BRIAN ASHCRAFT, IS AN IDIOT

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:52 am

He is a blog writer. Should be self explanatory.

Every once in a while there's increasingly idiotic and controversial topic at Kotaku. They make money from the traffic, so by sharing this, all you do is to help generate them more revenue. Don't like them? Don't share them.
User avatar
Chris Jones
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 3:11 am

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:10 am

Look, guys, I have a lot of beefs against Skyrim.
But comparing it to Zelda? ZELDA????? I hate the Zelda games, they have the most uninspired character design I've ever seen in any videogame ever, and they're basically kid's games. I never understood why did Zelda ever deserve any popularity, but then again, I pretty much wonder the same thing about any Nintendo mascotte.
User avatar
Alycia Leann grace
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:07 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:04 pm

Look, guys, I have a lot of beefs against Skyrim.
But comparing it to Zelda? ZELDA????? I hate the Zelda games, they have the most uninspired character design I've ever seen in any videogame ever, and they're basically kid's games. I never understood why did Zelda ever deserve any popularity, but then again, I pretty much wonder the same thing about any Nintendo mascotte.

You either like it or you don't I guess. Nothing you can really do about that.
User avatar
DeeD
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:50 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:17 am

Skyrim is painfully linear and forces the player to perform very specific series of steps in the correct sequence. Can you bypass any stage of the main quest?

Yes, if you advance sufficiently the civil war questline, you don't need (or even can!) do a peace conference near the end of the main quest. Also, if you do the peace conference first it changes what you need to do in the civil war questline depending on how you handled it :P
User avatar
Sakura Haruno
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:23 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:28 pm

Yes, if you advance sufficiently the civil war questline, you don't need (or even can!) do a peace conference near the end of the main quest. Also, if you do the peace conference first it changes what you need to do in the civil war questline depending on how you handled it :P


And how is that relevant to http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Main_Quest? I did mention that the civil war is the only questline where you can make a modicum of choices. You can't skip capturing the Dragon or find a way to bypass Balgruf and capture him yourself.
User avatar
Marlo Stanfield
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:00 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:18 am

Eh, Zelda's still awesome and so is Skyrim. I don't know why anybody wouldn't want to own both.

User avatar
Kay O'Hara
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:04 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:18 am

I'm an idiot because I chose #3! xD
(conclusion further below, for those who are too lazy to read that much :thumbsup: )

Seriously now, I think the article has a point. despite all the pros and cons for and against Zelda/Skyrim, if you come to think about it, Skyrim could have a wider variety in foes and especially in boss fights. But that was already the same in Oblivion. Did this make Oblivion a bad game? No. And that's exactly the same with Skyrim. You can have a perfectly fine fantasy lore experience with Skyrim for hours and hours, you can lose yourself in the world and the books and so on. If the game does not challenge you enough, there is still the difficulty to adjust. And if the repetitive battles really are an issue, then go play dark souls. It's so simple, why flaming about something when you have the freedom to go play something/somewhere else? :yes:

But I think TES does not need quick time events, which is a common tool for "epic" boss fights in other action/adventure games. Now this would really be "go there and click the blue button, now come back and click the red button, now HAMMER the green button until your controller meets the flying spaghetti monster!" Instead, you are free to chose: Set the enemy on fire and hack away with the sword, summoning helpers and shoot from far away with the bow, use heavy magic and eat heavy damage, and so on and so forth, you all know the game and it's possibilites. How epic is that?

Also, these "epic" moments have an unepic repetition value: If you know the boss, it's (usually) easy to take him/her/it out. Where's the fun in that? I've played quite a few action/adventures and RPG's, and for me it comes down to the depth of my personal playing experience or the intensity of the gameplay experience. For example, God of War - for me - was simply fun to play (besides the cool plot) and thus had a replay value, which it needed since it's not so long. So that's what I mean by intensity of gameplay experience - basically how fun it is to execute the commands which make you advance in the game. The other thing is, that after playing a lot of titles (in every genre), you get spoiled. I for my part only touch the top games or indie productions. Everything else is like "seen it, been there, done that....lame-o!". And that's why I like games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion and now Skyrim so much: I can lose myself in the beautifully vast landscapes and do what I please when I please in the order I please. No more "oh you forgot to pick that magic stone up? You can't complete the game with 100%? well, it's gone now, you've had your chance! what, how you could have known that? well, buy the freaking guide, lol!" (I know these things don't happen too often, but still, some of the older/ more experienced ones of you might know this feeling ;) ). Also, I can specialize my character and have to live with the consequences. Many other RPGs only provide little variety, and when you reach end game levels, it very often comes down to one set of equipment, one ultimate limit break, one configuration of your stats, etc.

Conclusion:

I think Skyrim and future TES titles could use a wider variety in foes or at least in their behavior. This would provide a different way to increase the difficulty without maxing the enemies's damage output. Also, some special bossfights, maybe in the mainquest and some important/big sidequests, would not harm the game. But then these events should be scripted and only used once, otherwise it becomes a dull sensation again, like the one with the dragons (not my opinion, I have only killed two until now due to real life occupations :( ). In general, I agree to the quality over quantity point, but I certainly don't want TES to become a 20h experience.
Zelda is not better than Skyrim and Skyrim is not better than Zelda. They're both good games with different priorities on different aspects and different approaches. And yes, you can almost always learn something from other games, even if they're another genre. After all, we're way past the time where a game can only be allocated to one genre, aren't we?

After all, innovation IS very important, and I do hope that future DLCs for Skyrim will add more than just some quests!
User avatar
Connie Thomas
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:58 am

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:08 am

It's Kotaku, guys. KOTAKU. A website everyone should finally learn to ignore, so that it finally vanishes from existence.


+1
User avatar
Invasion's
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 6:09 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:24 am

If you believe Skyrim is Linear then it must be the only game you have ever played my friend.

The reason you have markins on the map, which I find a great thing, is that otherwise you would stumble across this world and maybe, get to do a few qusts in total.

The fact is, the character we are playing have a map. And EVERY quest you recieve, they mark for you, on the map, where you need to go. How hard is that to understand.
And this thing about a compass. So what?
It takes 1 minute for anyone, without anything, to find north or south, if you have some knowledge in nature and astronomy.

People on this forum have no knowledge. If you dont have high tech items you would not find your way.

We play a character, that as most in this time era, could find directions, such as North or South especially, and its not hard to find West and East when you have that knowledge is it.
And if you carry a map, and someone place a pin on it that "this is where X is". Its pretty simple to find it.

I dont get all these complains about hand holding when its actually just logical and natural steps.
It would be illogical to not have a compass or marking on a map when you are told your map is updated, as if your character would be a complete impecil for the time he lives in.

You can do whatever you want in Skyrim. There are no limits.
Thats why it is called an open game.
Again, if you think Skyrim is linear then it is the only game you have played cause you lack experience of linear games.


If you hadda said all that in two or three sentences, i'd have just written it off as fan-boy troll crap. That you did not is interesting.
User avatar
brenden casey
 
Posts: 3400
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:58 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:31 am

What is with the extremely biased polls on these forums? Abusing them polls like true politicians. :thumbsdown:
User avatar
Chris Cross Cabaret Man
 
Posts: 3301
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:33 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:11 am

First of all here's the link: http://kotaku.com/5863376/what-skyrim-could-learn-from-skyward-sword


Alright, so Brian's arguement is basically stating that when you compare Skyrim to Zelda, that Zelda is superior. I have a lot of beef with that. Here's why:

1) You can't compare two games that aren't apart of the same Genre. Zelda is a more action oritened RPG with a linear adventure, having quest picked up along the way. Skyrim, from the start, you have freedom - PURE Freedom. An RPG based around a depth of Lore and exploration that only Zelda fans could DREAM about.

2) Zelda is a another Mario-type. How many times, different ways can you save the princess? (that should be the title of the new Zelda.) Although you play a strong hero(ine)(OR Villian even, do that Zelda..) in Skyrim, the main plot in EVERY elder scrolls has been different. Never have you had to continously kill Dagon, or walk in the depths of Oblivion, or kill a Dragon in every game.

3) The Elder Scrolls carries more of a mature theme as Zelda has always been a kiddish-type of feature, made for anyone. You're basically, in lamen terms, comparing an advlts game, to a child's game. That's like comparing Left 4 Dead to Pok'e mon. Come on....

And I could probably go in to it a lot more, but I'll save the arguement. Just read the article, if you haven't, and let me know what you think. I've seen some stupid articles, but this one is biting the bullet.

Skyrim - GOTY. Who's with me on that?

::Edit:: fixed the poll.

Linearity vs Sandbox =/= child's game vs advlt's game. Not to mention Zelda games have a considerable amount of freedom usually, and many sidequests, just not as much freedom as TES games.

Likewise, your anology is just plain bad.
User avatar
Cathrine Jack
 
Posts: 3329
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:29 am

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:59 am

it definitely is a pretty bad comparison
but you can't really blame the guy for liking zelda better
reviews are just the subjective opinions of the writer
not some asbolute truth worth arguing

he doesn't like the game
you do

I don't see the big deal really
go write a review if you think it's so unfair
User avatar
Devils Cheek
 
Posts: 3561
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 10:24 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:40 am

I don't think I can really have an opinion as I haven't played a Zelda game since Super Nintendo. Guess I grew out of it, or something.
User avatar
Brian Newman
 
Posts: 3466
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:36 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:17 am

I think Dungeon's and Dragons (pen and paper) is better than Chutes and Ladders.

l2compare same genre games, lol
User avatar
Vicki Gunn
 
Posts: 3397
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:59 am

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:11 am

This article is ridiculous.

He makes the claim that there aren't enough epic moments in Skyrim, right after making the argument that there are too many epic moments in Skyrim for them to all feel epic. He needs to make his mind up.

Also, he needs to try comparing games that have at least one thing in common.
User avatar
Sammygirl
 
Posts: 3378
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 6:15 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:34 pm

Well to be honest, I agree with him saying the dragons and giants get repetitive. In fact, I chuckled when he next said he began cherishing the draugr bosses more because this was exactly my thoughts before even reading the article. I haven't played Skyward Sword but the number of different bosses he is mentioning sounds great. In Fallout 3, I wished there were more behemoth type enemies. I was hoping Bethesda would do this in Skyrim but not so much. The dragons are great, but far too many. In Fallout 3, there were 5 Behemoths, it was so exciting to encounter one. Fighting Alduin felt like fighting any other dragon. :(

Now I'm not saying Zelda is better because I havent played it obviously but there are some things Bethesda could learn, at least when it comes to bosses anyway. Imagine a huge squid like creature you have to battle off the coast of a city, or a legendary colossal troll that destroys an entire village like Alduin did Helgen, etc.. The article is a bit annoying though because he makes it seem like Bethesda doesnt know what they are doing, but I agree with some points.
User avatar
Emma Parkinson
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:53 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:49 am

And how is that relevant to http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Main_Quest? I did mention that the civil war is the only questline where you can make a modicum of choices. You can't skip capturing the Dragon or find a way to bypass Balgruf and capture him yourself.

The peace conference is a part of the main quest. You can altogether skip it through your actions in the game. Isn't that what you were asking?
User avatar
Steve Fallon
 
Posts: 3503
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 12:29 am

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:07 am

I've never been a fan of Zelda games, but I do enjoy games in a similar genre, like Soul Reaver and Darksiders. That said, comparing Zelda and Skyrim is the same as those that compared Darksiders to God of War. Sure, they both have combat, and a few other similarities, but they are very different games. So, IMO, due to comparing the two games, yes, he is an idiot. There are two things I would like to mention though.

First, I will have to say that complaining that there are too many dragons is ridiculous. Why? Because you need 3 souls for nearly all of your dragon shouts. In 150+ hours I still have not killed enough dragons to unlock all of my shouts on my main character, who does not fast travel. Also, the dragons were quite numerous, a civilization in itself. To say that there are too many would be like saying there are too many people in Skyrim.

Second, can you play through Zelda, explore nearly every location, hit the level cap and never touch the main story? Freedom of choice.

Again, comparing the two games is poor journalism. Next week's article will probably be comparing Saints Row with Gangland. They both have gangs, right?
User avatar
Steeeph
 
Posts: 3443
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:28 am

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:27 am

Dragons were too common and too easy to be as epic as they should've been, he has a point.
User avatar
Verity Hurding
 
Posts: 3455
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:29 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:03 pm

The guy must have been paid quite a bit to write that article~
NintendoscaredofBethesda :spotted owl:

While Dragons may be common for fantasy, no one has pulled them off like Bethesda has in a videogame.
User avatar
Jerry Cox
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:21 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:40 am

It amazes me the amount of idiocy that fills Bethesda fanbois heads.

That article was no different than if you and your friend ( or mom, in your case most likely ) were sitting there talking about games and decided to compare the game he's playing to the game you're playing.

There was no "ZOMGWTFBBQSKYRIMBASHING" going on, at all. No more than it was bashing Skyward Sword ( which I happen to be playing right now instead of Skyrim because unlike Skyrim, Skyward Sword works perfectly right out of the box ).

Grow a brain and pull your head from Beth's ass OP and you won't see "conspiracies" as much.
User avatar
Celestine Stardust
 
Posts: 3390
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 11:22 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:47 am

I'm stuck at "Why would you ever compare these two games??"
User avatar
Christie Mitchell
 
Posts: 3389
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:44 pm

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:43 am

Eh, Zelda's still awesome and so is Skyrim. I don't know why anybody wouldn't want to own both.


Yeah, i gotta get myself a Wii
User avatar
Josh Dagreat
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:07 am

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 10:44 am

OP is a bigger idiot.
User avatar
Kara Payne
 
Posts: 3415
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:47 am

Post » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:10 am

Skyrim is a great game but Zelda Ocarina of time remains the greatest game i have ever played. Have not played the new one as i dont have (or will ever get) a Wii but if that game is good enough then i just may splash out on it.
User avatar
k a t e
 
Posts: 3378
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim