In that case, I'll give you my answer:
That's what I like about Morrowind's 'dialogue' system - it's not really a dialogue system and you'll end up imagining what you just said anyhow... (just for the record, I like Fallout's dialogues more, I just think Morrowind's one fits in Morrowind's concept perfectly - merging the two in Fallout 3 was not the... Best idea - which, obviously, means I agree with you, to a certain degree - if they want to do a 'sandbox' game, they should do it properly).
I was in the middle of writing answer along those lines when it occured to me that it's really just TES fans who's going to actually LIKE the dialogue system because of their approach to the game - that's why I rather just wrote 'it's matter of personal preferences' (how the hell did I invent the world preferations?)
But I think we'd end up in the 'personal preferences' with all of our points eventually, because it's obvious your approach is just too different from mine

I know what he means, but it's hard to put into words adequately. Still, I'll try.
If the game had been just "a game set in the Fallout universe", then it would have been fine. However, the problem is that it's "a game meant to lift the huge legacy of Fallout 1 and 2", and that puts somewhat higher demands on the game.
In other words, on its own, the game is fine. But as the third installment in the series that is Fallout, the game fails. Now, I understand that, to a certain degree, this is absolutely illogical. It is, however, also very human, and I understand his argument perfectly.
It's like I feel about Star Wars 1-3, that is, the three latest of the Star Wars movies. Had they been on their own, I'm sure I would have loved them. However, they are not on their own. They too are trying to lift a huge legacy, and as such, I think they fail miserably. This is why I've never seen any of them more than once, as opposed to the three original movies, which I have seen countless times each.

All they had to do was change the name and they would have gotten just that.
They could have called it The Elder Scrolls: Fallout

I'm uncertain as to whether you are mocking my argument, or agreeing with it :-/

I agree with it, it would have been better if they gave it a different name, and not made it part of the same world.

I found the game devoid of things to do. It's a wasteland, so I can understand that part, but it's still not very exciting.

Acutally i didn't miss anything like lush forests etc. It was done pretty good compared to some other games.
And what did you expect from a barren wasteland?
VATS is something done really bad. Not real time, not turn based, not invulnerable, just less damage. And then the camera.. sometimes it showed you your character like 10 seconds while the enemy was running towards you, and then it went back to normal the moment he was hitting you, so couldn't avoid the (now 100% again) damage.
Also.. bugs.
Irradition was a joke anyways. There is only one place where it matters, and there it is just because of bad design: Rivet City, the water. All other placers are either way too irradiated (one place, to be accurate), so you won't go there, and besides that you can play through the whole game without ever using Rad-Away etc.
And the ending yeah. I mean, he actual gets the G.E.C.K for you, despite that it might be possible to get it yourself (not sure, but you can get pretty far in it..). But then hitting that button..
And why do you have to fight the Colonel? I didn't want to kill anybody, of course, (i usually end up playing good, even i wanted to be evil...), and so did he. Still, i have to fight him?
It was way to easy (played it on hard or whatever was the hardest). It was a bit difficult when i ran out of Vault 101 and met some Super Mutants when just running around..but later.. no. I ended up not even using VATS later in the game. Heck, i didn't even use rifles etc, i just ran in and stabbed them with my Sword (Shishkebab).
And the level pacing..and they dumbed down Karma (title is linked to level, so as soon as you have +250/-250, it doesn't matter if you help to save the world a dozen times, people won't think different of you..).
I liked the radio, both main radio stations. Especially that he talks about what you have done etc. But he could have used some more different sentences when he is not talking about your recent actions. And more songs.
So you meet every special group (Mutants, BoS, Enclave) way too early, so there is nothing left do discover later..
You couldn't join them, which was one thing i always wanted (sure, you are a BoS member in Tactics, but thats different from what it would be being it in the main series..)..
To sum it up, as i wanted to go the bed about 2 hours ago:
It was a good game, especially when i compare it to Oblivion. It just didn't meet the high expectations everyone head (not like Bethesda would have wanted it any other way..). Its something around 70/100 or so. Not that many bugs, better pacing etc..80-90/100.

I really liked the game despite its flaws, but I must agree it shouldn't be awarded much. Probably those that rated it 95 didn't play through the end.

Fallout 3 needs more dancing.

Yeah you definitely said it how I meant to say it.
I enjoy it as a game on it's own. It's just that the game is fouled whenever I realize that I'm playing a Fallout.
It puts a bitter taste in my mouth.

This is *really* awesome.

Bethesda had the misfortune of having to actually make a game that would exist in the real world rather then the perfect game that exists in every fan's mind.

Expectations were hardly that high, Fallout 1+2 were hardly flawless after all. The idea that there are groups of rabid fans expecting a perfect Van Buren-esque fallout sequel is quite frankly bullshit.

You seem to have never visited NMA.