Let me just say this. I haven't read half of the topic (Because I'm stressed for time), but I do want to say this before I forget:
To the Topic Creator,
This exact complaint comes to mind when Fallout 3 was released. The people who have played the previous installment, in this case is DD, complain that the game is terrible in comparison. But that's exactly what you're doing wrong. Comparing it to DD. DD has been so long ago, that a lot, if not everything, has to change. The game-player base has changed utterly and completely. You cannot make the same exact game, gameplay wise, 10 years later if they want the game to sell. It just won't. Since it is so long ago, the best they can do is create as many allusions and likeness to the previous installment as they can, and hope the players understand the reason for the drastic changes. You, as a player, has to look at the game as a whole, not as a sequel, but as an independant game that is similar to the game it takes its name after.
Now I won't deny that I was just like you, except for Fallout 3. I compared it to Fallout 1/2 in every situation I could, and I didn't like it either. But when I took the name Fallout 3 away from it, and imagined it as a new game that has a similar storyline (Hard to do, I know), I fully appreciated the game for what it was. You need to do the same.
Nuff from me.
I've loved Fallout 1, 2, and 3.
All were great games during their era and solidify this RPG series as one of the best RPG series around, if you ask me.
It probably helps that I like most styles of RPG's and action-RPG's, regardless of their control method -- click-and-point RPG's (think Diablo, BG2, Divine Divinity) and direct control style of RPG's (think Oblivion and Fallout 3). Some games, even allow you to decide whether to use WSAD/cursors for direct movement or to just use the mouse to click-and-point to move around -- think Sacred 2 or Guild Wars.
Probably, the two genre of games I play most are RPG and FPS.
