I'd like to hear an argument against dragons that:

1. Isn't circular ("they svck because they're dragons")
2. Isn't cliche (calling dragons "cliche" is cliche per se)
3. Doesn't involve Dungeons and Dragons (D&D is not the issue here and dragons were a concept long before that game was created)

But I don't think I'm going to hear such an argument.

And if you want a game that caters to every one of your delicate and particular needs, go learn to make such a game. And, during development, make absolutely sure you set up a forum for user input. And then try to meet every person's needs. Yeah. Go do that.

Of corse it was. Tamriel was a world that the developers used for their D&D games. This quote I found on the Elder Scrolls.com in the Archives
"The world used for Arena was Tamriel, the fantasy world created by a few members of the staff for use in their weekly D&D campaign."

Who would have thought? In that case, if you even include D&D in your negative post, "your argument is invalid" automatically, literally. It's like saying TES was never supposed to be what it was in the very beginning.

Thanks for sharing the info :goodjob: .

Some more posts have been removed from this thread.

Here's an idea - maybe find a way to disagree with someone in a manner that isn't disrespectful or insulting, and we won't have to intervene. This may be a shock, but people are going to have very different opinions about things. Many will not mesh with your own opinions. Either deal with those differences in a respectful and civil manner - or not at all.

Hey now, I'm not *that* snarky! You guys know I love ya.

If your skin-deep anolysis of the games content is enough to make you pass on it, then by all means fly away, I can't even amass the energy to educate you on any of the multitude of ways Skyrim will exceed previous games. Because this is stuff you should have done yourself, instead of jumping the gun after 2 months of being out of the loop. Well it was nice of you to drop by and let us know how you feel, please do not research Skyrim any further, there's danger it might shame you to your very core, at least I hope it does.

#Winning

If I'm wrong, I apologize, but I think we can probably guess what kind of person the OP is when he says he will not PAY for the game, but not that he won't PLAY the game.

Developers owe you nothing. There were massive discussion topics, but they were just that- fan-driven, fan-built discussion, with occasional developer insights (they ARE people too, you know).

People wanted dual-wielding. They got it. People wanted a more politically charged Main Quest, more like Morrowind's. Recent evidence indicates they got it. People wanted hand-built landscapes rather than pre-generated stuff in Oblivion (which I still think was beautiful, if a little bland). They got it.

Dragons have ALWAYS been in TES. It's in the lore. But they're different, just like Dwarves are not Dwarves, they're Dwemer.

blasphemy

This is all a bit dramatic. If you don`t fancy the look of the game, then don`t get it. No big problem.

Bear in mind there is still a LOT we don`t know about Skyrim, so making a pre conceived judgement based on the very short trailer is, well, a knee jerk reaction at the least.

If you hate the idea of Dragons in a TES game then pretend they are gigantic, flame breathing, Cliff Racers <_<

The butthurt is strong with this one...

http://levistey0.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/sloth_shades.gif

And if the OP doesn't believe SkyShadowing go ask M'aiq!

And that's another thing, people were asking for dragons, thus our beloved M'aiq talking about it!

But they are so much more than dragons!

I partially thought about the same thing too really! "Dragons? What? Again? Like all the other 50 games that are gonna come out this year?" but then I read the lore and WOW I was amazed! Akatosh? Jills? Akavir? Dragon Breaks? It's amazing!
And fine you might find them in D&D-ish locations but they are so much different!

Boo hoo :sadvaultboy:

If you want to make your own game, then go out and make it. Bethesda takes the opinions and viewpoints of their games into consideration, but they do not let the fans make the games. If they did that, they'd wind up with a huge mess of a game that appeals to only a select few and wouldn't sell worth crap.

You aren't even a fan of the series. You consider the last two games "failures?" Completely and UTTERLY ridiculous. If you like the series, you'll play Skyrim because you'll realize that it's an Elder Scrolls game and even at its worst it will be a fantastic game, but that Skyrim will not be its worst but will be great and an improvement over Oblivion. If not, then I'm sorry that you can't get over yourself.

Goddreaming, if I recall correctly I got into a debate or two with you in the suggestion threads way back when, because all you ever seemed to suggest was what I considered "TES V: The Sims," a.k.a. you wanted the player to do things that seemed unnecessary to me like building a house brick by brick, chopping wood, and so on. Skyrim (thankfully) doesn't appear to have become exactly what you wanted however you might be happy to know that Bethesda HAS included menial activities the player can do, including woodworking and iirc forging. If you can stop vomiting for a few seconds when you watch the trailer (you are literally getting sick after all), you can even see some woodworking going on for yourself.

I suggest you read up on the game OP. It's looking to be the best Elder Scrolls yet.

Obviously, you judged the game based off of little information. We all do it sometimes, its not a big deal. The reality is, no one has played it yet. Don't start bashing it yet. At least wait till its out.

Unnecessary? All true heroes build houses instead of doing that useless heroic stuff!
Just imagine what would have happened if the Nerevearine fought Dagoth Ur instead of building New Ebonheart alone, brick by brick!

In this thread I see two standpoints. 1: the people who are worried that Skyrim will feel generic and bland and 2: the ones who think Bethesda is making the right choices.
I can agree with those with opinion 1. OB was quite bland true, but it was still a great game. It had amazing graphic for it's size and time and a great replay value.
I mostly agree with opinion 2. Bethesda is changing the series as they go. They don't do it simply as a cash-in like Call of Duty. Todd have also stated that they are trying to give the world and all it's inhabbitants a unique feel and twist. The dragons is not simply a creature it seems: They are very intelligent, have a sacred place in the empire, and most importantly: they don't just breath fire. They use their own type of magic to create fire and their other abilities, something only a handfull off mortals can learn to do. The dragons have been in the lore of TES for quite a while too. If memory serves you could/would encounter dragonlings in Daggerfall and a dragon in Redguard. Not to mention the dragons mantioned in books. The katana Goldbrand is also supposed to be forged by dragons.
In the end I just wonder how you can call Skyrim black, white and grey from a 2-3 min trailer. And from some of the pictures I would say that it will be at least as diverse as MW.
Last I would say that we should not stop people from making these threads. If only those who liked the new info posted threads we would become yesmen, and I'm all for constructive criticism.

Technically, TES is a big Sims game played by the Godhead's dream

And yea you are right! There is Minecraft for doing this sort of stuff! But hey they still listened! We are still going to have some of these things (cooking etc.), so it would immerse things but not too much, not like building a house build by brick etc. would do!

EDIT:
@Akul: +1 xD

Well obviously you are not talking for everyone because Beth seem to do a lot to my liking!

To me as well. :foodndrink:

:bowdown:

Good, now, would you like compensation in the form of a cookie? :cookie:

I've got to admit that I'm getting encreasingly skeptical about Skyrim being something I'll enjoy, but it's too early, and there's too little info yet, to make a firm judgement on it.

While I don't want "another Morrowind", I would like to see some of the same sense of "learning by doing" and "overcoming failure" which that game featured. Even if the starting difficulty in MW leaned toward the "excessive" side in several respects, the "auto-success" at everything in OB was NOT to my liking, and completely took the "game" out of the game for me. It looks more and more like Skyrim will use the same underlying "succes/failure" philosophy as Oblivion (which means "success only"), rather than that of Morrowind (mostly failure, until you improve), or what I REALLY want: something in between.

Dragons have been on the fringe of the series almost from the start, if not right at it, and I'm kind of "underwhelmed" by the OP's rant on the topic. I just seriously hope that the devs don't "devalue" them the same way that was done with Supermutants between FO an FO3, where they went from being tough to deal with at low levels in the original to being used as generic "pushover" opponents at low levels in the later game, yet for some unfathomable reason became a real threat when you reached higher levels.

The apparent or possible removal of Attributes in Skyrim, and the expected heavy reliance on Perks, could be either a good or a bad thing, depending on how it's done. From the way they were mishandled in OB (auto-perks, some of which were absurdly powerful and went from nothing to "extreme" in one skill point), and their only marginally better handling in FO3, I'm not holding my breath in expectation of Bethesda getting it "right" this next time around.

I've been posting suggestions for a lot longer than the OP (4 years?), and I'd be amazed if ANYTHING I said had any impact on the developers, or if any of them ever even read my posts. The most I can hope to do is to try to "edge" the general concensus of opinion a shade in the direction of "compromise" between the "newer" FPS/rpg in OB (and FO3) and the "older" RPG/fps gameplay style in MW (and the original FO).

The OP's remarks about graphics don't make a lot of sense to me, as I wouldn't expect or want a bunch of rocks in a field of snow to be "multi-colored". Graphical quality will be what it will be, and I certainly won't complain if it looks fantastic, as long as it doesn't detract from everything else and that's about as "deep" as the game goes. Personally, I'd have much preferred to see Black Marsh, Elsweyr, or Valenwood, or perhaps the Summerset Isles instead, but since they're making Skyrim, a "totally unique" and "fantastic" setting doesn't make much sense. A mix of familiar and unfamiliar creatures was found in the previous games, so as long as it's not ALL just "generic fantasy" creatures, I'm willing to accept it.

I'll probably end up buying the game sooner or later anyway, regardless of what it's like, but the price and time will probably be heavily affected. If I read a lot of good comments by some of the posters I agree with, after the game's been out for a few weeks, I might pick it up. If all I hear is how great the combat and graphics are, then I'll probably wait about a year or three until a "GoTY" edition with all of the expansions comes out for $19.99, and modders have turned it into something that I consider "worth playing". If, like OB, a lot of the issues I have with it are inherent in the underlying game mechanics, and can't be changed, only "covered up" in places, then I may not bother even then.

It's really frustrating that people associate good graphics with poor gameplay like the OP, here. It's like (by their logic) the better art I do, the worse I, the 3D artist, will make a game. It's all done by completely different teams!

I'm also frustrated by the OP's hypocrisy. Did you know that Morrowind was one of the most visually enhanced RPG on the market when it came out? A lot of the Elder Scrolls visual appeal come from the attention to detail. How much filled a room is, etc. Did that prevent the game from being awesome? There's no need to be the film snob "I think different from the mass" type.

Let me guess, if I say that I loved Oblivion more-so than Morrowind, you're going to brand me as a graphics-!@#$, aren't you?

Sure, you might've had a lot of input to give out to Bethesda, but so did thousands of other people. At the end of the day, it's THEIR choice to make the game how they feel it should be otherwise we risk having an awful game. How often do fans THINK they know what they want?

:o

Yes! I think we win.