Yeah, but the VATS system was underdeveloped, it actually made the aiming and hitting your opponents way too easy. You could say that you need to refill your points, but refilling your points is so easy.

Agreed.

I personally think that fallout 3, whilst a good to great game certainly wasn't as amazing as the originals and I think that games critics do have a sheep like mentality when its comes to reviewing hight profile releases.

simple:

Fallout 3 is a pretty bad FPS, BUT that's not the way you should play it. V.A.T.S. is essential and works like a charm.

Alpha Protocol has broken stealth gameplay AND broken TPS gameplay. In Fallout 3 you will at least see an improvement of non-VATS combat, but you definitely won't experience that in Alpha Protol. Only thing it does well are the conversations.

Which makes me think that Obsidian absolutely needs a template for their games. Copy & paste gameplay worked great in KOTOR 2, NWN2 and will work great in Fallout New Vegas.

I've actually gained a early copy from my friend who works at GameStop, I'm actually enjoying it so far. :P

It's been an on going trend amongst critics during this generation of gaming. Many games receive "rave" reviews despite their obvious flaws, they're so caught in the hype, that they become oblivious to the flaws.

Examples:

• Grand Theft Auto IV (Excellent game, but not worthy of a 98 average rating)
• Gears of War 2 (Great single-player mode and horde mode is a lot of fun, but the multi-player...)
• Modern Warfare 2
• Oblivion
• Any Halo title after the Combat Evolved
• Fable II
• Fallout 3

They're all good games, but hardly deserving of the accolades that the influx of the media give it.

Total disagree and I'm not a game critic. All those games easily deserve 90+ scores and are the best of their respective genres. (Fable 2 being the exception).

conspiracy theory rejected.

I honestly and sincerely think that Fallout 3 is the best game this generation, and deserves every accolade the media bestows upon it. I think it is an affront to list it next to such over-rated games as GTAIV and MW2, as Fallout 3 has a lower review average than either of those games, but is much better.

...also, I'd be willing to bet that in my opinion at least, Alpha Protocol will be shit ONLY WHEN compared to Fallout 3. That said, it's just a prediction. However, unless Alpha Protocol is the best game this generation, I'd be guessing right, so I think it's a pretty safe bet.

I don't mean to run down Alpha Protocol, but Fallout 3 is one of the only multiplat universally acclaimed games this generation that is loved by users and reviewers, along with Modern Warfare 1 and TOB. It is NOT in the same category as GTAIV which is generally hated by users. That means that the Fallout 3 is probably damn good, if you like it or not, and I can attest to you that it is. Unfortunately, the experience will be different for everyone due to the nature of the game, so maybe you just had a bad playthrough. My 3rd one was bad, but my 6th one was the best damn time I've ever had.

....and having recently replayed the original two games, I can safely say that they need to stay behind the shiny glass of memory and not on my hard-drive. Witty as hell, but boring as shit. My god games were so slow back in the day, lol. I have a tough time with antiquation.

...and I would probably agree with that. Just because I think GTAIV was over-rated, doesn't mean that I think it was bad. To the contrary, it was the best GTA game yet released imo, and Gears of War 2....definitely deservers AAA. MW2, while not as good as the first, again, is a great experience on consoles, AAA, Fable 2 I'd give an 85 or so, Fallout 3 best game of the generation, and Oblivion is also a pretty good game in that same genre.

...imo...some over-rated games from this gen are, imo, LBP, Halo 3, Brawl, and Assassin's Creed.

Sure, GTA IV is overrated. Never deserves a 98.

I would give it a 92, but I think an average score of 90 is fair. (+/- 10 points for the individual taste) Anyone rating it below that (80) is either lying to themself or simply never played a game that would really fit in that department.

The only game where I really don't agree with high score is LBP. Low 80s for me.

Everything else lies within +/- 5 points and some others within +/- 10, which I would say is the normal value for a margin of error (error being the average of critics OR yourself !)

Well, sir, I think we share an opinion on a great many things, according to that post.