I'm not really that good at games, the Sneak mechanics are simply broken. .50 cal sniper rifle with night vision scope, high sneak with muffled and shadowed armor and a couple of magazine boosts and a couple of upgrades on rifle damage and it's a breeze. It won't find you and you can sit behind a tree a pop shots off till it drops. It never came close to detecting me.
As for dogs, rad scorpions, mole rats and most other, smaller enemies who bite or claw, just climb onto the roof of a car or a medium sized rock and they can't touch you.
Human enemies are poor at taking cover and have lousy aim, they also tend to box themselves in and open themselves up to grenade attacks and when you sneak, they just give up on finding you even if you blast their companions' heads off one by one right beside them.

Some of the flying enemies can be challenging in the beginning or in tighter quarters but when you can some more damage bonuses and sneak around; they're really nothing to be concerned about.
Robots are also mostly useless compared to New Vegas, a sentry bot there could tear you up in seconds.
For the record; I'm now playing on Very Hard, Normal was too easy. Sneak mechanics are broken, just like in Skyrim, which was also way too easy when using sneak and ranged.

Sneaking was always bad in Bethesda games; "now that I'm bending my knees, I'm invisible! Even in the light!"

Well, if you know that stealth mechanics have been broken in Bethesda games for your taste, then why do you keep using them? It's not like the game isn't giving enough other options... you could for example just max out strength and endurance from the beginning and invest nothing into perception or agility. That way you'll have yourself a great brawler that will get detected by everyone in the game world miles away! 

I used to play all games like that, but I just prefer the slow, sneaky and methodical way since many years ago. I play the same way in games like Deus Ex and Thief as well. Pickpocket, lockpicking, sneaking and  remaining undetected is the way I prefer it.
There are games where sneaking can't really be used for combat, like the Gothic series, and to a lesser extent the Thief series, you may down one enemy with a silent arrow but the rest will be relentless in trying to find you, and this game is nearly 20 years old.
Dishonored also did the stealth part really well, you had to isolate enemies and time your strikes really well and they were terrific at detecting you on higher difficulties, forcing you to come up with more creative ways to get by and open combat was often not a real option when facing some of the stronger enemies.
Even Tomb Raider did a much better job at the stealth part.
Stealth can be done really well, just gliding around unhindered and murdering everything without opposition is not doing it really well.

As for playing guns blazing; that would be even more boring in my opinion as the mechanics don't really lend themselves that well to such a style of play, a system more akin to Far Cry would be a lot more fun then, the transition between sneaking and all out shoot-out's is quite blurred and hectic and the regular shooting mechanics in Fallout games just aren't very good, the VATS system is more annoying than anything and I would much rather have them tweak the gameplay instead, VATS ruins immersion and causes a "free criticals to win" system that is almost as broken as the stealth part.

Haven't played Fallout, but I've been forced to play Witcher 3 for dozens, if not hundreds of hours.

I don't get why most people love the game so much, I personally think it's rather boring and repetitive. Just always follow the dotted path shown on the mini-map, turn on your witcher sense if you're in the center of the target circle, press the attack button if you're being attacked... And that's pretty much the whole game.

Gwent, the game in the game, is actually the best part about witcher 3.

From the information you find in the town and compound they're fine tuning the SAFE test to work as a turing test.  Fallout 3 had the GOAT test, which is indeed the same set of questions (minus the last one with only Overseer as answer) Either it's a cheeky reference to previous game, total laziness, or the people in Covenent found that old test to try and use it for their purpose. I'm thinking the latter from the information available about testing the test.

Currenlty I'm on the USS constitution, run by dementing robots. Funny stuff, yet the gameplay isn't much more than fetch missions so far (or simply bypass with high int) There is a 'moral' dilemma, side with the scavengers or satisfy my curiosity and find out what the dementing captain has in mind with all that firepower... I know it will be the latter, I set of the nuke in F3 to satify my curiosity :)

I agree with this post almost entirely. I dont understand how anyone can say Elder Scrolls and Fallout are great "open worlds" cause you write your own story, actualy no theres no story to be written, the storytelling is super simple and rudmentar all you do is literaly go from random place in your map to random place in your map killing stuf and if you feel like it you can also murder an entire setlement for no reason. I have fun playing it but thats all those games are to me, some quick fun shooting stuf and leveling up and finding some loot (wich by the way has a few problems as well, since there isnt much variety if you disconsider all the junk you get to scrap),  kinda like playing Diablo. The characters are so useless that I dont even know the names of the companions I have, they have no story and dont interact with the world at all, the onyl one I remember is Dogmeat cause hes good at bitting enemys legs and pinning them down for me.

Withcer on the other hand is a complete experience, with super imersive world and story, masterfull quest design and characters that youll remember forever, and it also have the going to random places and kiling suf in there if you want to do that for a bit.

As I said, I was pretty much forced to play the game against my own will. And because of that, I tried to play through the game in as little time as possible.

I admit that for this reason my opinion on the Witcher was negatively biased from the very start. It somewhat changed when I started playing and loving gwent; the prospect of getting more and better cards was such a huge motivation for me to proceed in the rest of the game.

I'm going to disagree with you pretty much every way possible.  Like, on a fundamental level.  Not that you're wrong about what you like but rather that your ideas about RPGs are not absolutes.

Basically, it sounds like what you're saying is that for you to enjoy an RPG, the developers have to tightly define your playstyle and tell you what choices you can make.  That's fine.  Those can be good games.  However, it's every bit as valid and, for me, enjoyable, when the developer allows you to use your imagination.  Personally, I'm not using metal armor because my character wouldn't.  I'm not using mini-guns or rocket launchers unless I'm in power armor.  I'm using non-automatic rifles.  I'm using my charisma.  I'm focusing on picking locks and hacking.  This is the character that I'm creating on my own and I'm doing it because that's what I want, not because I'm following a path laid down by the developers.  The SPECIAL chart is a guide that gives you focus but it never feels frustrating because you can't get to something that changes everything.  I think that's perfectly fine as an RPG and, honestly, pretty awesome.

For all the RPG side, the characters, the world, the story, the quests, the writting, variety, the deepness of the game, TW3, no debate , it's like comparing Hunger Games to Shutter Island, TW3 is a masterpiece, Fallout 4 a decent game

You're right. Forgot about that.