If this thread is covered elsewhere, please lock it. I do not want to duplicate.....if not, then read on.

Ok, having been a huge Fallout 3 fan for some time, loving every minute of it, I still found myself migrating to Mass Effect 2. For a different experience more than anything else. I was blown away. Fallout New Vegas kind of mixed the two together - the free world exploration of Fallout 3 and the character dialogue of ME2, but without specialising in either. Please note, this is not a Fallout 3 vs New Vegas discussion thread.

The following is kind of unstructured, and just a jumble of thoughts really, rather than an organised way of separating the different game styles. The key thing is to simulate debate, really.

1 ) World Design
Fallout 3/NV is a free open world game, and judging by the Skyrim demos, Fallout 4 will likely be the same. Lots of exploring far off vistas, seeing what lies behind that hill, and just general following your nose. ME2, on the other hand, has very linear level design - each mission is a trek from A to B, killing whatever gets in your way. The important thing, though, is not the journey you take, but how you get there. What is more important...having a free world to explore, but killing things in the same way each time, or have linear missions where you are free to decide how you complete them?

2) Classes
ME2 has classes. Six of them, to be exact. They are all different and legitimately offer six different ways to play through the game that many times. Each classes has special weapons/powers that are unique to it, that cannot be experienced in any other playthrough. Fallout 3/NV has skill points, to distribute how you see fit. Correctly managed, these skill points should allow you to specialise in only a few key areas, rather than maxing out many skills, which therefore determines character type. So far, this has not been the case. This is part of the RPG element of each game. Clearly, Fallout 3's Broken Steel extended the level cap allowing any player to be a specialist in many areas. So, classes, or (correctly distributed) skill points?

3) Character Development
Fallout 3/NV's character development varies wildly. Fallout 3 is very limited in this department, with each NPC offering limited animations and dialogue. New Vegas went the other way - incredibly detailed dialogue that spent an inordinate amount of time recounting various backstories and numerous nods to Fallout 1 and 2. ME2 has cutscenes that incorporate the player character and any NPC in the same scene, so we get to see ourselves interact with others. Also, romancing a squad mate is possible, and gives yet another reason to play through the game again. Opinions?

4) RPG elements
Fallout 3's good/evil karma system is too simplistic. New Vegas improved on this many times over with the faction elements - align yourself to a faction and see the world react differently to you. ME2 has the paragon/renegade system, which kind of sits in between. ME2's story is linear (defeat the Reapers), but how you go about achieving this is down to your personal alignment with the world, and with others. A do-gooder Paragon, or a practical no nonsense Renegade? Again, what would you prefer - good/evil, factions, or paragon/renegade?

5) Story Design
Ok, the big one - story design. The choices are...Fallout 3's open world, but linear ending...New Vegas's limited world design, but many varied endings....or ME2, linear world/mission design, linear ending, but numerous ways of completing said story? Are you combat oriented (ME2), or do you like to explore (F3)? Alternatively, do you like to learn about NPC'c backstories, immerse yourself in the history of the gameworld, and actually define the story itself (NV)?

I always feel like Mass effect put's you in the shoes of Humanity's best and the story is all laid out in three directions a classic a & b consequence game. Wheres Bethesda epics are as non linear as you can be in a video game. No voice actor, no mention of player given name, nothing substantial. You forge you're own path. The more and more I thought about it, the least it mattered to me if my character had a name, so much as I desire there to be a voice. Something like the diologe system that mass effect does. Wheres it has a summarized version of what he says.

You act like Mass Effect 2 is the first game to do this.

Please... please get the image of Fallout Effect out of my head.

That's not really true. Open world and no time limit don't imply non-linearity - they factor in in the free questorder and movement directions, but that's still quite far from "as non linear as you can be in a video game". The quests are nigh always set up basically as optionless/choiceless and without differing outcomes.

I'd prefer we go the route of the original Fallout, open world but story driven, with interactive and dynamic quests and a meaningful C&C system.

Apples and Oranges.