On the negative side, I'm not sure I like the seeming emphasis on Bethesda deciding what's best for me, with the Radiant Story stuff; I can't help but feel that level of reactiveness will be intrusive rather than immersive. Perhaps GI's choice of words isn't doing the system justice...
Not sure I understand this complaint... After all, didn't Bethesda also decide what's best for you in previous games? If anything, Bethesda's influence will be
less in Skyrim than it was in Morrowind and Oblivion, given that how some quests are implemented in Skyrim will be somewhat tailored to your character's history, rather than just one-size-fits-all regardless of character history.
The issue here, I think, is one they are already aware of, and trying to keep on top of: making sure that random encounters don't get too intrusive so that you get bogged down having to deal with them, rather than things you feel are more worth your time (MQ, faction quests).
Oh, and I think our fears about level-scaling can be allayed. It mentioned ruins with enemies at a certain level, which implies there are once again places in the world not safe for low-level characters.
It's not clear that this is what the article says. Here is the bit I think you have in mind:
Radiant Story is also smart enough to know which caves and dungeons you've already visited and thus conditionalize where, for instance, a kidnapped person is being held to direct you toward a specific place you haven't been to before, populated with a specific level of enemy.
I think there are a couple of ways of reading this:
1. There are some dungeons which are populated with enemies of a fixed level. When you are faced with a random quest, Radiant Story will pick the appropriate dungeon based on your level. (The level of enemy in the dungeon is independent of you getting the quest).
2. Radiant Story will pick a dungeon you haven't been to before,
and it will populate it with a "specific level of enemy" appropriate to your character.
From what I've heard about Radiant Story, it seems like it will work the second way - but I'm sure if I'm wrong about that, someone will point it out.
It looks realistic to me. Look outside on an overcast day(got one here right now) and you will observe an extreme lack of shadows. This gives me hope that their dynamic weather is going to actually be dynamic rather than faking it.
I was also a little concerned about the discrepancy between the screenshot and the claim that everything has shadows. It's also an overcast day where I am, so I had a more careful look outside, and I think you're right. There wasn't much in the way of shadows (apart from places where there's basically no light at all, such as under a car). But trees and things like that aren't casting much of a shadow.