Im a huge fan of both series, and just wanna know what others think the difference in the worlds are besides the obvious. I've noticed that in the fallout series the NPC's are more life like and animated, thus making quests more rewarding for me cause theres more feedback from an NPC when you help him/Her out or hurt him/her. The main difference is more of a life-like world to me, where it seems like your character isn't the only one the world revolves around, sometimes in TES games at least to me it feels like you go to do this for me, then talk to this person and do that for him.

that being said im still a big fan of both, just curious what differences others feel there are, thanks and sorry if a thread for this topic already exists. TES series can give off too dark of a feel sometimes and the npc's can feel alittle lifeless and boring.

[post deleted]

i think in general FO seems more creative. the palette there is less constricted to the typical tolkein style fantasy world.

also FO3 and FONV were released quite a while ago, and much better RPG than Skyrim, and I fear that the ever decreasing 'R' in TES games are going will be seen there in FO4.

I agree about the NPCs but I prefer TES right now because of Fallout's piece o' crap environment. I understand that's what Bethesda is going for but if I have a choice between looking at a beautiful forest or an endless landscape of dirt and concrete, I'm going with the forest.

On looks alone it's not even close. And I don't just mean graphically, I like fallout for it's humor and npc. But it is a drab world.. I put down fallout before I really should have because I got sick of sand. Off topic, I remember reading somewhere that they are set in the same universe- planet. Anyone know if that's true.

i'd agree with that, TES series definetly has better scenery. If i had to choose i would go with the fallout series just cause the kookiness and lively hood of the people that inhabit the world keeps me interested. Im also a fan of the whole post-apocolyptic look, more so in FO3 not so much in new vegas.

The Fallout World is set in our world as a split off universe. It was split in the 50's and followed a different path.

The Elder Scrolls is set in the world of Nirn, a fanasy world that has no relation to our world.

off topic question but why does everyone say some games are incomparible? everythign can be compared, i can compare sliced bread to skyrim to see which is mroe fun (skyrim clearly) or which is the bigger invention (skyrim clearly, bread was better unsliced ) or which is needed more (bread, im that in love with skyrim) and the list goes on

on-tpoc: i like fallout's humor, NPCs, and world more tbh

that is not true, TES is in mundas FO is set on earth (im 99.9999999999999999% sure at least, but the one thing i know for sure is i know nothing)

The only reason TES is now the generic typical fantasy is because of too many people crying about Morrowind and how alien it was. Sorry to those people but that is what made TES creative and special to me. It was a different world with different wildlife and people. Now with Oblivion and Skyrim. It is just more generic wolves, bears, and lame mythical creatures I have seen in stories since I was a little kid.

Actually, I go 180o the other way. I find everything about FO3 SOOOO boring that I just can not get a character past a few hours.

But if you know nothing how is it that you know you know nothing. If you know that you know nothing you must therefore know something

*Twitch's head explodes*

hehehehe logic bombs~<3

I'm the same way and I never understood why. I was pumped about what I thought would be a the shooter/RPG blend, but could never get into FO3 the way I did Morrowind. Now that I've played Skyrim some, I almost want to go back to FO3 and give it another shot.

I like Fallout they are ok, but given the choice I would play TES any day.

I prefer the setting and overall style off the game. The lore is very good in TES as well.

Fallout does some things better, such as more meaningful dialogue but it just to me anyway isn't as good. It's still very good but not as good

that's interesting, as soon as i left the vault the game took off for me.

I still get a laugh about fo3 opening when your a kid. If you make the right speech choices you can spit on the sweetroll and then hand it to the bully. I like tes more then fo, but fo gives you a good laugh

definetly more wacky moments in the FO series

Yes, FO3 and FONV are set on the same planet. FO3 takes place in and around Washington D.C. FONV takes place in the Mohavi Desert, in the (fomrally) American west. It's a desert, and there aren't trees, and it's all rocks and sand. You just gotta be expecting that.

Fallout 1 and 2 took place there also, and in Fallout 2 there is a large part that takes place in Vegas. Was my favorite part of Fallout 2. In this respect Fallout: New Vegas, is kind of like the "real" sequal to Fallout 2. Fallout 3 had the Enclave and the Brotherhood of Steel, but it was in the east, and from Fallout 1 and 2, I had grown to like the desert and the New California Republic, and the Mohavi Desert Rangers. And New Vegas had Cassidy's daughter...and Marcus! Kind of svcked Marcus wouldn't join your party this time around, but at least Rose of Sharon did. And she's much better looking than her father

Oh wait. Did you mean Tamriel was the same planet as Fallout? No. I don't see how. No magic in Fallout, just radiation.

I know what you mean about Fallout but it's hard to describe... I guess the bleak and depressing setting makes it feel as if you really are making a difference when you help someone, since they had little hope otherwise. I also find it's a lot easier to imagine yourself in the place of the antagonist of the game; you're just an ordinary guy who's picked up a gun and gone off into the wasteland for some reason, as opposed to the Elder Scrolls series where you're an almost god-like being who accomplishes incredible feats.

Both games are incredible in different ways.

couldn't of said it better myself, well put

I think I'm inclined to agree with this; for some reason it didn't bother me so much with Morrowind and Oblivion, but with Skyrim it's becoming very hard to maintain my interest in the same way that FO3 and NV held onto it (and that's from someone who generally prefers TES.) The recent Fallouts (I haven't played 1 and 2) have made me want to keep going back in spite of their grotty and unpleasant setting, which I guess must be down to the interaction. Ironically, I think Skyrim doesn't work for me because I think they tried to incorporate some of the ideas from Fallout into TES but seem to have chosen the wrong ones: they took the grittiness but not the humanity, and it felt a bit dull and uninviting as a consequence.

I'm a fantasy man, so I prefer TES, but FO is more intriguing. In Fallout the pop culture references are funnier and the references to every day life are more interesting than the metaphysics and cryptic lore of TES.

I prefer the Mojave and the Capital Wasteland to Cyrodil. I love the post apocalyptic environment, I love walking through ruins that you could tell used to be homes, I love wandering the highways of the Mojave and coming across a caravan heading to the 188. I loved going halfway across the Capital Wasteland without seeing daylight by using the subways. The other post I quoted is really why I didn't find Cyrodil nearly as interesting, it seemed too generic. It did nothing to separate itself from the other cookie cutter fantasy worlds in my opinion.
I haven't played Morrowind, but I have just started playing Fallout 1 and have just realized something. One of the similarities between the new and old Fallout games and one of the reasons why the atmosphere always draws me in is the music. I just started with Fallout 1 and I'm hearing some of the same music I've heard in New Vegas. It gave me goosebumps because I instantly felt like I was in a huge wasteland that didn't pay attention to any of the creatures who lived in it, or what they did to each other.

Fallout is, simply, unique. There is just nothing like it. Portraying future now from a past viewpoint. Three in one. Fallout has a very consistent story, has very advanced lore and overall stays within the limits of relative reality (with SCIENCE!)

Personally I like Fallout 1 and 3 the best. They both are lacking compared to 2 and NV in terms of gameplay, but they maintain that post-apocalyptic mystique, the eerie silence of the Fall of Mankind. I'll never forget the day I first entered the scorched ruins of West-Tek, or exited Vault 101.
The only thing I've always hated about Fallout, something that existed in all issues before NV, was that the villains' actions were so justified that the developers had to make a huge ass-pull instane plan for them, or a distinct flaw, to justify you mass murdering them. Only in NV we had factions that were just different with no lame excuses to destroy them. Fallout 3 came close with having Colonel Autumn as a much more humane element of the Enclave, but you couldn't help him so he was completely wasted.


As for Elder Scrolls, it is either intentionally or unintentionally a carbon copy of your generic modern fantasy. An island continent, polytheism with actually existing gods, Elf/Man/Beast living in relative harmony, Medieval Stasis, magic and so on. The only thing ES lacks from typical fantasy is dwarves (the short, hairy type). Thankfully Bethesda has put the lore into good use and inverted it enough so it's not the classical good/evil nonsense, something that I appreciate greatly. Elder Scrolls setting may be generic, but the stories are not. But the quality of the stories - well - that's another story.