Fallout 3 was original, vast, engrossing. To me a follow up game would need to make significant improvements to all aspects developed and conceived in the original. My vote is for Fallout 3.
@mbrogz3000: Games like Hearthstone are generating that continuous revenue with active players putting down $50 or so to preorder packs 3 times a year. You could be right but I'm wondering how much more they will make on this game considering that half of players aren't interested in cosmetics and don't pay anything beyond what they paid for the base game. It's been selling really well considering they have 40 million players now but at some point they'll probably want to release a sequel to bring in more cash. At the moment it seems like they are focused on building a foundation, fanbase, competitive league, etc.
@pcps4xb: True, this game is nothing like TLoU. That's a horrible comparison. If you want to compare TLoU to something it's Uncharted 4: A Thief's End. The gameplay is very similar between those two games. In this game each area feels unique, each set of enemies you fight a good challenge, rewards scattered throughout, good level design, graphics, high attention to detail in all aspects of the game. Please don't compare this to TLoU because there's a companion.
@comments123: I agree actually. Like you, I can appreciate that many enjoyed this game, it's not for me though. Open world games in general can feel aimless at times. I need clear cut goals to keep me interested. I don't find it fun to walk around the sides of huge mountains looking for nothing in particular. I can see the appeal in exploring the vast, polished and detailed world they've put together, but I can only "mess around" in a game for a half hour or so before getting bored. My ideal Zelda game would be more along the lines of Link to the Past. A game that offers a challenge, all items have meaning and value, clear cut objectives but also side quests for those interested and more concisely designed.
Spectralfire0's comments