Only 88 MBs of ram shared?:O And I thought PS3 and 360 had low ram.

If that's the case why is Oblivion far more restrictive then Morrowind, and Fallout 3 far more restrictive then Oblivion? In Oblivion all your enhancements and food/potion effects are capped very low, all the major cities now instances that have to be loaded in, where is in Morrowwind they were just part of the world. You can't even levitate or make jump spells anymore because then you might jump over a wall of a city and find there's nothing there. (Which I managed to do anyways with max Acrobatics.) You can't even kill people who are part of the main quest anymore, just knock them out. San Andreas had more freedom and variety then Oblivion and that was a damn PS2 game.

Now they're making an FPS and you're telling me they're into freedom? They're clearly into shiny graphics so people like you and them can pretend Video Games are comparable to Movies or Books as a respected artistic medium, and that Bethesda games are "masterpieces". They're decision to work on the "high-end" machines is purely an egotistical one, and has nothing to do with what they want in actual gameplay design.

The PS2 only had 32 MB of memory and the XBox had 64 MB, and when you're not dealing with the massive memory requirements of HD textures and highly detailed polygonal models you don't need that much memory. On top of this the Gamecube had hardware support for a wide variety of compression algorithms, which means that the Wii should be able to use its memory more efficiently.

Um. . . You could still make those spells BTW. And look at the size of the cities in oblivion compared to morrowind? The cities in morrorwind are like a few huts and 5 people walking around. Inside of the capital city and such you have many more buildings(much larger also) As well as more people walking around. I believe they made it so you couldnt kill main quest people because people were annoyed for a while. I rather enjoy killing random people. But to forget to reload and have my auto save get saved over? In morrorwind i was exploring and killed someone, guess what? I couldn't beat the game!

San andres had freedoms also yes. but aside from go where you want, kill who you want how much did you really have?

 Uh, where? I looked long and hard to find Jump or Levitate ANYTHING in Oblivion. There's no mention of those spells in Oblivion at the Elder Scrolls Wiki. It's not there, not without downloading some damn mod that someone else made to put it back after having it removed. The closest things you got is trying to push your acrobatics above 100 and feather, which makes you fall slower. In Morrowind one of the first things I did was find a super-jump spells and leap-frogged over a large chunk of the continent into the ocean.

The citites were plenty large for me in Morrowind, especially Vivec which I constantly got lost in. Plenty more mud huts then five in most towns, Especially in Balmora where you start.

You couldn't beat the game because you randomly killed someone you shouldn't and missed the giant pop-up to reload? Well responsibility comes with Freedom, but clearly Bethesda values their main storyline over a player's personal freedom. So they care more about "and such" than freedom.

In San Andreas the developers at least gave the players some great toys to play with in their sandbox. (If you stuck it out with their awful missions long enough.) I could hi-jack planes and sky dive over the desert, gamble tons of money at casinos, bike down a mountain, or do drive-bys in a jetpack. And Rockstar cut all that out in GTA IV and more, and set the game in a smaller area then San Andreas. Ultimately I guess they value "and such" more then freedom as well and used all that extra Hardware from the 360/PS3 for things other then expanding player freedom.

Meh, No matter how you slice it. Fallout3 and Oblivion are some of the best sandbox games around. Can we agree upon that?

I don't agree with that, because I value Sandbox games by how much crazy crap you're allowed to do, and how much personal control you have over that. I still enjoyed Morrowind a lot more then Oblivion, and a good bit more then Fallout 3.

I'll agree Fallout 3 is one the best cinematic style games in a sandbox setting out there. And despite me being a huge dick in this thread, I don't actually have a problem with people putting a lot personal value on graphics for games. There is clearly a market for on the HD consoles and high-end PC users, and for a lot of people the better graphics, and draw distances, and effects all make for more immersive experiences in game types they like. I won't lie, I enjoyed climbing hills in Fallout 3 just to see if there was anything in the distance, or the spectacle of a traversing wrecked Washington D.C. But for me personally, it's a fleeting experience, and for other people it's a lot more enriching then that.

I don't have mind that Bethesda or Rockstar want to go the cinematic route either, but just tell it as it is. They want the better hardware the HD consoles and high-end PC’s offer to make better graphics and effects and such to make their games more immersive and cinematic. That's fine, there are plenty of consumers out there who want that. The Madden series probably does better on the HD consoles because a lot of people who buy it aren't interested in playing football, but coaching their favorite football teams. Better graphics help enrich that fantasy for them as well. That's all cool with me, just don't try and tell me the companies want better hardware so they can create games with more personal freedom or because some sort of ideal to gameplay, because that's not what they're doing.

I didn't say all companies did. I said bethesda does lol.

I meant to say "those" companies instead of "the" companies, but yeah, I know what you meant.

We can agree FALLOUT IS INCREDIBLE what we cant agree on is oblivion being the same cause in reality oblivion is one of the WORST games ive ever played!