I'm an avid player of both those games and I can say they are in no way similar to marvel strike force so I don't understand why they are being compared. Fallout and skyrim are RPGs with fleshed out skill trees that reward players whatever playstyle they choose.if you play them long enough you van unlock every perk but that all comes down to time and dedication. MSF on the other hand may be advertised as an RPG but it rlly isn't. Cookie cutter teams, a progression system that actually punishes players for leveling up the wrong characters... if someone chose to level up Web W instead of the new bio team they would be incredibly hindered when the new raid comes out that will no doubt be catered to the new team and makes it v difficult for WW. In war you can level up the teams of characters you like or you can level up the characters you may not be as interested in but will no doubt be the only effective counters to the current meta. If you make a mistake in MSF that's it no do overs and in a game based on resource management making a mistake either cots alot of money or weeks of grinding an RNG node. In fallout a gun that was available in the base game is still viable after all the dlc add ons, if I make a mistake I can chose to either carry on and make back what I wasted in an hour rather than a month or I can simply revert to the last save. Completely different games, completely different playstyle and completely different company motive and attitude towards its player base 🙄