Yeah, the Dunwich Building, that is what I was talking about. lol I realized by watching the beginning of this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4rMrMZ8YBQ

3 is a decent Bethesda game. NV is a great fallout AND Bethesda(-styled) game, having been made by some of the original Fallout crew. 3 was just really engrossing at the time, just as Oblivion was for some. I put 500 hours into 3 with its DLCs, and 700 into NV. They're wonderful games if you can get into them, but you have to know they're gonna be buggy, things are gonna break, they PROBABLY won't be playable post-ending, and so on. So, any Bethesda game mostly. The only thing is 3 sucks as an RPG really. It's got very few quests, a bunch of the skills are worthless, if you don't max one or two specific skills you're screwed, the story is pretty poor (and most of it can be skipped), etc. NV is generally a better game overall, even if it was buggier for longer.

That's it, yeah.  Creeped me the hell out.  With one of the DLC, you come back during a quest involving some kind of evil book.

It's funny that this thread has done nothing but make me want to play Fallout 4 even more.

Totally get you. But when it comes to me, I gotta finish New Vegas first ^^'

Yeah, it's really quite sad how little Fallout 3 is actual Fallout game - atmosphere is nowhere near as engrossing as in first 2 games, story and characters are much weaker, humor is almost completely absent, but probably the worst offender is the world itself - both Fallout 1 and 2 had such memorable and varied communities, something that is sorely missing in Fallout 3.

While it's still on overall fun and decent game, it is really just a Bethesda game without most of things that made Fallout 1/2 such a memorable experiences - but, as I said several times on various ocassions, when it comes to Bethesda and Fallout 3, you can't really blame them too much, they are mostly just inherently incompetent to be very nuanced (saying this as someone who's been playing their games since Daggerfall).

Much of it is down to preference. Many people like in RPGs there to be a set destination, set goal and outcome but Fallout 3 and NV made it so that you could, if you wanted, kind of ignore that. Go off on your own, explore and discover things. I guess that is the difference. I'm not fond of some open world games as to me they lack direction, yet Fallout filled that with the idea that there may always be something to discover around the corner.

its as simple as one word

choice

there is no other open world game that gives you more choice and options in terms of decision making than Fallout 3 (and New Vegas). obviously the main storyline for the most part is linear, but the 100 or so other quests in the games almost always allow you to make SOME choice

whether its choosing to help one person over another, ignoring said mission, killing those who ask for your help, etc., there's so much choice

you can do practically whatever you want in the game whenever you want. 

there's a big world to explore, there's a quirky humorous retro art design and dialogue humor that a lot of people enjoy.

also to state that Fallout 3's graphics were bad for 2008 is ludicrous, you couldn't name many other games in that period that had such excellent visuals and also had to maintain anywhere near the amount of assets in a big game world at one time

there are tons of great things about the game

I think the reality is that if you fail to find practically anything good in Fallout 3 (or New Vegas for that matter) then its plainly obvious you're not a fan of a certain part of the RPG genre. if you can't get yourself into your imagination of character then I can see how it might be hard to get absorbed into a Fallout game as so much is up to the player to decide and a described character/story isn't always mouthfed

for 2008 the graphics in Fallout 3 are actually pretty excellent. I think people are failing to have perspective here regarding the year it came out. 

just as an example I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to claim that GTA IV (also released in 2008) was anywhere near as visually advanced as Fallout 3. Star Wars Unleashed, Call of Duty, Dead Space, Saints Row 2

I'm trying to think of 2008 game releases and the ones I mentioned graphically do not appear better visually than Fallout 3 when you go back and actually play them (or watch them)

the NPC's being somewhat blocky is the only thing I can think of, and that appears to have been partially deliberate as the Fallout franchise has never went for a literally realistic vibe in visuals

FO3 is not a good game and people just like it because of the concept and it's open world with PC mods.

Quoted for truth.

PC mods were awesome as I played F3 on my PS3.