In what way?
And how is your opinion better metric than my opinion? You have data to back it up?
https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/fallout-3
https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/fallout-4
One might slice and dice this by platform, but I think there was a general consensus that 4 was not as good as 3 both in meta score and user score.
The argument has nothing to do with anybody enjoying the game, a metric that I did not mention at all in my comment, it has to do with a growing trend where Bethesda has been doing the absolute bare minimum to cash in on their fans' good will.
For some reason you believe that your opinion about the game is universally true, while the opinion on the other is personal preference.
You are just trying to prove that vanilla flavor is universally better than chocolate.
Edit: Retracting "Borderline bigotry."
Also, what if vanilla could be proven to be universally better? That’d be cool, how could one go about doing that? Probably either: eliminate the supply of chocolate world wide, or spend billions marketing vanilla... Probably lots of ways to get a universal sentiment with the right levers!
One ding in chocolate: there’s no chocolate coca-cola... or is there? I should google that :) There do seeeeeem to be more vanilla flavored mass market colas than chocolate, but that’s very much cherry picking.
A ding for vanilla, I’m not sure if it’s ever eaten alone in any meaningful way, but I dunno, I’d have to think about it more.
That's exactly my point. I haven't once conflated the two, all of your comments have.
Fallout 4 suffered from quest repetition/duplication, an emphasis on combat over other rpg driven approaches to play and a relatively low ability to effect the world as the player.
It's not a bad game per say but it's a mediocre rpg. It was arguably more disappointing given how incredible an rpg New Vegas was despite not having been finished properly.
