131 réponses à ce sujet

[Wyndham711]

Fallout 3 felt empty and aimless. The main plot was horridly bad, I didn't find even a single interesting character and the environments, while atmospheric, were incredibly repetative and continuously brooding. It wasn't what I would call an enjoyable experience. As with pretty much all sandbox games, I got the feeling that I was responsible of my own entertainment level. How much I get out of the game would depend of my own motivation since there was no real story or characters to provide that motivation for me. Obviously, with Dragon Age (and BioWare games in general) those problems do not exist. So, Dragon Age all the way!

[AtreiyaN7]

I have both games as well, and while I enjoyed the open world of Fallout 3, it lacked focus and a sense of urgency as far as the main quest(s) went. I suppose that's the tradeoff for having a sandbox game versus a more traditional RPG like DA:O. Hands down, the writing, the characters & the story are superior in DA:O. The DA:O environment may be more limited than FO3, but the world feels more alive due to the little things like the party banter and the stellar voicework. I did like Liam Neeson, Malcolm McDowell & Ron Perlman in FO3, but the rest of the VO? Meh!

[Monica21]

While I think that Fallout 3 was head and shoulders a better game than Oblivion and did manage to pull me in enough for several playthroughs while I could barely manage one for Oblivion, I still prefer game design like DA:O.

[Hniles09]

Fallout 3 was one of the greatest games i ever played, but they are nearly impossible to compare in my eyes. As a bigger fan of fantasy, DA:O is something i was waiting for bioware to make since the first time i beat Jade Empire. The work is amazing on both those games. I found the story of DA:O more engrossing and emotionally driven. FO3 has a great story, but the time it could take you to travel through the wasteland can be a little daunting, not like in Oblivion. I do prefer Fallout in that if your getting destroyed from all sides, you can always haul ass out of there. Althought the open world was massive i felt anxiety from the dangers of downtown DC the first time i played. In DA:O it wasn't the same feeling of danger anywere you went, the closest was the feeling of being underground in Orzammar for too long, and longing to see the sunlight again. Broken Steel is a much better dlc than any of the yet available ones on Dragon age, but i guess we will see how that will stack up when Awakening comes out.

[Cross1280]

while I love both games, if I had to choose I would say I prefer the open world style of game play in FO3 more than the linier game play that was in DA:O. I am the type of gamer that trys to unlock every achievement. in FO3 you can achieve almost 90% of them on the first play through and complete the rest on a second, where as in DA:O I was unhappy with the fact you have to start a minimum of 6 times to unlock all the achievements.



even ME was more openworld than DA:O and you only need 3 play throughs to get 100% completion of the game.

[Abriael_CG]

Cross1280 wrote...

while I love both games, if I had to choose I would say I prefer the open world style of game play in FO3 more than the linier game play that was in DA:O.

DAO isn't really linear. A linear game is a game that sends you to point A to B to C to D to End

DAO is fairly linear up to Lothering, then it's fairly open ended until the Landsmeet. Everything in between can be played in any order. I notice that there's quite a bit of extremizing here.
There aren't only sandbox open ended worlds and linear worlds, but there are several stages in-between.

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 15 janvier 2010 - 08:05 .

[gotthammer]

FO3 had good atmosphere, better than DA:O's, IMHO. FO3, in it's entirety, tho', was a disappointment. I blame that feeling on both nostalgia and relatively high expectations (being a fan of FO 1 & 2). If FO3 had the same amount of character development/interaction and solid plot as DA:O, then it might have been one of the better RPGs I've ever played. It didn't have that, tho'.



DA:O, on the other hand, had, IMHO, so-so atmosphere: some areas did quite well, but that was offset by lackluster bits. An example of a game with, IMHO, good atmosphere all throughout would be 'The Witcher' (that one suffered, I think, from the early bugs and pacing, especially near the beginning). Again, this may have been expectation on my part (among other things, I was drawn in by that 'dark heroic' line...and other than 'The Witcher', Warhammer Fantasy, particularly WFRP and Mordheim, are the things that come to mind when 'dark' and 'fantasy' are mentioned).

[Skellimancer]

100% Agree with OP.

I want Radio stations in DA:O

"This is TEAAAAAAA-GAAAAAAAAAAN!!! AWOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

[ImNotTrent]

i love Fallout 3.. i actually said "mmmm Fallout 3" at the title of your post. it's just awesome in all aspects, it conveys the desolate post-apoc so amazingly well. the story is wonderful, the sidequests, the world being so vast, having to discover a place before you can fast travel. yeah, i love that freaking game. but, that lavish praise being put down, to me they are apples and oranges, one is post-apoc, one is dark fantasy. and DA:O does indeed do dark fantasy very well. the banter, the main quest, the legends and old gods all come together with ease. the dwarves actually made me interested in them and their politics, the urn was a great "lost ark" sort of adventure. the companions are what really make me like DA:O when it comes down to it in the end. if it was not for them, i'd be Fallout 3 all the way. but, the companions and their relationships and interaction make me love both games pretty equally.

[Cross1280]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Cross1280 wrote...

while I love both games, if I had to choose I would say I prefer the open world style of game play in FO3 more than the linier game play that was in DA:O.

DAO isn't really linear. A linear game is a game that sends you to point A to B to C to D to End

DAO is fairly linear up to Lothering, then it's fairly open ended until the Landsmeet. Everything in between can be played in any order. I notice that there's quite a bit of extremizing here.
There aren't only sandbox open ended worlds and linear worlds, but there are several stages in-between.

You are right that it is not truly linear, I guess what I was trying to say is I like the ability in FO3 to explore the area inbetween the differnt quest areas and help or kill the inhabatants I find along the way, unlike the map system used in DA:O where you go to the world map and select your next destination and you may have a random encounter inbetween

[Froggen88]

Fallout 3, on your first playthrough, with no knowledge of the game at all, is possibly one of the best gaming experiences, ever, in my books.

When I first stepped out of that vault, the sun blinded my eyes for a few seconds, I looked around at the vast and chilling wasteland before me, and looked at the destroyed town infront of me and though "wow". Turning on the radio and strolling through the eerie streets of DC is an incredible experience, and I loved every minute of Fallout 3.

The side quests in my view are wonderful, they are completely different to the main quest, which gives the game a sense of diversity and introduces more mini stories of people's struggles to get by in the post apocalyptic wasteland. There are some mods that make the experience better, such as EVE, which just gets rid of the "green" tint/aura everything has.

DA:O is quite a different game, it is a fantasy RPG which is quite linear and the combat is...different.

All in all, they are both great games, both of which I rank evenly, as they both have given me great experiences playing and experiencing.

[Snarf95]

DA is nothing compared to Fallout 3 sorry, also Oblivion and Morrowind(Bethesda RockS!). Bioware sucks

[Bryy_Miller]

Snarf95 wrote...

DA is nothing compared to Fallout 3 sorry, also Oblivion and Morrowind(Bethesda RockS!). Bioware sucks

The first part of your post was great. But then you had to ruin it by being a fanboy.

[addiction21]

Snarf95 wrote...

DA is nothing compared to Fallout 3 sorry, also Oblivion and Morrowind(Bethesda RockS!). Bioware sucks

Troll smarter not harder.

[Abriael_CG]

Snarf95 wrote...

DA is nothing compared to Fallout 3 sorry, also Oblivion and Morrowind(Bethesda RockS!). Bioware sucks

Just LOL. When Bethesda will find, somewhere in their cellars, the ability to write a decent story or a sligtly believable character, then they will come close to Bioware's level. Come close, because I doubt they'll ever reach it.

'til then, their games will just be glorified FPSs.

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 15 janvier 2010 - 08:51 .

[KCFender]

I liked the atmosphere of Fallout 3 a lot, including the humor that often went along with it.



And as for DLC, Point Lookout blew my mind. They really outdid themselves on that one. Whole new environment that seriously makes it look like a whole different game, new weapons, creatures. New voice-acted characters with a lot of personality. And some of the quests were just awesome and featured some... interesting new things with the graphics. Best DLC I've ever played.

[AmstradHero]

Fallout 3 gives you a big (and graphically dull) wasteland to explore. Which is fun for a while, until the silly level scaling breaks the reality of the game that they have presented to you as deathclaws and super-robots take over DC.

There are some good points to Fallout 3, and it genuinely does have some interesting quests. However, I have refused to go back and play it because the ending of the game is made of so much fail that they had to release a DLC to fix it.

Despite the calls of "Buy Broken Steel, you'll love it", sorry, but Bethesda lost it when my self-sacrficing super-mutant buddy, who was happy to risk life and limb by trekking half-way across the wilderness with a single gatling gun to save me from the entire enclave within an exploding mountain, refused to enter a contaminated chamber that he could do so WITH NO THREAT OF HARM TO HIMSELF OR ANYONE ELSE, because, and I quote, "this is your destiny" to die.

There is no length of time that will cause that to be an acceptable design decision.

Hence Fallout 3 loses to Dragon Age big time.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 15 janvier 2010 - 09:10 .

[LyonVanguard]

You are comparing apples and oranges. They are both RPGs. That is preety much all they have in common.
Both good games but totally different.

PS: talk about being late. Fallout 3 has been out forever lol.

[LyonVanguard]

Double posts FTW

Modifié par LyonVanguard, 15 janvier 2010 - 09:09 .

[Walina]

Dragon Age: Origins vs. Fallout 3, in terms of atmosphere

That's a pointless topic since both game do not take place in mediaval time.

[addiction21]

Walina wrote...

Dragon Age: Origins vs. Fallout 3, in terms of atmosphere

That's a pointless topic since both game do not take place in mediaval time.

Not really but I am sure someone will elaborate.

[mrmike_1949]

Fallout 3 had a more immersive feeling than DAO, except for the Fade, which was very cool. Running thru those dark subway tunnels was at times scarier than anything since System Shock 2 ( one of the scariest PC game of all time) or Bioshock

Yeah, FO3 story is not as detailed as DAO, but it wasn't all that bad as some here seem to imply.

Graphics in FO3 are significantly better, freedom of movement and action blows away DAO.

DAO wins the oscar for acting and voices.

FO3 much less buggier than DAO, winner hands down! I don't think I ever had a crash in FO3.

NPCs in DAO are much better, wider selection, more "complicated" people; traditional 4 char dungeon crawl vs FO3 you and 1 NPC.

DLC: to be determined; FO3 DLCs were $10 each, for "average" 3 or so hours: some were just 2 hours,some lasted 5 or 6 hours, wide variation. Seems likely that FO3 had better value, but still early yet

Replay value :DAO has more, but part of that is winning the "acheivement badges" ( slick move Bioware) and the different start scenarios for different race.

My overall view - I liked FO3 better (first time thru), but DAO has more replay value

MikeK