I think a big part of it for me was the perks. Almost none of the perks significantly change gameplay mechanics much – they’re small percentage tweaks to stats.

The firearms were pretty similar, other then the science weapons.

The game played in a pretty linear fashion, even though it was technically open-world. Not much backtracking.

I almost never stumbled across interesting things going on in the world a la Fallout. Just in cities.

None of those features individually made the Fallout series, but collectively not having them adds up.

Was pretty bug-free, which was nice.

It wasn’t awful and it did share a lot of similarities with Fallout, but it didn’t have the mixture that made Fallout “click” for me.

I would agree with the exception of the art team. I thought it was visually excellent. But yeah the gameplay and story was pretty average and not very unique.

I did really like the flying resort DLC. I forget the name now.

I found the worldbuilding and character development on par with Obsidian’s other titles, which is to say excellent. The gameplay was certainly nothing special but it was okay enough to keep me playing

I played it 3 times in a row, something I’ve never done before in my life outside of say strategy games.

One of the best rpgs of the last decade, really carried that Fallout spirit that’s been missing for so long.

Only issue is it seemed to be on a tight budget after the first act, something I’m hoping Microsoft acquisition can fix.

This is the exact reason I own and beat outer worlds.

I’m pretty sure both games have an ending where you fly into the sun, too.

I accidentally bought Wilds instead of Worlds. The best accident I’ve had!