Changes from Oblivion to Skyrim : V - Skyrim

» Mon May 23, 2011 8:41 am

I actually enjoy Oblivions' enviroments. I liked the big forests and open plains, and the brightness of the world. It felt like it fit the land in was made for just right, Just as morrowinds' enviroment fit it, and as Skyrims' will fit it as well. Then again, I always have liked the Generic fantasy settings, so that probably made me like oblivions' world more then others, heh.

» Mon May 23, 2011 5:00 pm

But Oblivion is not a medieval game. Not even close.
I do not understand why people see a sword or a bow and then instantly go: medieval. Or why they always ignore the fantasy elements in these arguments.
First of all, Its fantasy and fantasy and medieval are not the same by a long shot.

Furthermore, the level of technology that Oblivion did have was much closer to our renessaince than our medieval times.
They have advanced glassmaking, advanced architecture and a myriad of other things that our medieval times simply lacked.

Wow man, you really have know clue what that discussion is actually about.

» Mon May 23, 2011 5:59 am

Wow man, you really have know clue what that discussion is actually about.

Enlighten me please

Constructive remember?

Oh, and you might want to actually read a thread before you go all berating on me

"By doing this it felt less unique because it looked and felt like our own human culture in europe in the dark/middle ages, and like other games set in this time period"

» Mon May 23, 2011 8:29 am

In regards to uniqueness, Oblivion had two big problems:
1. It was very generic. Not only was the environment very clean, green and plain, the quests were also predictable.
2. There was a strong sense of morality in the game (morality: principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior). All of the characters were either good (knight in shinning armor) or evil (sterotypical cartoon villain), especially the main quest. The characters were either white, or black; there were no gray areas. (The Dark Brotherhood quests were a breath of fresh air because the characters and their quests in it had gray areas, and were believable as a result.)

These two problems go hand in hand. The real world is not white and black, but full of gray areas. So in order to make characters more believable and unique, give them gray areas thus making them believable.

"The fish in the pond can only truly survive if the water is slightly murky. Clear water will be the death of them."

Agreed completely. While Oblivion did have some unique and cool things (certain dungeons had nice gimmicks to them), it was rather generic, and the quests were predictable. And I agree on the whole black/grey/white area argument you have there.

» Mon May 23, 2011 3:42 pm

I actually enjoy Oblivions' enviroments. I liked the big forests and open plains, and the brightness of the world. It felt like it fit the land in was made for just right

Agreed. I thought OB's landscapes and environ's fit the game perfectly. Those who didn't find uniqueness in it did so because that is what they wanted to find. Personally I'd get pretty bored with TES as a series if they just rereleased MW every few years with updated graphics.

I am hoping Skyrim has more diverse landscapes but that doesn't take anything away from OB.

» Mon May 23, 2011 10:16 am

What do you mean oblivion was replay able? It was not like there was much to miss on the first play through. Oblivion gave us that rather lame quest system where people did not even need to read anything. Had no role play what so ever. Talk to random npc hit 1 alot then go to the nice shiny waypoint marker on your compase. Kill mob or grab item. Return to quest giver and repeat. I hope they bring back the actual quest system from morrowind and daggerfall. I do not want another baby's first rpg like Oblivion/fallout. 1 was bad enough let alone 3 games that was a cake walk. It was less of a game and more like a long interactive movie. There was no exploring. There was no roleplay. It was just this badly made game that people who can not read loved to death. I want to be exploring the world. Finding dungeons. Spending countless hours tring to complete said quest. Not spend 60 dollars on a game I will beat in a few hours.

I've probably spent hundreds of hours, on dozens of characters, in Oblivion. A bit less in Fallout 3. And only one play of Fallout:NV, because it was so damn linear, for all that it's quest structure was more "complex" and had more "roleplay" options. I play gamesas games for the world. And the world in OB & FO3 was interesting, and open (you can just pick a direction and go!), and has plenty of space to screw around in.

(Now that I think about it, I think I've only actually finished the MQ once in OB and twice in FO3 - had to do it again for Broken Steel; most of my OB games, I don't even start the main quest, because I don't want to clutter the landscape with Oblivion Gates.)

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

» Mon May 23, 2011 4:47 pm

Oblivion's downsides are minor if that. The only thing that you could truly complain about is the massive overuse of Enemy Level Scaling and item/Quest Item Level Scaling. Hopefully that will get fixed in Skyrim to some degree which from what I've heard it's going to be more like Fallout 3.

» Mon May 23, 2011 6:05 pm

I LOVE Oblivion. It is what it is for its time and it's the game that got me back to gaming in a big way. I'll always be grateful for that. The first time I saw it at a friend's house, I had to have it. Now I'm playing Morrowind and it is what it is...slower play but I'm learning the lore. I know that technically, Skyrim will be so much better. I just think they're all the best they could be at the time they were released. I just want major bugs to be patched and I'll be happy. The animation bug got me on my first Oblivion on PS3 and now I'm playing on PC so I'll have community help this time.

» Mon May 23, 2011 5:13 am

Ican't see how you can say NV was linear and FO3 wasn't. *shrugs*

» Mon May 23, 2011 11:06 am

Ican't see how you can say NV was linear and FO3 wasn't. *shrugs*

As I mentioned, I generally ignore the MQ in OB/FO3. Since FO:NV is pretty much built entirely around it's MQ, there's not really much to do there if you "ignore" the MQ. Plus the non-scaled world the funnels you along the "one true path" for a good portion of the beginning. Much more linear than the other two games.

(edit: or to put it another way - Bethesda designs great world & not so great quests; Obsidian designs great quests, not so great world. Since I play OB & FO3 for the world...... :shrug: )

» Mon May 23, 2011 10:10 am

Second the landscape was lame just green hills with trees it was too open. I don't know how to describe it but it was too easy to go straightforward to every spot you want. There were no natural barriers that force you to skirt around and therefore exploring never felt like "wow I've never been here" but like "hey I walked half an hour but everything looks the same and I saw this spot from my starting point anyway". I never felt like an adventure it always felt the same Cyrodill was just too plain.

As beautiful as Oblivion was, I hated the fact that I could go from point A to point B with little to no obstruction. It looked wonderful but it took away a bit of the immersion. Agreed 100%.