So far, I've really yet to see any counter to the argument that Fallout 3 does everything better than it's predecessors. Instead, the self-proclaimed geniuses (whose minds can only be stimulated by the highest form of video game writing, obviously) can only point out things they don't like about Fo3. If you can't make a comparison to F1 or F2, and explain why it was better, then I guess you'll have to agree that they are even worse. I'd be fine with that because I think it's generally correct. Oh, and anything that goes..."so, by your logic..." is a poor argument. Stop using it. Just makes you look silly when your misunderstanding of the original argument leads to some ridiculous extrapolation of a point that was never made. If you can't actually prove something incorrect on it's face, you've got nothing to say.