Skyrim vs Fallout 3 GO!

[TheGreatAndPowerfulZOG]

Fallout 3 for me. This is just my personal preference, but I liked that there was more structure in Fallout's narrative. I consider the opening from F3 one of the best in any game, ever. New Vegas overall had an even better arc; I loved how the first act feels like an actual journey, Bethesda's never quite nailed that down in all their massive-open-world-exploration games. The closest they got in Skyrim was probably The Throat of The World; that part was really cool, but fairly short. I love the scenarios you end up in in the Fallout games. A good example is the virtual reality sequence in F3, meeting Caesar in New Vegas, the town of cannibals in F3, Tenpenny Tower. Those scenes played out like short stories, with their own little arcs and generally a lot of room for player choice and experimentation. In Elder Scrolls games, there are basically two types of mission: fetch quest and dungeon crawl. I think Skyrim made some good improvements on the ES formula, like that sequence where you infiltrate the Thalmor embassy, but even there it was super linear, and not at all dynamic. It just seems like a missed opportunity. The world was so vast and rich, but al there is to do there is basically combat. The dungeons were a lot better than those in Oblivion though, I'll give Bethesda that. I actually had quite a bit of fun just running around the country side, finding dungeouns and crawling them. It just got to be too much after a while. There's only so many Draugr you can kill and still call it "fun".

Basically, I think of Elder Scrolls games as giant maps. That's not a bad thing, Skyrim was beautiful, and I felt I got my moneys worth out of exploring it. But I think of Fallout as interactive narrative, and I value that higher. I played Skyrim for about 40 hours and I honestly can't tell you anything about the story arc. I guess at some point you can participate in battles between the imperials and stormcloaks? That sounds cool, I wish I had seen that before I lost interest. For all the time I put into that game, the land of Skyrim was almost exactly the same as when I first started, minus a couple thousand draugr.

Can't fuckin wait for Fallout 4, zomg take my money now 0_o

 

[neonsword13-ops]

-snip- According to them, F3 had "shitty music" ...

Bull. Shit.

That game has some of the best atmospheric and classical music ever in a game. Ever

Blasting super mutant heads off while Butcher Pete was playing in the background is truly awesome.


OT: I prefer Fallout 3 over Skyrim mainly because of the atmosphere.

Well, that and Wadsworth, the robot butler in the Megaton house. I love his stupid jokes.

 

[Pyro Paul]

-snip-

That unfortunatly is a diffrence in design focus.

In Skyrim and Oblivion, a lot more focus is set on the acctual character interactions and world as a whole rather then the individual set peices. You'll often run into more individuality of characters through your dialog options then anything else. It creates the immersion of being apart of a world rather then walking through one.

the downside is that often individual set peices are reused... a lot. And because the world is defined by interactions, certain approches to the game can lead to a loss of over all experience. Skyrim is ment to be played as a rogue as you can then listen into all the conversation which tie into the main story and better define events and occurances.

there are many times in skyrim where i got mad because my approche to the game was that of the warrior and i ended up missing out quiet a few conversations because they turned on me the instant i walked in the door.

Fallout and New Vegas follow the more traditional design focus. Much like Rift, the witcher, and several other games which follow the traditional RPG design build...

A unique world with unique set peices populated by immobile vendors and roaming mobs...

 

[SajuukKhar]

Bull. Shit.

That game has some of the best atmospheric and classical music ever in a game. Ever

Blasting super mutant heads off while Butcher Pete was playing in the background is truly awesome.


OT: I prefer Fallout 3 over Skyrim mainly because of the atmosphere.

Well, that and Wadsworth, the robot butler in the Megaton house. I love his stupid jokes.

I loved Fallout 3's music..... I just hated having the radio on while I played the game.

If I could, I would have gone into the game files and removed every fucking trace of the radio.

 

[SajuukKhar]

The ambient soundtracks to Fallout 1/2 by Mark Morgan was the shit.

I quite enjoyed the ambient music in Fallout 1 and fallout 2.

When I played Fallout 3 and New Vegas I tried playing it with the radio on but...... I dont know, the music kinda killed my immersion into the world.

I greatly prefer the ambient music to the radio.

 

[Zantos]

Fallout 3 for me, over Skyrim and New Vegas. I can't really explain what it is, but Skyrim, NV and Morrowind for that matter reside on my shelf with an immense case of "Couldn't give a fuck" syndrome. Never felt the drive to see them to the end, whereas Fallout 3 I did twice, and thinking of going through a third time. I don't even like the story to Fallout 3, I just like the setting.

 

[AdamRhodes]

First of all, any comments concerning New Vegas should be disregarded. This is Fallout 3 vs. Skyrim, not Fallout series vs. Skyrim. The two games are very similar. Most characters are not three dimensional and remain entirely static. The various towns are all visually unique and are inhabited by people with their own concerns and motivations (i.e. the incestuous cannibal town which creeped the hell out of me so much that I actively avoided it almost always, and the city built into a mountain fighting a war with hostile factions that have infiltrated into various levels of society). These similarities can be explained by the fact that they're both Bethesda games. Same team (I'd think), similar gameplay, different focus. I'd agree with Pyro Paul and say that FO3 was designed with individual set pieces in mind, while Skyrim was designed with the whole world in mind.

 

[Zhukov]

Hey, Alpha Protocol had plenty of romance! My spy guy banged at least 4 chicks! Oh, and one lady kinda-sorta raped him, but I don't think that counts.

Joking aside, I'm guessing that was a Bioware crack. Not really seeing the relevance.

To be fair, if you're basing your opinion of Obsidian's writing on Alpha Protocol, it's something of an anomaly (because it is fucking awful in that department - as well as the rest of the departments).

Nah, I was just using AP to poke fun at the sex scenes.

I've played every Obsidian game except for the NW2 expansions. None of them impressed me with their writing.

KotOR 2 had its moments and was better written than the original Bioware game, but that's not saying much since I hated KotOR 1. New Vegas was much better written than Fallout 3 but, again, that's like beating a crippled child in a foot race.

 

[TheGreatAndPowerfulZOG]

First of all, any comments concerning New Vegas should be disregarded. This is Fallout 3 vs. Skyrim, not Fallout series vs. Skyrim.

Yes, your honor 9_9

 

[Razor Z7]

Skyrim. Despite me not playing Fallout, I have a good idea of it. I'm also pretty sure ther are no display cabinets. Collecting Armour and weapons is what I do in Skyrim. The game also does not have the Steam Workshop.

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

Every Settlement in fallout 3 looks identical to one another aside from a singular variation. From the cobbled together salvaged look to Megaton and Paradise Falls to the Re-vamped or Repurpoused Old World structures (often falling apart) as seen with Underworld or Tenpenny Tower. The only acctual unique settlement in all of Fallout 3 is Rivet City

In New Vegas many of the settlements are near identical to other enviornments in the game and only really identified by a singular land-mark type building unique to that settlement. Take the Saloon out of Goodspring, the Coster out of Prim, or the Rocket Domes out of REPCONN and they become indistiguishable from many of the other exteriors of the game.

Also...
Every city in Skyrim is acctually rather unique in its design and everything from structure style to pallette range creates an individualized feel for each city...

From the more gothic styles of Windhelm bathed in dark blue hues given a more down trodden feeling to the open air Norman style Dragons Reach and the Viking influenced design of Whiterun.

Honostly... if you think that Riften has the same visual feel as Solitude then i'd have to say that you're either blind or have never played the game.

So what you're saying is that if you take away all the set pieces and attractions from the settlements, then they all look the same? GREAT POINT THERE SPORT!

All the cities in Skyrim are basically laid out exactly the same. It's always a boring city with stone walkways, stone buildings, and a castle on top of a hill looking down on everything. Nothing ever "wow'd" me in Skyrim. It was always just "oh boy, another goddamn generic medieval walled city with a population that's entirely indistinguishable from the last three I just came from". When I was playing Fallout 3, I would find Little Lamplight or Oasis or Underworld and say "Wow, that's NOTHING like anywhere I've been yet. I can't wait to talk to people here". Sure the buildings in the cities of Skyrim may not be moved around a little, but it's always the same old bullshit every time you walk through those big walled gates.

That unfortunatly is a diffrence in design focus.

In Skyrim and Oblivion, a lot more focus is set on the acctual character interactions and world as a whole rather then the individual set peices. You'll often run into more individuality of characters through your dialog options then anything else. It creates the immersion of being apart of a world rather then walking through one.

the downside is that often individual set peices are reused... a lot. And because the world is defined by interactions, certain approches to the game can lead to a loss of over all experience. Skyrim is ment to be played as a rogue as you can then listen into all the conversation which tie into the main story and better define events and occurances.

there are many times in skyrim where i got mad because my approche to the game was that of the warrior and i ended up missing out quiet a few conversations because they turned on me the instant i walked in the door.

Fallout and New Vegas follow the more traditional design focus. Much like Rift, the witcher, and several other games which follow the traditional RPG design build...

A unique world with unique set peices populated by immobile vendors and roaming mobs...

The problem with what you said was that it was reversed. The world in Skyrim revolves around you, and nothing you do changes what happens. Skyrim plays like the world doesn't want you in it. It practically ignores you. In Fallout 3 and New Vegas, the player interaction with NPCs varies with things like "How will you finish this quest? Do you have high enough Speech to talk your way out of the fight? Do you have high enough Gun skill to notice the bandit leader takes very good care of his revolver? Or will you pay the guy off to avoid the gunfight? Or will you just take your chances in the fight?" All of these things can change depending on your play style. In Skyrim, your interactions with quests are barely ever "Do it, or don't do it" because the quests are rarely ever just "go here and kill everything" or "go here and bring something back". You have no input on how you do the quest.

Fallout plays like old school P&P games. Your personal play style long with your skills can change everything with a quest. Take the "Head of State" quest in Fallout 3 for instance. First you find a group of escaped slaves out in the wasteland who's settlement revolves around the severed head of the Lincoln Memorial, The Great Emancipator. They ask you to go to the site of the Lincoln Memorial to make sure it's safe. When you get there, you find a group of Slavers squatting there. This is the diverging point: You can either follow through with your deal with the Union and make sure they get their "promised land" and kill all the slavers there, or you can go up and talk to the slavers and tell them where the Slaves are hiding. Both of these choices has consequences beyond who ends up living at the Lincoln Memorial. If you clear out the Slavers, the Underworld merchants will sell things cheaper because they're trading with the Union. If you sided with the Slavers, you get into Paradise Falls without any problem because it's a city of Slavers, which they consider you a part of.

There is not a single quest in Skyrim that dynamic. It's always just "kill everything here" or "bring me X" or "bring me x number of y". If the game is feeling a little frisky, you'll get an escort mission to take a person somewhere. The choices in Skyrim are a farce, nothing you do changes anything in the world.

Skyrim. Despite me not playing Fallout, I have a good idea of it. I'm also pretty sure ther are no display cabinets. Collecting Armour and weapons is what I do in Skyrim. The game also does not have the Steam Workshop.

You could always locate and collect the many Unique weapons and bobble heads spread throughout the world. I kind of had trouble finding things I wanted to keep with me in Skyrim because I never had an attachment to any equipment. I wad always looking for the next upgrade because if I didn't have the best thing, I knew I would be at a disadvantage in my next encounter.

 

[Woodsey]

Hey, Alpha Protocol had plenty of romance! My spy guy banged at least 4 chicks! Oh, and one lady kinda-sorta raped him, but I don't think that counts.

Joking aside, I'm guessing that was a Bioware crack. Not really seeing the relevance.

To be fair, if you're basing your opinion of Obsidian's writing on Alpha Protocol, it's something of an anomaly (because it is fucking awful in that department - as well as the rest of the departments).

Nah, I was just using AP to poke fun at the sex scenes.

I've played every Obsidian game except for the NW2 expansions. None of them impressed me with their writing.

KotOR 2 had its moments and was better written than the original Bioware game, but that's not saying much since I hated KotOR 1. New Vegas was much better written than Fallout 3 but, again, that's like beating a crippled child in a foot race.

Haha, fair enough.

I've always liked KotOR 2 in terms of what's actually there thematically, but the structure of the narrative itself is a mess.

 

[SajuukKhar]

The choices in Skyrim are a farce, nothing you do changes anything in the world.

Except the Civil War quest-line alone results in
-4-6 forts, previously occupied by bandits/witches/vampires/etc. etc., being taken over by soldiers of whichever faction you join, who then patrol the roads in the immediate area.
-The entirety of, at least, 4 town's guards being replaced by soldiers from whatever faction you join.
-The Jarl's of, again at least, 4 cities getting replaced.
-The people of said town making comments about who won.

 

[SajuukKhar]

While those were major changes, I felt it was a little empty because the civil war questline was roughly 3hrs long? Still like the changes.

Skyrim's only major letdown were a few quest breaking bugs (I'm looking at you forsworn conspiracy) and the awfully short guild quest-lines. It also sucks that you can really do nothing about the forsworn and killing Madonach does nothing to the game except some dialog change.

I think people are way too bothered by the storyline, I wanted an epic adventure where I help people, clear dungeons, get married and bee a legend and guess what, they fucking nailed that. Fallout won't give me that, In fallout, I get a destroyed world that you explore and see how civilization is doing and how you can help or destroy them and bring change to the wastesm for better, for worse. Beating a dungeon in fallout feels like a waste of time bar a few quests but the characters and story were well done, especially in New Vegas.

I love em both and don't see why one has to be superior to the other.

I actually understand the Madonach thing, he only was ever able to "rule" the higher ups of the forsworn while he was in jail, most of the forsworn just did what they had always done, Madonach's death really wouldn't have changed anything since he really wasn't doing that much to being with.

It is more like you did something that would result in the slow decline of the forsworn instead of their immediate removal.
.
.
Also as I recall the guild questlines were short because Bethesda decided to scale back then number of radiant quests shortly before launch.

-Originally the companions questline had like 3 radiant quests in between each "main quest", instead of the like 1 we have now.

-The Dark-brotherhood is OK in length to me, though most people dont seem to know that Nazir has like 6 more contracts besides the ones you have to do for him for the DB main quest, which I could see as why it would seem short when your missing out on 6 kills.

-The Thieves guild is the one most people just miss the big picture. Brynolf makes mention several times that AFTER you beat Merecer AND restore the guild to its former glory THEN you are the guild Master.

Most people I have talked too somehow missed the fact that you have to do, at least, 25 jobs for Vex/Delving before you are the guild master. There is quite a bit of thieving you HAVE to do to "beat" the thieves guild.

It does take awhile

-the College............. yeah thats just fucking broken............. but anything magic related in skyrim is broken.

 

[hermes]

As a game, I liked Skyrim better. I think everything, from the leveling system to the way the compass works is a step in the right direction. It may not sound like much when compared with Fallout 3, but if I compare it with Oblivion is quite superior.

As a setting, I liked Fallout better. Everything, from the humor to the references, is far more interesting and has a lot more personality. It is truth that the color palette is more limited, but that is a small setback for more "colorful" characters. Also, combat is a lot better in Fallout 3. Not only because of VATS, but because, while melee combat in both games sucks the same, Fallout uses it less...

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

The choices in Skyrim are a farce, nothing you do changes anything in the world.

Except the Civil War quest-line alone results in
-4-6 forts, previously occupied by bandits/witches/vampires/etc. etc., being taken over by soldiers of whichever faction you join, who then patrol the roads in the immediate area.
-The entirety of, at least, 4 town's guards being replaced by soldiers from whatever faction you join.
-The Jarl's of, again at least, 4 cities getting replaced.
-The people of said town making comments about who won.

Thanks for helping prove my point. Those are purely superficial changes that doesn't change anything that doesn't change your experience in the game at all. A similar questline in new Vegas of similar length? Deciding the fate of all the different factions in the Mojave and deciding who shows up at the battle for the Hoover Dam. You overcome long existing feuds between your chosen side and factions like the Brotherhood of Steel, the Khans, the Enclave, and others. Sounds a lot more important and world changing than real estate management, doesn't it?

 

[GloatingSwine]

New Vegas.

Because it's Fallout 3 without the completely broken challenge curve and a way better plot. It's also basically the poster child for Really Good DLC.