout all the bugs)

 

[Omnific One]

Both are awesome. I abstain. Fallout 3 was great for post apocalyptic and Oblivion was great for a fantasy setting.

 

[run_forrest_run]

First of all this is a fantastic thread. Well done. Second of all I found Oblivion to be a rather dull and uncompelling game. Fallout 3 is my all time favourite game due to how immersive it is.

 

[ArcWinter]

Fallout 3 was more exciting, but I'm choosing Oblivion.

I love Oblivion, it is my favorite game of all time. I have no idea why, but it is, by far, the best game I have ever played. The exploration was probably what did it. The massive world, choosing not to use fast-travel... that just makes the game. THERE IS SO MUCH STUFF. It literally took me around 400 hours to clean out every dungeon in Cyrodiil. And then another 200 to beat Shivering Isles.

For DLC, Fallout had some good stuff, but it felt recycled and just more of the same. Even Broken Steel, while it was fun, didn't have much new stuff. However, Shivering Isles completely reinvented Oblivion. Why? Sheogorath says so.

And some math to back my opinion up: swords > guns

i havent played many games but still my point is that oblivion is seriously uncannybrutal and if oblivion were a person i would give it a high five and maybe some hugs

 

[Jordan Dillon]

"I don't think i've met anyone who liked Zeta. Anchorage either, but that does get a little bit of tolerance because of how it fits into the story.. sorta."
I like Anchorage, Won't ever compete with other shooters but I liked it was just focused on killing shit =] Oh and Fallout 3 FTW!!!!

 

[Dexiro]

Fallout 3 was potentially better but had a few massive flaws for me D:
For a start it gives you next to no direction to begin with. You're thrown into a dull looking wasteland and spend the first few hours a little overwhelmed with no money or weapons.

Then when i finally got past that bit i realised that you had to do some quests in a certain order or else you wouldn't be able to complete some of them. I don't mind needing to do a good and an evil playthrough, but it makes it really vague and sometimes morality has nothing to do with which quests you can't complete.
I'm too much of a perfectionist and don't want to go through the hassle of following a walkthrough constantly to make sure i don't do the slightest thing wrong.

It does have a better world than Oblivion though. Both are boring but Fallout 3 does seem to have more variety.

 

[Coaxill]

To me, the main difference is that Fallout 3 shits on a beloved franchise while Oblivion continues one.

 

[Druyn]

Fallout 3. Oblivion got boring really fast. Fallout simplified the map interface, forced you to actualy FIND places you hadnt been, had a stronger story and better voice acting, the atmosphere and design and feel is a work of art, VATS was awesome, and you had Gatling Lasers and Mini Nukes. However, the DLC wasnt really good... The Pitt was pretty good, as was Broken Steel, but none held up to the actual story and game. Tho continuing the ending was nice. Then you had some moral choices that were very cool, like Blowing up Megaton, or destroying the entire wasteland, stuff like that. The side quests were very interesting (Well most of them). Etc. Same as the people before me, I guess.

 

[CoverYourHead]

Oblivion. I just enjoyed it more. Fallout 3 is great 'n' all, but there's no gear to really work for and that removes some of the magic.

I believe Susan wrote an article about it once...

 

[Matt Yeomans]

As stated already, Morrowind.