I'm going to have to take it with a grain of salt! That was definitely an incredibly biased comparison.The_Oracle said:That's just my fanboi opinion, so take it with a grain of salt.
The only difference in the games, according to what you just said, is the setting. That's not grounds for a comparison? Do games have to be exact carbon copies of each other in order to be compared?That Dude With A Face said:You can't compare the two. One is a fantasy RPG (swords and magic), and the other is a futuristic RPG (guns and nuclear war). True, they are by the same developer and they are both RPGs, but they are not enough alike to be compared.
Definitely Oranges.Biek said:I figure if you like Oblivion, and if you liek shooters, you will love Fallout 3. If you dont like shooters, dont get fallout and if you dont like rpg's, dont get either.
I think its comparing apples to oranges.
Fallout isn't a shooter, all you have to do is mash V and click on body parts ;DBiek said:I figure if you like Oblivion, and if you liek shooters, you will love Fallout 3. If you dont like shooters, dont get fallout and if you dont like rpg's, dont get either.
I think its comparing apples to oranges.
And what do you do with shooters? You point on something and click your mouse or press a button. big diffRickyvantof said:Fallout isn't a shooter, all you have to do is mash V and click on body parts ;DBiek said:I figure if you like Oblivion, and if you liek shooters, you will love Fallout 3. If you dont like shooters, dont get fallout and if you dont like rpg's, dont get either.
I think its comparing apples to oranges.
I still believe the two can be compared by how much total utility they've given you. But, we may just have to agree to disagree on that. No big deal.That Dude With A Face said:No, not carbon copies, but same play style. Guns change the dynamics of a game more than most people realize.runtheplacered said:The only difference in the games, according to what you just said, is the setting. That's not grounds for a comparison? Do games have to be exact carbon copies of each other in order to be compared?That Dude With A Face said:You can't compare the two. One is a fantasy RPG (swords and magic), and the other is a futuristic RPG (guns and nuclear war). True, they are by the same developer and they are both RPGs, but they are not enough alike to be compared.
It turns the game from a close quarter game (sword & shield) with the options a bow and magic (i.e. OBLIVION), into a Ranged combat game (Guns) with no option for magic or (with very little exception) melee combat (i.e. Fallout 3). The main difference is guns and magic.
Psh, maybe YOU can't.RAND00M said:They are both AWESOME Period.You just can't compare to all of the options in each game.
Yes except with regular shooters the game doesn't pause.Biek said:And what do you do with shooters? You point on something and click your mouse or press a button. big diffRickyvantof said:Fallout isn't a shooter, all you have to do is mash V and click on body parts ;DBiek said:I figure if you like Oblivion, and if you liek shooters, you will love Fallout 3. If you dont like shooters, dont get fallout and if you dont like rpg's, dont get either.
I think its comparing apples to oranges.