I think its a terrible game.Theres nothing to do in the game except follow the cliche plot or do random meaningless quests that have no impact on anything, the graphics are ugly as hell(yeah yeah gameplay over graphics blah blah) and theres really no reason to play it if you own daggerfall(which is good game)

anyone feel the same?

you can't hate this game because it's simply old! They didnt have the possibilities to create a game like oblivion so you can't even compare these games.

By the way what did you expect the graphics to be like on a 14 year old DOS game. Arena is no worse graphically than many other games of the same timeframe, and most were'nt even in 3D.

...

If you don't like it then don't play it.

I think it's the worse game Bethesda made. But that's quite logical being the first ES game.
I don't hate it, it even amused me for a while. After a couple of weeks it grow boring yes, and I quickly completed the main quest... but hey, it was a few weeks free entertainment.

It still has nicer countryside and (in my opinion) more living cities then any other TES game :shrug:
For the rest I think Daggerfall is better in every aspect. That doesn't make Arena a bad game, though. It just means Daggerfall is mind-numbingly awesome

Arena does have more then six save slots, and you can even name them from the saves menu! Both pretty important 'features'. But strangely, some later TES games lacked one or the other.
Yes, I'm looking at you, Daggerfall and Oblivion :stare:

Edits for clarity.

Off topic (the topic being a troll topic):
Umm, I'm pretty sure i can name my saves from the saves menu in Daggerfall..

Hey, look! A three-headed monkey!

You can name your saves in daggerfall

If you read what the post actually says, he was complaining about the fact that Daggerfall only has 6 save slots.

It's funny. This could just as easily been about Oblivion.

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do.
Actually, I'm not that fond of arena, either. Wouldn't say I hate it, but the whole no-custom-classes and EXP system is, well, vastly inferior the the class and skill system of Daggerfall.

Have you even played oblivion? I doubt it.You cant even compare oblivion and arena.Oblivion is so far out of its league it isnt even funny.Oblivion is superb(and fun), arena isnt

Its all a matter of opinion in the end, I personally have to agree with Jorm, and to be honest I really like Arena more than Oblivion, its faults can be blamed on the time, Oblivions can only be blamed on design choices and a wish for profit.

Opinions, Opinions, Opinions, bah!

No offense, but I find this post to be a bit too childish. Oblivion is not far out of anythings league. It's fun and addictive, but so are a lot of games, including Arena.
Opinions is also one thing. Everyone has one, not everyone has the same.

How can you hate a game that has a spell in it that lets you destroy/build walls?

As far as base, unmodded Elder Scrolls* games go, it's actually my favorite.

I guess with Daggerfall, Bethesda was trying for a sort of medieval life simulator, with Morrowind, they were moving in a more Ultima like direction (Smaller, but highly detailed world space, and more robust NPCs. Yes, most of them were generic, but there were still something like 200 really fleshed out NPCs, which is I think what Ultima 6 had, so including a bunch of generics just to create a more aesthetic/immersive/living-feeling world is fine), and Oblivion into a more Might and Magic style (Sort of. Quest progression is similar. Nothing else is. Oblivion's extremely odd in some regards. It's fairly easy to figure out how you feel about the first couple TES games and why. ).

Arena, though, was maybe the most genuinely freelance adventure feeling game. In some regards the way the world was detailed -- which was actually quite good. Complaints about wilderness areas not linking up properly aside, quest dungeons were excellent, the random dungeons were fairly well generated, the towns were awesome, and I'm surprised such viable-feeling randomly generated AND varied towns haven't really been done since then. The game also lent itself to these weird, emergent little moments.

I guess in some regards it also had the clearest design... process, it seems. Daggerfall tried to be a medieval life sim and Morrowind tried to be the successor to Ultima 7, but they both kind of fell short, and I think for roughly the same reason -- that being, flawed world models. Complain all you like about Morrowind's lack of NPC schedules, Daggerfall's "everyone just turns off at night and the doors lock" wasn't that much better (and stores closing at night I wouldn't call essential. If you have schedules NPCs, from a gameplay standpoint, stores that are always open but have night and day shifts work somewhat better, and lead to interesting situations where like, say, the night staff hates you, but the day staff loves you, etc.) Likewise, in both cases, they didn't quite get interactivity right. Daggerfall is missing some really important life sim aspects -- you don't need to eat or take care of your basic needs or pay taxes, and the urban element is a bit lacking -- why are there so few quests where you have to chase people through cities? Why does it stick so rigidly to quests, anyway? Shouldn't the fighters guild also pay you for taking down rogue daedra, or the knights for offing bandits? In Morrowind's case, the lack of interactivity -- and I mean, they both were lacking here, but they needed different KINDS of interactivity -- namely, if it's using the Ultima style, why don't we have Ultima 7's hyper-interactivity with the items? Why can't I make bread? There's flour. There's ovens. So why not?

And despite what the devs say, I would've liked more non-combat oriented careers in both. Why CAN'T a be an armorer by trade? There could be interesting quests to find rare armor and blueprints, for instance!

Arena didn't really have a world model. At the same time, it didn't really need it. In some regards it was simpler. In some regards not. I think that over all, though, it was a much solider, more directed, clearer end-product.

Also, as someone mentioned, you had tunnel/hole fill and wall make/wall destroy spells. These could actually end up being useful too, oddly enough. I guess it's not terrain deformation in the modern sense, but...

* Morrowind had a lot of really talented modders, and a good amount moved over to Oblivion.

When I first played Arena in the starter dungeon, I immediately thought, "Ultima Underworld clone." Even the music, which I loved, also reminded me of UW. But I can't give a free pass to the graphics due to its age. Those were terrible for a 1994 game. Luckily I played through and did learn to enjoy it. To me, it's just good dungeon crawling with a solid challenge. I think more people would like the game if the beginning wasn't so unfriendly.

With this I have to agree to some extent. (even if you could say the same thing about many other games) But I don't hate Arena, the old games are interesting because they are TES games and the world is interesting.

arena was a good good game as it was simple, no deceptive plots, or complcated missions, just get the quest, then find the item/kill the monster/escort the person and get the reward. in many regards it has a quest structure similiar to oblivion, the find -> kill -> reward system.

daggerfall is the oppersite end of the scale, so in-depth it can really stun first time players. took me ages to play well cause there was just so much! however the quests are fairly similiar again, find -> kill -> reward, except for alot of the MQ and special guilds.

morrowind was good in that aspect that it was complex enough to give a broad range and yet simple enough not to intimidate first-timers. the quests had a ton of depth with a story unfolding as you progressed through most guilds. it had a detailed and unquie landscape, and a thriving enviroment, unlike the other too.

oblivion was a let down, was too simple, short and had the old find -> kill -> reward quest all over again. while this was great for a first timer, it ruined the game for hard core RPs. The guilds were good, and had a minor continuation after the questline was finished, but its not enough in most repects.

i believe TES 5 should have a morrowind like aspect, where it can be complex for a hard core person, or simple too a fisrt timer. the questlines can finish but i want to be able to hunt random NPCs after the assassin's guild is finished, kill bandits for the FG...

well that my two cents on complexity and quests.

Never focus on what a game isn't. Focus on what it is. If what it is is good, then it's good no matter what else it might've been.

I think one of the problems I had with Oblivion was similar to a complaint I had about Daggerfall, that being that most of the quest procede in a really similar way, but Oblivion made it a lot worse. In Daggerfall, most of the quests ARE essentially "Go to dungeon, kill foozle, retrieve wingding, and return it to me." Which applies to most of the series, actually. In Oblivion's case, though, the number of quests where you had to get a character's opinion of you up before they let you help them was sort of silly, because it was pretty much every non guild quest, and that little persuasion minigame thing was fairly pointless too. Disposition's never done much in ANY TES game. Couldn't they have gotten rid of THAT instead of spears and made the quest progression a lot less silly in the process?

Whatever do you mean!? Arena is a lousy tennis game, therefore it svcks

However; if you bought the CD version, back in the day, it made an AWESOME frisbee game. Therefore, it rules.

unless your a modder......

Can't blame it for having outdated graphics, they were pretty advanced for the time.

Bad writing is inexcusable, though.