Fallout >> Dragon Age.
I don't know how could they even compare Dragon Age with Baldur's Gate and Fallout. o_O
After playing 4-5 days worth of Dragon Age, I realised that it's just another version of Diablo II, with a storyline. Lots of hack/slash and it's very, very linear. Means that there's ONLY one direction to go in the game.
Of course, there are OPTIONS to choose, but it doesn't have any bearing on the ending. Unlike Fallout, where almost every major decision you make affects the ending totally.
I think I'm biased coz of Fallout. (I mean the 1st and 2nd, the 3rd one really sucks)
"If you consider yourself a fan of role-playing games, but you've never played Fallout, then you should be completely ashamed of yourself, you horrible person. Go sit in the corner!"
After/When/If I finish Dragon Age, I don't think I'll be playing games (I think also coz I've grown outta playing games), unless a game which is as good or better than Fallout, is created.
I've played it four times and each time a different outcome. It's been rumoured there are 21 totally different ways to go. Man, I don't have that much time k k =(
Now that I'm old er , I still wish to install and play it again when I have the chance.
Taken from gamespot.com:
"One of the great things about Fallout is how it lets you play as any number of completely different character types, depending on your decisions during character creation. You can play as an expert marksman or as a brutish close-range fighter. You can be exceptionally strong but incredibly stupid to the point where you can't even coherently respond to other characters in the game (but boy, can you beat them up). You can also play as a brilliant and charismatic diplomat and talk your way out of even the most dangerous situations. Though it isn't easy, it's possible to finish Fallout without ever getting into a single fight. Also, you can play as a sneaky character and get your way by picking locks, stealing, conniving, and so forth. The game offers unique rewards for all these approaches and for shades in between."
Yes, you CAN finish the game without ever needing a single weapon drawn.
So, there's one thing I still don't understand.
How can a 1997 game, be so much, much more 'advanced' than a game made in 2009? Of course, do not compare the graphics. Nowadays games focus TOO much on graphics till there's little/no effort put into the gameplay.
But hey, this isn't just my opinion. In fact, it IS a fact. Check any gaming website on the internet. Gamespot, IGN, VGCharts, just to name a few.
Even the Executive Editor agrees!
'If you got me at gunpoint and made me pick my single all-time favorite game, I'd probably blurt out "Fallout."'So, ppl, I have to say, I've had the honour of playing the best game of all time.
Have you?
