Some more thoughts I had when on Facebook.
QUOTE
FO3 and Ob' are two different things using the same engine.
FO3's primary lose is its "weaker" storyline, since you are basically given little or no alternative means to complete the main quest; however, you don't have an immediate "deliver this" mission to complete either, no quest item clogging up your inventory to force you into doing the damn thing.
Where FO3 wins are its levelling system and perks. While I understand that you might expend zillions of bullets and still "learn" nothing, to me it makes slightly less sense than Oblivion's where practice really did make perfect. In FO3, you only advance in a heavily used skill of you want to. Perhaps a hybrid system mixing automatic "grinding" with manual skill points (which in turn may affect attributes) may have been a better idea.
However: I can imagine Oblivion with VATS (Divine-Assisted Targeting System?), especially in combat - select the sequence of body parts and show those baddies techniques of Rain-of-Sand or Legion swordsmanship. However instead of freezing action, I would have merely slowed time down, maybe by a factor of 10. Think fast, hero-boy!
Perks might also be fun in Ob', especially if they involve penalties to avoid the dreaded munchkinism. (e.g. the Thief perk bumps your Sneak and Security skills at the expense of Barter and Speechcraft!)
Oblivion to me has the more interesting quest system, since there are actual factions you can join, as opposed to being the Lone Wanderer. Imagine if you could have thrown in with the Enclave. Or the slavers of Evergreen Mills. And that's just baddies
And of course, Ob's more colourful (planes of Oblivion excluded), as opposed to FO3 which is mostly, to quote Yahtzee, "dystopia grey or dog merd brown".
And I like them both in different ways.
This post has been edited by Cardboard Box: Sep 21 2010, 04:36 AM