Ooh the actual ideas, thought you guys meant, nvm kk . ( thinking back to the future... )

On the modding side of things, and these are the additions that I love:
- Texture Sets
- More head slots than you can shake a large stick at (Head, Hair, Hat, Headband, Glasses, Mask, Mouth Object, Earrings, Nosering, Necklace, Choker..)
- Navmeshes
- Model lists
- Armor Addons
- Better NIF format
- Friggin cube textures
- Better environmental texturing over all, plus you can make your own
- Shader flags <3
- Creatures can have dialogue (Morrowind had this, Oblivion did not)

I'm sure I'll think of more after some sleep..

From a technical standpoint Id say not much besides the standard upgrades that come with the time gap between the two. They did use the same engine and what-nots.

The main difference is choice. You have more choice in this FO3. The fact that you can complete the quests in different ways, that you can actually choose to help or hurt.

The other big difference for me is the atmosphere. FO3 is just a better world. It feels like its just on another level, like I am actually living in this world, trying to survive and make a difference.

Horse armour!

The mood and atmosphere are worlds apart. People are generally pleasant and nice to you on oblivion but in fallout eveyone is out for themselves and generally dislikes you.
There are tweaks here and there but i have to say what's the big deal with using the same engine? It works and works well. Even if you only had bows and swords it still wouldn't feel like oblivion.
If they release the new elder scrolls and you can walk when overencumbered people will say they are just using the fallout engine. It's just progression. Creating game engines takes time and money, which is better spent on content and actually getting games out.

Also i have to say i've never really heard anyone compliment how good the game mechanic works seens as i've jumped around the whole of the rocky capital wasteland and never got trapped or atleast never got trapped from where i can't get out of with a little bit of random jumping.

Guess you've never looked at all the bugs reported then? Thats the thing thought It's an excellent upgrade FOR TES but it's bad if you compare ti to the originals mechanics. If you goto the vault and look up the originals combat and SPECIAL mechanics you'll see how much better they are. :shrugs: My opinion ofcourse, but I favor more complex over dumbed down.

Are you talking about the orignal Fallouts? Yeah they are alot more complicated but have you tried playing them lately? It hasn't aged too well in my opinion and they just couldn't make a game like that these days. For all the specials on the origianls there is still far more to the new fallout than the old ones. And lets face it, old-skool rpg type battles are rubbish. I think it takes you completely out of the world and you stop feeling a part of it all. It's one of those things though, i think Bethesda are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Can't please everyone.
Personally i was disapointed with the amount towns/settlements (or lack of) and how tiny they were and how ultimately useless places like big town are once you've done the quests. Missed opportunity.

You have to be on flat [enough] ground to jump twice... My PC has been stuck in a hole no deeper than his shins, and trapped between a wall and a bookcase ~Nearly every debris wall in DC or behind Canterbury Commons has some spot that will pin your PC permanently if you step in it ~Parts of the wall at Ten Penny's are the same way.

Basically any point where you can slide downward into another angled slide can potentially pin you and you sit [stand] there floating helplessly in a perpetual fall, unable to jump for not being on a flat surface.

You are able to write actual dialogues for Fallout 3. I tried going back to mod a few more quests for Oblivion but gave up after trying to write my first few lines of player dialogue and being restricted to less than ten words again. It's impossible to tell a good story or make the dialogue interesting when the player can't say more than a few words at a time.

I played them again a few days ago, still as fun as ever. Considering the better and branching dialogue.

I don't think so, I think it's only those who can't get past thinking Real time = "more evolved", or just don't like turn-based gameplay. Anyway the Originals, wasn't about "maximum Immersion" it was about telling a story with C&C and a good Mechanics system to back it up. You p[layed in the Third person for a good reason. As you the player and you the character where seperated.

Ah i have it for the 360 that might be why. I've been everywhere and never got stuck. Don't know what it's like on pc. I wish i could get some of the mods.

The difference as far as I know, is that with the PC one can use the no-clipping code to escape instead of reloading. I don't think the level geometry is that different (though I don't know this from experience with the non-PC versions); It simply matters where you step... If you never step in the right spot, you won't likely get stuck.

*** BTW... PC and PC are not always the same meaning... It can mean "Personal Computer" or "Player Character". In my case I meant "Player Character" each time I used it in my previous post.

Theres big differences! The combat is more stat based like it was in MORROWIND so your ingame skill plays just a tad more important part in being successful then your real life twitch reflex eventhough that is very important too.

Your in a dead world. A holocaust universe in a stagnant never ending ocean of rotting corpses. A funeral feast where life is pain and even drinking water brings suffering.

There are children and they hate you.

There are toy teddy bears you can talk to yet they cannot hear you.

There is a very old man. He is a young girl. He lives in a town. The town is fake full of real fake people.

There is an Uncle he is your friend yet shoot to kill at first sight you will tempted be.

There is a lone wanderer..who is everyone and no one.

I just don't like turn based gameplay. But... seens as they couldn't do first person to the standard they can today it is more evolved. I know Fallout isn't about realism and you can soak up a load of bullets when fighting but in turn based fighting everyone just stands there waiting to shoot. Theres no innovative use of cover or fast thinking involved or anything even remotely resembling real combat. For those who use VATS iyou can atleast position yourself better or just fight normally.
I think turn based has had it's day and if the older fallouts had a better game machanic they would have used it now. But it doesn't and they didn't. It's an old game that nostalgia leads us to look back at with rose tinted glasses.
Great game for it's time but things move on. I think they could have made more effort with dialogue though. More 'real' choices.

I agree with everything you said. I also recently played the original Fallout games, and while they are still fun, they definitely feel like old games. Turn based combat was used back in the day because it was more or less a necessity in order to bring the pen and paper experience to computer games, but even by the time Fallout 1 was released, turn based RPGs were becoming more rare in favor of real time games. It all comes down to preference I guess, but the new system just allows for a much richer and more immersive experience IMO.

Two points:
Point 1: Most of those players you might consider as nostalgic have likely played both games within the previous few weeks or months; Many have decided which is better [for them] by direct side by side comparison. Myself I'd take Fallout 2 over three any day, unless (in the unlikely event that) I wanted a PA simulation (Which Fallout 3 is currently one of the best). But that's not why I'd want to play :shrug:

Point 2: "Great game for it's time but things move on";
I disagree. And thankfully http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2kNTGYdKu8&feature=related.
Fallout 1 may well have been the worst first person shooter I ever played.
(and I wouldn't have had it any other way.)

See that where your going wrong, it's not that people are just standing there waiting, turn based "turns" are "segments of time" Say each turn is 10 seconds of real time. then you take everyone's turn for the round (Everyone goes once and it's back to the first guy) and play them simultaneously you'd have what happened in "real time" for that 10 seconds. gamesas made it the way they made it because they can't seem to be stuck in TES land I think. Instead of making a more Fallout system they chose to just modify the already in place Oblivion system. Could they have made it in line with the originals? I betting they could fairly easily. I'd imagine it was a cost cutting maneuver to just use the old code. also to appeal to there TES fanbase wit ha familiar gameplay system.

As for the "rose tinted glasses" comment I'll refer you to some ones Sig, it goes something like this: "it's not nostalgia, if your still playing it."

But you do realise your the minority right?

How ironic, it actually IS nostalgia if your still playing it. I doubt very much that people have played the old games again and again non-stop. They would have went back for a reason. The reason would be what fond memories they had of playing the game. That would be nostalgia.

Of coure they used the Oblivion engine to capitalise on ther already huge fanbase and why shouldn't they? As i said earlier, writing new code and creating game engines takes a hell of alot fo time and money which is better spent on the content.

As for the turn based combat, i know it's supposed to be on the fly but it doesn't change the fact that it's still happening at slugs pace and doesn't ever give the impression your doing anything on the fly so each turn could mean 10 seconds, 1 hour, 10 years it still doesn't change a thing.

Could they have made it more in line with the originals? yes. Course they could. IF you mean by putting turn based combat in that would pretty much half their sales if not worse but as for content, story and the old fallout feel yeah they could have. I don't know why they didn't. Maybe they just thought they could put a better spin on it? Or simply tried to aim at a different market. I think they wanted to please old fans aswell as gain new fans and have their oblivion fanbase in the bag too. Which is impossible to keep old fans happy if that's the case.
They could have done that with a more fallout 1 related dialogue mechanic though.

Still it's not tTHAT massively out of touch. It's just a different twist on it really. I can't get enough of post apocalyptic stuff and i don't mind people 'messing' with the old stuff to hit on something good. they might fail but they might succeed. Better than fallout 1.3

The term nostalgia describes a longing for the past, it's not the past if your still playing it now is it? then how do you explain the folk that never played the orignals until they played FO3 then go the originals and liked it much better?

Also why does it have to be "slugs pace" just because it turns don't mean it has to go as slow as it did in past games. Have you played the Baldur's gate series? Did you know that it used a "turn based" system too? It just left out the "end turn button and played throught the turns in real time. However it used all the D&D turn based mechanics. Again your using only one idea of what turn based is and thinking it has to be the same. Here's a question for you, about how long do you spend in VATs? Do you spend hours thinking of your next shot placement? I'm guessing "no". Given tha tthe computer takes its turns instantly pretty much you'd still have some pretty fast turns i'd say.

I like how you throw this in without any proof, you do know that turn based game still exist and sell in large quantities right?

Eh, this is however a very old argument, I'm just going to stop here.

Before purchasing FO3 i have read the same thing , about how FO3 was just OB with guns and gore. After actually playing FO3 , it really didn't feel like the same game at all. Of course if you go looking for similarities , you'll find some but once fully immersed in the game i bet you won't think of it as just an OB rip-off.

I've played OB a lot , too much that i'd want to admit , and FO3 feels like its own game not some futuristic version of OB. If you are still on the fence i suggest checking out a few "let's play's" of FO3 on youtube , that should give you a good idea of what the game feels like.

It's also pointless, since the game has been out for a year and the next game will also be using the same mechanics.

If your talking about NV thats still unknown, also goes for FO4. You can have no Idea if they're going to change the mechanics. Especially if they use a newer engine in FO4.

Fallout 3 has faster leveling, is smaller than oblivion, has body damage (crippling effects), radiation, medicine, no factions, less towns, VATS, gore, less DLC than oblivion, better graphics than oblivion, and Fallout 3 takes place in a entirely different setting than oblivion.

Fallout 3 is not anything like oblivion. The only way to compare them is to say " there both RPGs made by Bethesda".

:spotted owl:
yes it is basically oblivion with guns, which is a good thing, its a huge game, fast travel just like oblivion and you will get use to it very fast if you play oblivion, its very similar in a lot of ways, it has the feel of oblivion except it has gun and is set in a post apocolypse

According to Pete Hines, "It will be the same sort of role-playing game experience seen in Fallout 3". http://kotaku.com/5219584/new-fallout-announced