Hello everyone

First of all a bit about myself- I am 44 years old, an old gamer since age 11 who cut my teeth on hand-moderated Play-By-Mail games (Siernost), Dungeons and Dragons et al. and the miracles that were squeezed into the ZX Spectrum. I've been around. I wrote the definitive guide to Velnor's Lair- remember that? Didn't think so....

Now a quick assertion on the named games in the topic:

Morrowind- 10/10 for atmosphere and setting, 8/10 for challenge (10=Myst), 9/10 for multiple options and complexity, 7/10 for graphics and gameplay, 6/10 for interface.
Oblivion- 7/10 for atmosphere and setting (shivering isles was better), 5/10 for challenge (finished it whilst still low enough to fight scamps in Mankor's paradise), 7/10 for multiple options and complexity, 9/10 for graphics and gameplay, 10/10 for interface.
Skyrim- 9/10 for atmosphere and setting, 7/10 for challenge, 5/10 for multiple options and complexity, 10/10 for graphics and gameplay, 5/10 for interface.

What do I mean by all of this?

Simple- Skyrim is breathtakingly beautiful, atmospheric and absorbing- but shallow with respect to depth and complexity of the actual story- you're on railroad tracks with map locations for a fast exit and into the showers before having a chance to fully engage with this. And the interface svcks- Oblivion had it right- can we go back to that please?
Morrowind, for its time, was also beautiful, atmospheric and absorbing, but had the added advantage of more complex choice of subjects to talk about, had no real 'map' of how you completed the main quest, gave you options which led to failure (ie challenge)
Oblivion had its spoon-feeding mapping and quest guidance, but some of the side quests were quite a challenge and there were no-win situations. That said it had very little fantasy feel to it- yes there was magic and monsters, but the world was orderly and late medieval- no silt striders and, until shivering isles, no bizarre and unfamiliar flora.

My perfect 10 RPG would have puzzles that evolve and test the gamer- not switches lights and knobs but the need to get on the right side of NPC 'A', the wrong side of NPC 'B' and trick NPC 'C' just when they're about to try a double cross involving the first two but, and here's the catch- WITHOUT THE INTERFACE TELLING YOU TO DO IT!!! When planting a stolen item to stitch up a snitch in Oblivion, the NPC actually tells you to put it in her cupboard. The games get a 15 rating. Let's see some intelligence being needed to do these games. Those people who do not like the thrill of puzzling things out can always find someone on the internet to spell it out for them...

My perfect 10 RPG would have real role playing. Characters would, in addition to skills stats, have personality traits which would inform conversation choice, actions and possible options- with only a gentle shift permissable so that a paladin would not suddenly start murdering for money. Players would have to work at their evil side before being able to butcher small children in an orphanage or beat up their spouse out of jealousy. NPCs would respond differently to differently styled characters. Evil would really be evil and not just the opposite team and characters will have combinations which offer a naturalistic balance between the two (ie the christian who seeks revenge, the muslim who subjugates the poor, the buddhist who only respects his own life etc).

My perfect 10 RPG would have complex options for characters both in terms of conversation and in what they do with their wealth. Every game in the series has had its economy skewed by characters hobbling out under the weight of dwarven artefacts to sell for ridiculous prices. When a tower or dungeon is cleared, there is nothing the character can do to turn this into a claim or, in a feudal system, earn tenancy for it. Buying houses is all very well- but the medieval norm for wealthy characters having just made good was to build new.

My perfect 10 RPG would allow characters to own slaves, hire mercenaries, impose rent on tenants, receive service from serfs. You would not just get married but have children and raise a dynasty. Maybe an affair with the maid or stable boy on the side. In other words- all those things wealthy adventurers in medieval society could do if they chose.

My perfect 10 RPG would be authentic and not coddle the 21st Century liberal mind.

The Elder Scrolls, given all that, have come the closest so far to delivering a perfect 10 RPG. Theoretically, you would need something like WOW with decent graphics and no spoilers for true role-playing, but that assumes you are not online with people who just want to use MMORPGS for six (which is a percentage in single figures).

Anyway, enough waffle from me (the pills! the pills!)

Thanks for reading and not paging down






Like you just did.

Rob Miles
Poole, UK

edited to stop the flaming which was getting very personal

I totally agree.
I'm a wow player.
You have just been CONTRADICTED!

Have you not played the Fallout series? Most of the character interactions you mention are covered.

I strongly agree with your opinions about TES after Dsggerfall. But the things you propose, altho' fantastic, are extremely difficult to pull off especially if you want contemporary graphical fidelity.

That said, why don't you look into some MUDs? After all, you don't need graphics to have a good time.

What, I don't even...

http://i.qkme.me/1ql7.jpg

Why doesn't somebody tell the game companies this. They go and push graphics farther and farther but leave the game play and storytelling in the dirt.

This

This man has everything correct in my view! I never even finished Skyrim because of how terrible the role playing aspect is and the stupid decisions for how mages work.

skyrim svcks, spend less time on looks and more time on the game. Try to make it more complex, spend less money on useless ads, love the game more than the money.

ps, the only reason i came on this forum today was because i wanted to see if they patched anything of use, looks like no. guess im screwed on the xbox

To be fair I think Nintendo get this, they may offer some gimmicky 3D stuff on the gameboy thingy wotsit but they have always delivered quality gameplay with some pretty basic graphics. look at the success of the Wii, Loads of their best sellers rely on avatars that don't even have arms

Hmmm. The problem with poor/non graphical games is they represent a step backwards from the Asimovian/Huxleyesque view of how technology will take us over and become our masters without us realising it.

It stands to reason that there will come a time when we will reject reality in favour of computer generated fantasy. From cradle to grave we will plug ourselves into our whole-body sensor suits (or just switch on the simulation implant in our brains) and live the life we choose instead of the one birth/education/predestiny has landed us with. We will, in effect, voluntarily and cheerfully plug ourselves into The Matrix.

And, yes, most people will use this for six.

Anyway, suffice it to say I do like Skyrim for its sensual feel. I just wish such a gift to the progression of fantasy rpg had the depth to go with it and gave us the opportunity to live the life of a viking advlt to the full without typecasting us as ourselves and without restricting our progress to several easy quest lines that it is almost impossible to miss. Leadership of the companions AND the mages college after just one major questline in each? That is a step backwards from Oblivion.

I do like Skyrim. I just wish it didn't rush the first run through so much. Only by deliberately avoiding the main quest line was it possible to avoid early completion for you never know how much there is until you get to the end. And it did, like Oblivion, end very quickly.

Can I be brutally honest? You're not going to get 100% perfection (10 rating) from a commercial business. Their passion has a cutoff point: The paycheck. It's up to the modders, the volunteers, those whose passion goes beyond the paycheck. That's not a knock against Bethesda. It's the reality of capitalism. But Bethesda (and Cryptic to a certain extent) are opening up opportunities for volunteer modders to contribute to their hearts' content.

Your ratings are interesting, but quite subjective. I give Skyrim higher ratings, but agree with the complexity rating. It's too simple in the intellect department. But again, maybe some third-party modding can rectify that issue.

Edited to add:

<-- 41 y/o here. Played table top D&D. Favorite RPG of the past is Bard's Tale on C-64.

This.

To the OP: You're right in many things. Beth as we know tried once again to bring TES to a larger audience and that, of course, has a double edge sword.

Morrowind above all.

As far as I'm concerned the only perfect RPG was Final Fantasy X. Amazing characters, amazing story, tons to do.

Games that came close to being perfect are Knights of the Old Republic and Morrowind.


Skyrim's graphics are good, but the storyline is uninteresting-- really Dragonborn? how cliche can you get, and the interface is GOD awful. Skyrim's interface is probably the worst of any rpg I've played. When Morrowind was made gaming wasn't nearly as popular as it is now. Bethesda is forced to appeal to the lowest common denominator and so they've dumbed down the game to a point where I don't even find myself having fun a lot of the times. Getting a quest and fast traveling to the town closest to the arrow on my map is not fun to me.

I liked in Morrowind when someone told you to find a rare item you actually had to go on a , you know, QUEST! Also, the quest lines for Skyrim are ridiculously short. Oblivion's dark brotherhood was probably 100x better than Skyrim's. Lastly, no Umbra? Cool bethesda, cool.

Agree to an extent. I would give slightly higher ratings for some things. Likely I would keep your complexity score the same or lower it. The companions quest line and college of winterhold was just piss poor writing. Loop holes abound.

Still an enjoyable game.

All I ask is better writing and some more depth while making interactions slightly believable. Also more choices during quests!

I agree with a lot of what you said, but the problem is that it is difficult to do all those things. Especially because of console limitations (yeah guys sorry I play on console Im not a real TES player like everyone i guess...)
I reeeeally like the idea of personality points. And the only main thing I dislike is the lack of choice. I know you can choose not to do quests, but I wish you could change what happens at the end. Fallout 3 and NV seems to institute this a lot better. I also wish it didnt hold you hand as much as it does, and had a little bit of a more intricate storyline. All in all Im totally happy with the game and hope RPGs will continure to improve

No. You are bad.


It's not cliche at all, how many dragon movies/games have you shouting to kill things?

marketing graphics is ten times easier than marketing a satisfactory system

I couldn't disagree more with your assessment.

First off, I feel your desired RPG actually restricts actual roleplaying.

In order to make a choice, you have to develop your good or evil side? Unless I'm misunderstanding you, that makes absolutely no sense what so ever. There is no realism in a system that requires me to reach a certain "level" in order to make a decision. Now, if I am inexperienced at something, I should -fail-, but I should always have the choice to do it. That is how Elder Scrolls works (yes, including Skyrim). I do agree that more consequence of action should return to the series (I.E. a guild won't accept you into their ranks if you do not have the appropriate skills they are looking for, and you cannot rise through their ranks until you become among the elite at those skill sets), but the fact of the matter, the choice is there.

Speaking of choice, I do not for a second believe that Skyrim is "simpler" or offers less choice than Morrowind.

Let's just take quest choices for instance.

Main Quest spoilers:


That one single choice is infinitely more choice than you have in Morrowind's main quest (and yes, unless my knowledge of math is completely off base - totally possible, I don't claim math to be my strong subject - the term "infinite" is accurate due to the fact that there is zero choice in the main quest of Morrowind).

More Main Quest spoilers:


I would completely argue that there is more choice in the Skyrim main quest than in either Morrowind or Oblivion, which are both pretty linear main quests story wise. The big dynamic with Morrowind's main quest that makes it feel so non-linear is the fact that much of the main quest, you are told to go off and do your own thing for awhile, and come back when you are ready to proceed, while Oblivion and Skyrim both have a sense of urgency due to impending doom, whether due to an invasion of Daedra, or due to the destruction caused by the returning dragons. But story wise, Morrowind is very linear and offers little to no choice in how to proceed.

There is also plenty of choice in the Skyrim side quests as well. More spoilers:


And I know there are a few quests where people say that there is only "one way" to finish it, a way that doesn't really fit their character, but I argue that is your choice, to simply not do the quest.

One more spoiler:


And that is about the same level of choice that you have in Morrowind. You either do it, or you don't. And since Morrowind doesn't have a "completed quest" portion of the journal like Oblivion and Skyrim have, I guess it's easier for a player to feel like they RP'd finishing the quest, because, well, Oblivion and Skyrim still have the quests in the "active quests" section.

In terms of the quest arrows, I again 100% disagree. In Morrowind, when you received a quest, and were told a location to go to, the location popped up on your map as a big, bright map marker. You knew exactly where to go. The only difference was, you had to keep opening your map to find out which way you needed to go to get there, where Oblivion and Skyrim simply cut out the tedium and put the arrow on your compass telling you where to go. It doesn't really require any more brain power to find a quest location in Morrowind, it just takes extra needless, tedious activity.

As far as roleplaying goes, I feel that Skyrim offers a much better character development system than Morrowind or Oblivion. Morrowind and Oblivion are simply a 1-100 level system. You level up your skills, they go up in number, and you are more powerful. There's really no variety.

With Skyrim, there is the same 1-100 level system, but perks have been implemented, and the perks actually give you specialization. Perks make you have to choose. Instead of just grinding out 1-100, and being the same as every other character who maxes out those same skills, you actually have opportunities for specialization and customization by focusing on your perks to become more of a master in particular areas. I use this example often, but it's relevant, my friend and I are both playing dual wielding, Heavy Armor wearing warriors. And our characters are completely different. Why? Because of perking.

Now, Morrowind or Oblivion you could make yourself different via skill selection, and that is a big reason why our characters are so different. He wants to play a "pure" warrior with as little magic as possible, where as I want to heavily concentrate on my arcane abilities. But perks allow us to be different even beyond that. In Morrowind or Oblivion, once we max out our combat skills (in this case, One Handed and Heavy Armor), our characters would be totally identical in those skills. In Skyrim, however, even within those skills we are different. In One Handed, I have specialized in the Dual Wielding branches, as well as the Bladesman perk. In Heavy Armor, I am focusing only on the Juggernaut skill.

My friend, however, has specialized in the Dual Wielding branch just as I did, but he also invested in the one handed power attack tree. So while I'm running around chopping foes down with my dual wield power attacks, he's lopping their heads off in the process. He's more of a tank than I am, because he wears helmets (I wear hoods) and has a deeper investment into the Heavy Armor tree, thus having better armor capabilities than I do.

That investment that he put into One Handed and Heavy Armor that I didn't, I instead put it into skills like Conjuration, Alteration, and Enchanting. And even in those skills, I could have a totally different character than someone else.

I can be a 100 Conjuration character who specializes in reanimation and necromancy, while the next person who has 100 in Conjuration may specialize in Atronachs and Bound Weapons.

Back in Morrowind and Oblivion, a level 100 Conjuration character was the exact same as every other 100 Conjuration character. Less variety.

Skyrim offers more variety due to perks and specialization, thus, higher roleplay capabilities in my mind.

I do not believe for a second that Skyrim is any simpler than Morrowind. I truly believe that the tedium of Morrowind (and as much as I love that game, there are elements of it that are incredibly tedious) is confused with complexity and depth, and when Oblivion and Skyrim removed that tediousness, it was confused as "dumbing down", when in actuality, the same depth and complexity is still there, it just removes the unnecessarily obnoxious elements of it.

People blame the voice acting for the lack of in depth dialogue, but in reality, the dialogue in Morrowind wasn't in depth at all. There were no branching dialogue options, and tons and tons of the written dialogue was copy and pasted across every single NPC in the game. The only real unique dialogue was from quest related dialogue, and that quest related dialogue is no more in depth than what we get from the voice acting in Oblivion and Skyrim.

People claim that the quests in Morrowind were so complex and engaging, but they really weren't, so much of it was exactly what people complain about in Oblivion and Skyrim, which is "go to this dungeon, get this item, and bring it back to me".

People claim about simplifying the game, and "dumbing it down", but if anything, Skyrim is the game getting more complex when dungeons actually have puzzles that you need to figure out in order to progress through them. Granted, the puzzles may not always be the hardest things on the planet to figure out, but the fact is, there are actually puzzles that you need to figure out, and that's something that Morrowind never really had, and Oblivion had only in very small doses.

I just don't buy the argument that Skyrim is in any way "simpler" than Morrowind. I'm all for differing opinions, and I'm not upset by the fact that there are people out there that don't love Skyrim just as much as I do, but there are certain claims made about the game that I truly feel are objectively wrong. I really do feel that a lot of these claims either blatantly ignore the features and elements of the game, or are just completely ignorant to them.

We are a dying breed, Sledgehammer. Steak vs. Sizzle...substance vs. style...keyboards vs. controllers... big paychecks are good for now, helped by hype and a console crowd who, through no real fault of their own, become tied to an inferior machine and drag the quality of gaming down, down, down.

But I wonder...what it must be like for the true innovators (as in any profession), who, in the sunset of their lives, look back - and are content with more modest paychecks because they feel warmth from the knowledge that they created something that MOVED people. That changed lives. Created true art.

Does Skyrim move you? Do you change? Or are you simply entertained? I would offer that those who created Skyrim, and put many thousands of hours into its creation, will look back and see a missed opportunity. Not missed because of chance, or a left road when right was the path...but instead because it was easier, and payed better. A bit sad that there is more creative depth in the opening score than in the story-line itself. So I will strap on my Bose QC-15s, lean back, listen to the music, close my eyes, and imagine what this game could have been.

"It's not cliche at all, how many dragon movies/games have you shouting to kill things?"


Well let's see first of all it's a direct rip off of one of the most famous fantasy series of all time: The Wheel of Time. The Third book of the series is called The Dragon Reborn ffs. Also, I've noticed a lot of things they've lifted from fantasy books. An assasain group called the "Dark Brotherhood" is a direct rip off of David Gemmel.


Also, have you ever read the Eragon books? About 10 minutes into the game I thought I was playing Eragon: The video game.

Not to mention the biggest rip off of the entire game is Norse Mythology. There aren't many creative elements in the game.

That said Blackreach was some of the most fun / awe inspired I've been in a video game, but the rest of the game was a pretty big let down. I had more fun playing Oblivion tbh.



Oh yea and the biggest thing I feel is missing--

THE JOURNAL!

Oh God, I don't know what I disagree most - the notion that Skyrim isn't a deep and complex RPG, or the idea that Final Fantasy X was even a passable RPG, let alone "perfect".

Also for the other part, you complain about getting a quest and then just fast traveling to the next town...

You do realize you don't have to fast travel, right?

I didn't use the fast travel system in Skyrim, and I am so glad that I didn't, because I had so many unintended adventures by actually making the journey from one part of Skyrim to the other. The most "fast travel" I used was the carriage system, and that's a very limited system, only running between the major holds. Not every city has a carriage working out of it, so if you find yourself in one of those towns, you're forced to make the long journey to your destination.

Unless of course, you take the easy way out and fast travel, but if you make the choice to fast travel, you cannot blame the game for not giving you the "questing" experience. It was your choice to forego that.

36 year old perspective.

I think we were spoilt in the past with all the DnD clones, for complexity of character development and toolset/community the best in my opinion was NWN1. As that holds the biggest interest for me as well as challenge and re-playability, it rates as my fav CRPG.

There was a CRPG that let you establish a town and grow it into a kingdom, but it overtook the roll playing aspect and was not that popular, can't think of the name of it??

But I hear you and totally agree, but once you realise its just an adventure game with role playing aspects, it puts the game into perspective and is enjoyable, maybe like me you had too much of an expectation becuase you have followed the series through its inceptions.
I think its the end of DnD CRPG unless you want to MMO sadly.




Nell2ThaIzzay
I just don't buy the argument that Skyrim is in any way "simpler" than Morrowind. I'm all for differing opinions, and I'm not upset by the fact that there are people out there that don't love Skyrim just as much as I do, but there are certain claims made about the game that I truly feel are objectively wrong. I really do feel that a lot of these claims either blatantly ignore the features and elements of the game, or are just completely ignorant to them.


In NWN they have 'perks' as well as all the other stuff, you could make very complex and original characters, I understand what your saying but wonder what CRPG's you have played if you think this is not dumbed down and simplified?

I fully agree with the OP .

I also rank Morrowind and the Witcher higher as the RPG content and quality of the quests/storytelling have captivated my imagination far more and got me hooked in a much more intense way .
What i enjoy in Skyrim is the action , visuals and item collection , not so much the RP or quests which are for most of them , quite uninteresting to be honest . There is also a lack of variety in the voice acting which doesn't help

Thing is , Morrowind was thought and conceived as a pc game even though it appeared on console later on . But since Oblivion , consolization is the clear objective for its profitability , but making "a one size fits all" product necessarily makes the game dumbed down in term of complexity in order to accomodate the limitations of console hardware (less than 1 gig of RAM on consoles ... that's why we have tiny villages in place of cities , so few NPC's at a time on the screen and so many dungeons instead of open air large populated locations ) and tastes of console players ( fast , fluid gameplay kept relatively simple , emphasis on action with a joypad etc ) . It also takes them quite some time to code the game so it runs on all platforms , that's a lot of time they don't devote to the content and polishing .

But there still RPG content in Skyrim thankfully , and i still think it's a better game than Oblivion , but my gripe with Bethesda is that since Morrowind , they do not innovate and/or improve on the RPG side ( in fact they regress on this aspect ), they bring up the same formula with improved graphics and action gameplay and streamline/cut everything else , which is disappointing for hardcoe RPG fans , but justified on the business point of view , since an action-adventure game sells much better on consoles and can easily be advertised as a full fledged RPG as long as there are quests and a levelling system , as there is no real alternative on console if you except the JRPG . Whereas producing a quality RPG content in Skyrim would have taken them a lot of energy , time and dedication that would not have had much of an impact on the sales . Well just my opinion