» Sat Dec 25, 2010 11:09 pm
I think Groucho summed up my sentiments almost to the letter.
I didn't buy FO3 until the GECK was released, largely because of the uncertainty as to whether the game was "good" without mods, and whether mods were even possible. I went out and picked it up about a day after the GECK became available.
I bought OB based on my opinions about MW, was initially very impressed with the graphics and animated grass, etc., but quickly found myself wondering why I wasn't enjoying it. The basic gameplay was just "wrong" from a couple of perspectives. Mods were able to at least partially fix OB's problems, or at least mask the inherent flaws with enough unaffected content that I could mostly ignore the problems. Without it, I'd have sold the game after about a week or two, and given up on Bethesda until presented with strong evidence that they had fixed the problem in the next game.
FO3 partially fixed some of the worst problems, but only partially. I somewhat enjoyed FO3 for a brief time before getting bored with it, for many of the same reasons as OB. After picking up and playing the original FO, I realized how much the "remake" had given up in terms of "consequences" and "risk". The Bethesda sequel game is flashy and "entertaining", and the interface is far less awkward and annoying, but the underlying sense of challenge (and not just in terms of combat) comes up lacking in many respects, compared to the old games. It's more than half FPS, as opposed to a RPG. Challenge does not equal Hitpoints, sorry.
With Skyrim, I'm hearing all sorts of stuff which MAY be good, or MAY be more of exactly what annoyed me in OB, and I'm concerned. Without a CS, I WILL NOT RISK IT unless enough of the forum posters whose opinions I respect and agree with give it a "thumbs up" after a few weeks of play. Even if they do, I may decide to wait a year or two until it hits the "discout rack" at $19.95, a fate which the lack of a CS would almost certainly hasten.