Poll: Battle of the RPGs

[Vampire_Hermes]

I can't get into JRPGs. I find it difficult to connect with the characters and I find the combat and level-grinding quite dull. I'm also a bit sick of Eastern/anime design. I'm not saying it's not good, but merely that it's not something that appeals to me, and its proliferation turns me off even more.

Cainx: the games are extremely comparable, as the poster above you eloquently pointed out. If you take away the graphics, the Western RPG styling, the format and execution of stats, the physical customisation of characters... Graphics tends to be low on my list when I'm buying a game (especially since the most 'realistic' graphics tend to turn me off), so I often don't see games that way.

I'm seeing overwhelming support for Fallout. Is there something fundamentally wrong with Fable, or is it just the apparently much larger game-world and interaction mechanics in Fallout that push it ahead?

 

[TsunamiWombat]

I'd say it's probably Fallout's depth. Fable 2 is a game designed, from the ground up, to be easy to pick up play and enjoy even by button mashing dyslexics who've never touched a game before in their lives- and it is a remarkebly good game despite that. However, Fallout 3 just has more...depth.

 

[Flying-Emu]

I personally will be picking up Tales of Symphonia 2, over both of those.
From the reviews coming out of Japan, it'll be awesome.
Maybe not as great as Fallout 3 our Fable II, but I'm a Tales fan, so... yeah XD

if you're a tales fan, there's no reason to consider a western RPG over a tales game

It's the only JRPG I've even taken a second look at, bro

 

[ElegantSwordsman]

Over Christmas, I'll probably have to make this choice and I'm stuck. Whereas Fable has a fantasy setting, magic, good vs. evil, colourful graphics and a little doggy; Fallout has a post-apocalyptic, science-fiction setting, big guns, radiation and up-to-the-minute graphics.

Well I'm not sure if the dog is a big selling point to you, but if so, you should know that Fallout 3 lets you recruit a canine companion as well. XD

As for me, I've made my decision already and am enjoying umpteen hours of Fallout a day. Both look to be damned fine games, the decision for me boiled down to a preference for the Fallout world... well that and I really think Peter Molyneux is a douche. If you're really having a tough time deciding and money's tight, just wait a few weeks and get 'em used I say.

 

[kubinschu]

I said other.

Play the Witcher instead.

 

[Spectre39]

I've only played Fable 2 and I have to say that I regret buying it. Sure it was fun and all but the game is much like the first, colorful, intuitive, witty, but incredibly short. I don't feel as though I got my full money's worth out of a game I played a weeks worth at the most. Not to mention the bugs that you find in that game are staggering when compared other console games. I've also learned that I hate Peter Molyneux because of his unrealistic overhyping of his games, to which sometimes he flat out lies. The lie I remember most is that there were supposed to be absolutely no "invisible walls". If Fable, Lionhead, or Peter Molyneux, have taught me anything it's that when someone tells you that something is going to be perfect or the "Best thing evar", be skeptical and you won't get your hopes crushed. I liked Fable, but it's a rental game for all the time you spend on it.

I have yet to play Fallout 3, but I trust the company that made it. If Fallout 3 doesn't make the same mistake Oblivion did by scaling "Random Encounter" mobs to rival boss fights in the later levels, then I'm very optimistic about Fallout 3's quality.

 

[haruvister]

If Fallout 3 doesn't make the same mistake Oblivion did by scaling "Random Encounter" mobs to rival boss fights in the later levels

If you're referring to Oblivion's levelling system, that's pretty much out the window. Saying that, I'm level 14 (of 20) and while I can flick the head off a mole rat with my little finger, I could swear some of the random raider mobs around Megaton are conspicuously well-equipped...

Anyway, on topic. Fable 2 and Fallout 3 are very different games. Fable 2 is breezier, for sure, and far less depressing. Fallout 3's the more muscular game, both in terms of the solidity of the game engine and its adult themes. Fable 2 is all about exploding colour, fame and rewards; Fallout 3's all about exploding heads, infamy and scavenging what you can. Fable 2 has a large selection of beautifully crafted linear paths; Fallout 3's paths are all hidden beneath the rubble.

Personally, I'm making a stack of cash from my Fable 2 properties while I explore the Capital Wasteland. Moral of the story? Buy both!

 

[xitel]

Well, look at it this way. Fable II is lighthearted, more linear, and closer to a classic RPG. Fallout III is kind of dark and gritty, and more akin to an FPS than a classic RPG. It's somewhat unfair to compare the two, since they're two wildly different games.

 

[Altorin]

If Fallout 3 doesn't make the same mistake Oblivion did by scaling "Random Encounter" mobs to rival boss fights in the later levels

If you're referring to Oblivion's levelling system, that's pretty much out the window. Saying that, I'm level 14 (of 20) and while I can flick the head off a mole rat with my little finger, I could swear some of the random raider mobs around Megaton are conspicuously well-equipped...

Anyway, on topic. Fable 2 and Fallout 3 are very different games. Fable 2 is breezier, for sure, and far less depressing. Fallout 3's the more muscular game, both in terms of the solidity of the game engine and its adult themes. Fable 2 is all about exploding colour, fame and rewards; Fallout 3's all about exploding heads, infamy and scavenging what you can. Fable 2 has a large selection of beautifully crafted linear paths; Fallout 3's paths are all hidden beneath the rubble.

Personally, I'm making a stack of cash from my Fable 2 properties while I explore the Capital Wasteland. Moral of the story? Buy both!

Fallout uses a scaling level system, but it's not directly tied to your level. Areas will have minimum levels, and if you go there before you're that level, you're likely to get your bullocks shot off.

But luckily, if you do stumble into one of those places and make it out to tell the tale, when you come back in 3-4 levels or whatever, the monsters will be the same level as they were when you first entered, allowing you to easily murder them.

If you exceed those levels, the scaling system kicks in and tries to give you something that isn't trivial for you, even at level 15 (by level 20 everything is pretty much trivial). So if you enter a 5+ area at level 10, it might spew out level 8-9 enemies instead of the level 5 enemies that would appear if you were level 1 when you stepped in. If you leave that area and come back at level 20, those enemies will still be level 8-9

 

[Vampire_Hermes]

How much are the mini-games a part of Fable II (compared to, say, Saints Row 2, where they are numerous and have to be interacted with at least a little)?