I guess FO3

Level scaling was handled better, every skill was useful, you can miss (and not just because you moved your mouse slightly to the left), and exploration is much more fun.

Well, considering all they have in common is the engine and developer...
I voted Oblivion because I'm more of a sword & sorcery person than guns. Plus I much prefer the leveling system in Elder Scrolls to any game really. Hitting people with a sword should not make me better at picking locks. And the lore of Elder Scrolls is far more interesting to me.
Also, I just did not enjoy the "world" of Fallout 3. Everything was so grey and bland. Of course it makes sense because you are in a "wasteland" But still :shrug:

I think the scaling was better because if it was present I didn't notice it when I was getting destroyed by a deathclaw at level 5. And I never encountered a group of raiders with power armor. ( Heres looking at you bandits in full glass/daedric :stare: )

Fallout 3's world as a whole had a lot more hand-placed detail put into it than Oblivion's, leading to many more interesting exterior areas overall. added to that, there were countless little shacks and places you could go into and explore and they weren't part of settlements and they had nothing in them but they were similar to Morrowind's random farms and plantations and towers and ruins in that they were just THERE and by virtue of just being THERE they added life and character to the world. they gave you a thing to find if you walked in a direction for a while - maybe a bed to sleep in, maybe a gun to shoot, maybe a sad/cute little note.

Oblivion had a small handful of settlements and a couple shacks but virtually all of them were related to big dramatic quests and there was very little that just existed to add character and atmosphere. between towns everything was dead. there were no people, no beds, no stories - all there was was fighting. pretty much every fort and ruin not directly related to a quest was small, boring, and repetitive. the ones that WERE parts of quests were generally kind of neat, though, because there was a lot more attention put into their design - they had cool traps and cool architecture and cool little defining characteristics. the cave in the Mehrunes' Razor DLC is still probably my fondest memory of the core game outside of exploring the sewers beneath the Imperial City.

so Fallout wins exploration for that sense of "this is an adventure", which is 75% of why i play Bethesda's games (the other 25% being split evenly between Elder Scrolls lore and finding the weirdest mods i can).

Oblivion handled combat a lot more interestingly than Fallout did. the idea of linking weapon skill to how much damage the weapon does was kind of dumb, but it was sort of understandable given the lack of diceroll accuracy, but it could've been handled better. the different abilities at different skill levels was really neat, though - i recently started a playthrough as an acrobat/mage and it feels really rewarding being able to actually dodge fireballs and arrows and do goofy backflips to get away from things, and i really hope this kind of thing carries over into TES5. archery was awesome, and with a bit of tweaking melee combat was neat too. Oblivion is superior in this.

horse riding was horrible and clunky after Mount & Blade but the fact that it was there was neat i guess, though you could fast-travel anywhere the second you left the prison which kind of ruined that. the lack of any comparable mount in Fallout was kind of annoying at times. neither game wins in this regard - bring them back and make them control like they do in RDR and things will be delightful.

overall - Fallout 3 presented a more interesting world to explore, while Oblivion was a lot better at letting you get into the act of killing everything in that world.

You're asking in the Elder Scrolls forums so I'd say the answer is pretty obvious XD

I always thought and still do think fallout gameplay is very clunky and unresponsive. It always leaves me wishing i could do thing faster and more fluent. Hands down to oblivion gameplay. I never got sick of the fights. The game just seemed smoother to me. i guess..

To me, the big difference between the two is the world building and the system of character advancement. Note that I am mostly an explorer, and locations to find and explore are always what I look for first.

I prefer the worldbuilding of FO3. I thought the procedural generated content of Oblivion was lackluster. A bit of that is ok, but the hand built locations of FO3 were superior in terms of visual storytelling. There are a lot of places in Oblivion though, so it's not all that bad. Terrain was exceptions in both games, and I enjoyed the vibe of both games.

Itemization was better in Oblivion, I think. Lots more stuff, I think, and nice cultural differences.

Character mechanics is a tough one for me. I generally like the "train to advance" system of skill building we find in TES games. The Fallout system is rather basic to me. I like the idea of classes and character templates, for those who like to use them.

The crafting systems in Oblivion are far superior to the two Fallout games. I like the idea of combining stand alone "units" to create potions and spells. I like the enchanting systems as well. If one were to role-play an alchemist (which I did on occasion), there is an awful lot of content in Oblivion to support that. Same with role-playing a Mage. The magic system is so diverse that one could roll several mages and play through the game several times.

One gets the idea that Fallout 3 was sort of a test case, to see how well it would work. I would expect to see improvements in crafting and character mechanics as the series progresses.

So, bottom line? I'm a real Fallout fan. I like the PA genre, and I like guns. That said, I think Oblivion has better mechanics, and I think FO3 has better world-building.

I'm greatly looking forward to the next games in both series. I hope that each series retain their strengths and borrow more from each other.

At least in Fallout it didn't take all day to kill or be killed. Oblivion's combat just dragged on forever.

Fallout 3 looked at what Oblivion did and in many aspects improved on it. Their actual differences aside (Swords VS guns, skill use leveling VS experience points), I think Fallout 3 is better in the aspects where they overlap: Level scaling, NPC to NPC dialogue, dungeons and hand placed items, no instant fast travel options to all corners of the map from the start...

Random encounters being really random in Fallout 3. I really cared for NPCs in that game. In one instance, I wished I could say sorry. :sadvaultboy:

this more than anything else is something i really really hope carries over into TES5. random encounters added so much to just wandering around the empty areas, because even if there weren't any buildings or dungeons or anything around there was always the chance that you'd find someone or something that was worth stopping to check out.

Tough choice: TES character development (even as underutilized as it was in OB) versus a much improved levelling and scaling approach in FO3.

Both games still nerfed damages based on skill, rather than using skills to affect the actual mechanics of combat (such as hit, GLANCE for reduced damage, or miss, WITH proper animations for it). Two way tie for last place, in my eyes.

Levelling and scaling were improved in FO3, but still not perfect. No Raiders in PA, wonderful. The ability to find Deathclaws at level 1 was a good thing; finding them in the "safe" starting area, even rarely, was not. Having the spawn point at the front gate of Megaton gradually increase from "vermin", all the way to "monsters" that overwhelmed the local defenders, was outright bad, making it lethal for the inhabitants whenever your character to visited anywhere at high level. Marginal improvement in FO3, as far as I'm concerned.

Character development went from skills in OB, and attributes which rose through actual use of those skills, to an XP based system in FO3 where you could somehow improve your negotiating ability by shooting people on sight, or learn to repair your equipment by throwing grenades. Significant step backwards, in my opinion.

OB by a nose.

Fallout was ok. but i found it got boring fairly quick. Obviously not everyone will agree with that, but it's just my opinion

well it to different types of games it like saying
MW2 vs WoW

The gameplay feels identical to each other

I honestly can't say that one is really better than the other when I really didn't see any real improvements or differences at all

Most people are confusing the terms "Combat" and "Gameplay" here. Honestly, anyone who thinks Oblivion had better Gameplay than Fallout 3 is out of their mind. Oblivion was the most samey experience Bethesda had delivered in their history. You never felt like you were accomplishing anything. Exploration was severely impacted because of the cookie cutter dungeons, there was a punishing lack of unique and interesting people, and the world afforded significantly less opportunities to reach different solutions than Fallout 3. The Combat in Oblivion however, was much less annoying, and at it's core, quite good. However, the lack of diversity amongst weapon types got quite old (All weapons felt the same, which is similar to Fallout 3, so I'm not saying it's better, just a criticism I have).

Overall, I say Fallout 3's Gameplay was a vast improvement. Exploration was rewarded in unique and inspired ways. From the non-linear advancement and a deviance from the progress herding we saw in Oblivion, to the tiny world details that sell the story and atmosphere. In both these games, combat is actually a very tiny part of the experience, and you do both a disservice (And gaming as a whole) by saying Combat = Gameplay.

With all that said, even though it's not ~technically~ a Bethesda game (Published, not Developed) Fallout: New Vegas (Ignoring the bugs) has the best overall Gameplay since Morrowind. Rewarding Exploration, Nonlinear development, hordes of interesting people to meet and kill, a great social relation system (Faction reputation) surprisingly great balancing (Some of the Energy weapon changes are taken word-to-creation out of an ideas/changes page I made a year ago, this is almost certainly a coincidence though) and much improved combat, especially in regards to, not just how each weapon type feels, but down to each weapon as an individual. For example, even though they're both Lever-action repeaters, the .357 Cowboy and the 45-70 Brush are quite different in overall feel. I hope Bethesda learns from the good Obsidian did with their game, and apply the lessons to the next Elder Scrolls.

^^^^^
This. Basically this.

Lets just not mix this ok? Well, yeah oblivion and fallout 3 are running on same engines ,but so what? Table tennis and grand theft auto 4 are on same engine too ,but no one compares them.

This thread is deceptive because the title and the poll are asking for two different things. I personally preferred Oblivion because I enjoy TES more overall. But in terms of game play, Fallout 3 was obviously better because it made improvements over flaws Oblivion had. Although I really enjoyed Morrowind the most as it was the most immersive and really felt like a different world. I felt Oblivion fell short on delivering that immersion and the detail that Morrowind did. As a person mentioned above, the people in Morrowind felt much more alive and were a whole lot more interesting. Many of the NPCs in Oblivion on the other hand were generic and cookie cutter (Whatever happend to that scenario that Bethesda posted when Oblivion was in development about a drunkard coming out of a bar and picking a fight with the player? The reason Morrowind was so engaging is because the world was so unpredictable. Oblivion felt a lot more predictable, and as a result more of just a game). However, Oblivion did improve in various other ways with the physics engine, the voice overs, the graphics, the combat, and the overall game mechanics. My only real complaint about Oblivion is I couldn't join the Imperial Guard and become the Knight of the Imperial Dragon like I could in Morrowind!!!

Clarification: when I mention gameplay I'm referring to aspects that make the game fun to actually play. I'm not referring to story&characters or graphics&sound, I'm talking about exploration, combat, crafting etc.

IMO the whole thing evolved. OB had it's issues but when FO3 was released it fixed many of OB's flaws. Exploration felt better than OB and this was surprising for me given that most of Fo3's dungeons are ruins and caves while Ob had Alyed ruins, mines, caves, forts, Oblivion gates etc. I think they didn't take advantage of that in OB, saw their error and rectified in FO3. Quests were more interesting. I won't compare leveling and combat systems since they're quite different IMO although I will say I enjoyed the vanilla combat of FO3 more than the vanilla combat of OB.

And now with the release of NV, although developed by Obsidian for the most part, I think progress was made yet again. There were more items to choose from and they felt different. Skill use was better although I would have preferred if they used the speech-related perks a bit more. The only drawbacks for me were that I felt it lacked some polish and the gameworld felt less rewarding in terms of loot when exploring.

One thing that I did miss from TES was that most NPCs had a name. It added to the uniqueness of the characters IMO.

So gameplay-wise I'd say I'd prefer NV first, then FO3 and then OB. And I hope the same gameplay progress is maintained for TES V.

Oblivion wins by far, but if you put Fallout: New Vegas that would have been another story (yeah yeah just published by Beth I know, my point was that Beth should take some pointers from the original creators of the Fallout series for Fallout 4).

By the way the poll will be incredibly biased, considering this is on the ES discussion page. This same thread in the Fallout section would have different results.

Come on people why step back with animations rather then stride forward,... if you dont want fallout NV animations in an TES game I have to seriously think you are twisted and as its been said b4, if you dont like an option like VATS dont use it , thats why ITS AN OPTION !!!! if you go to your fast food place of choice and you dont feel like mustard or ketchup or onions or what have you dont order it or have them leave it off all together but dont expect them to not have it available to others who do want it just because you think you might have to use it yourself just because of availability of the item,... if you dont like levitation spells, dont use them, if you dont like fast travel, dont use it, if you dont want the x marker on your screen, remove it from your options, but dont try to influence TES to not grow with the new animations (have you even seen the cool new animations in fallout new Vegas??? Some are unbelievably cool). Many of us love them and would love to see them in TES, VATS ... I dont use it all the time because I love iron sights, but some animations are only available to be used/seen in VATS, those who dont want this I have to question whether or not you actually have played fallout new Vegas,... and the new jumping you dont want that ??? again I have to question your sanity, the new melee moves ?? you gotta be kidding,.. its all better and its not huge changes all of it, some of it is just how the character is portrayed while doing it like jumping forward one leg forward one leg back like a normal person does while running not that gay jump we have dealt with forever that is only appropriate to some1 jumping up and down,.... oh and even the walking looks more real rather then almost robotic,.......... but just my opinion

The original question was about gameplay, not graphics and animations.

While improvements in the clunky animations would be a welcome stride forward, they still won't save a bad game, at least in my opinion. Of course, some people will buy it because "it looks cool", no matter how unrealistic, how shallow, or how boring the actual game mechanics turn out to be, and vice versa; some will buy it no matter how bad it looks, if it plays well. For the mass market, it needs to work both ways.

It's apparent that Bethesda learned "something" from the reaction to OB, but what and how much are still very debatable after seeing FO3. FNV was made by an outside group, and it's apparent that they took a different perspective on it. That STILL says nothing about what BGS will do with the next TES installment. As the early promos from OB proved, what's released for marketing and hype reasons doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the game, either, so we really won't "know" anything until we open the box and load up the game.

This pole should also be in the fallout Forum because it relates to it.

Oblivion gameplay wasn't exciting, sure it was fun exploring and doing stuff in Cyrodiil, I love TESIV, I still hold Oblivion in my Top 5.
Fallout 3 gameplay improved a lot, the combat was fast-paced, gory, vicious and frantic and it required more thought in making a good char build, the skills worked better and the exploration was intense, rewarding and atmospheric.
Fallout New Vegas gameplay was wonderful, the best. The combat was as good as Fallout 3, thought it was much more balanced and satisfying, skill system felt like a true RPG instead of a hybrid action RPG-FPS. The locations all had something interesting and different, and it was full of wonderful non-linear gameplay and intereting NPCs etc.

I think that, Fallout 3 gameplay is best (I would say FNV, but it's not in the pool). It improved a lot over Oblivion, from combat to exploration, questing to dialogue.
TESV will combine the best of Fallout 3 gameplay, with the wonderful FNV improved mechanics and the beautiful medieval combat, world and stories.

Exploration: fallout 3 gave you more reason to explore as you needed to explore the subway system to find new location downtown, fewer tile set but more creative use and bandit camps looked more lived in than most in Oblivion, enemies and traps was also made more tactical sense. Outdoor forts and defences in dungeons was nice, probably easier in fallout as most used ranged weapons but archers and spell casters do this in Oblivion, might be an idea to hold back melee fighters to defend the ranged units.

Crafting, Fallout 3 you could make around 8 custom weapons, Oblivion you could make potions, spells and enchant weapon and armor, As I understand NW has an expanded crafting system who is more like oblivion alchemy, you can make lots of more items from things you find, you can also upgrade weapons, however unlike alchemy and enchanting the items you make require specified ingredients.

Combat is hard to say, Fallout 3 was faster, much faster, used VAT a lot but didn’t miss it then going back to Oblivion. Fast enemies are a good thing and also a way to boost difficulty lions and hungers are a problem for archers in Oblivion.
Main downside in Fallout 3 is that it’s to easy, yes broken steel solved it but took level scaling to a new and interesting level, real nice then you did the end of the main quest levelled up two times and the radscorpions was replaced with albinos. Better to run into a squad of enclave hellfire troops and have a pack of albinos attack you from behind.