http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FopyRHHlt3M&feature=related

No need to hate on Skyrim to prove you're a Fallout fan.....I think you couldn't be further from the truth. I love Fallout played it before TESS but Skyrim is way more polished than the latest FO's and it does show.


wolf

edit: sorry forgot to say, one of the references in the making of Skyrim DVD , 2006 was the earliest year for working on the game.

New Vegas.. eh... i mean i love the game but... it wasn't as good as what i hoped it to be, i played the [censored] out of it but i probably wont return to it, skyrim already has me on my second character with so much more to do. Though I am hoping for fo4 to be more win then Skyrim.


P.S- actually i might go back to do a legion and yes man play through...

this doesn't make sense and it sounds a bit biased. After playing Skyrim for the last few days, I can honestly say it feels rushed. the characters got little to few emotional moments, while the attack or combat animation system is totally lacking (besides the 'critical' kills and shield bashing, swinging your sword repeatedly at anything and it looks like their not even in pain, damage, and will probably continue to stare at you and in the stupidest look, plus your 'swinging' animation stayed the same..Dead Island isn't as polish, and yet they do an 'impact' sense with the AI, making it more satisfying to bash something with a hammer to see a zombie recoil in pain, this? not even the slightest). Choices have little impact, if not anything but a bit linear in that department. I won't lie, exploring is fun, and seeing the armor and specialty increases (like Smithing) is awesome in every way, but it can be exploited (friend grinded daggers all the way to max level, then proceeded to get dragonscale armor and glass weapons).

Overall, the game doesn't let you down in its exploration and vast things to kill or gather, but when it comes to 'choices' or opinions, it seriously dies there. Some Quests are fun and whatnot, and wacky a bit, but the impacts upon the player could've been more.

I'm waiting for the day when 90% of the community has finished the main quest and most of the factions, then we can all discuss the quality of the game without spoilers being an issue.
The reason being that a LOT of my criticism has to do with how short the faction quest chains are, how poorly written EVERYTHING is, how you're given practically 0 choices in quests, how horribad the ending is (worst ending they've ever produced for a game) and how severely lacking the lore is. This game is EXTREMELY poorly written. It might top FO3 in that regard.
When I criticize it now, I get "no need to prove you're a Fallout really devoted fan" as a response, and do I have an example to show how Fallout New Vegas delivers where Skyrim does not? Yes I do; I have multiple, but they all contain heavy spoilers. Overall though, of course we load up the game, see the map and think "woooooah there's a lot to do," but once you really start playing through it and aiming to complete everything, you realize the world is actually pretty damn barren. Maybe not the physical world itself, but all the content within that world? Yeah, the content is pretty limited.

Another criticism is the leveling system. You either focus on a weapon and armor type or you're screwed thanks to level-scaling enemies. This means that while recieving a perk in New Vegas is an incredibly rewarding experience that changes the way you play the game and opens up new possibilities, the perks of Skyrim....It feels more like leveling up means every skill will get WEAKER, and the perks you use allow you to choose what skills will NOT get weaker. The result is that you feel like you're not spending perks to improve, but rather you're spending them to not get weaker. Your playstyle doesn't change, but rather the perks allow you to keep playing the same exact way you've been playing already.

Fallout New Vegas was just a damn good game, and though I'm disappointed that Skyrim's even less than what I expected it to be (I didn't have high hopes for it when I compared Bethesda's FO3 to Obsidian's New Vegas) and struggling to find a way to play the game that'll make it fun for me, it's nice to know I can go back to the Mojave for a break and always enjoy my stay. Here's to hoping they bring Obsidian back for more Fallout. :foodndrink:

I did say thats what I thought, an opinion of course, just like any other is biased....the nature of opinions.

"grinding' is done an can be done in any game....

I know here, their won't be much support for my thoughts, all I can say is I'm not a fan of one over another but a fan of Bethesda foremost, you want a new game with choices and impact on your playing environment wait for Dishonored.

I'm off to drink some mead and slay a dragon :bolt:

I haven't bought Skyrim because the first interview Todd did with Game Informer he said in the podcast, "...It is more of an Action/adventure than an RPG..." or at least I am pretty sure he did. BGS makes great games with oceans of content...except that the water is only ankle deep.

It is.

Like I said, the way the leveling system works, you're almost forced to choose a weapon type to level (and by level, I mean invest perks in. Leveling a skill but not using perks to get the damage increasing perks? Not good enough). If you don't, you'll find you're getting your butt kicked. The result is that you're practically forced into the combat scene, and there's really only three different types of combat. (melee, magic, bows)

New Vegas has a definite advantage in that regard. I mean if I have 100 guns skill but only 1 agility, the Brush Gun, despite being very powerful, may be a bad gun for me simply because it'd take me millenia to reload it. Or if I have Fast Shot, then I may want to use the Assault Carbine over the .45 SMG simply because my spread with the .45 SMG is too high. And the difference between guns, explosives, melee, unarmed and energy weapons can be quite massive. The Elder Scrolls always seems to boil down to three different play styles.

There's also no real roles to play. Like for example, New Vegas provides us with the Boomers, the NCR, the Powder Gangers, the Khans, the Followers, the BoS, the Legion, the Strip Families and a couple more that people may or may not consider worth roleplaying as. Skyrim has factions, but each only has ~3-4 hours of quests, then you start getting randomly generated quests without plot or purpose; fetch quests without a story aren't worth doing, imo. So YOU have to fill that gap. Apparently fine for some people, but personally I consider myself more systematic than creative. I'd rather try and blend in with existing roles; I feel stupid being creative with something like this and trying to make my own character instead of trying to just blend in. Lord knows there's thousands of stupid [censored] god awful role-playing ideas that people come up with that don't fit into the setting AT ALL already, but they do it anyways because they like it. ("my character's a spartan from Halo who went through a wormhole and ended up here without his armor," "my character's a khajiit, but he's part-Nord....somehow. That's how he's the dragonborn!") I'd rather not add fuel to flames of bad character design.

Skyrim is actually awesome. After playing Oblivion and Fallout 3 I'd almost thought that Beth had forgotten how to make RPGs. I'm actually shocked at how good Skyrim is and how much I'm enjoying it.

But in terms of RPGs New Vegas still trumps it. More player agency, more chances to use your skills outside of combat, more reactive world, better character building, better handling of loot and more choices.
I won't be back to Vegas until next year sometime... but I'm someone who has played through the whole thing about five times and am doing a blog based on it... so there isn't a lot there I haven't seen.

But NV is the still the best RPG of the last 6 years, so I will be back.

Not sure you're being too fair here.

The factions you mention (Mages, Bards, Dark Botherhood, Companions) are side factions - the rough equivalent of the Boomers in terms of scope.
The two BIG factions (Stormcloaks vs Imperial) are closer to the 'big' Fallout factions like the Legion and NCR. What's more, I'd say that Skyrim give both the big factions a fairer shake than New Vegas. Skyrim highlights the highs and lows of both the Stormcloaks and Imperials, wheres Vegas has a billion quests highlighting the NCR and only a quick drive-by of the legion.

I'm not so sure I'd agree. It's an action-RPG, sure. But it's got more RPG in it than Oblivion... and it's better constructed that Fallout 3. Roughly

Fallout New Vegas > > Skyrim > Fallout 3 > Morrowind > > > > > > > > Oblivion

But have you done the Stormcloak-Legion quest chains already? Again, they're very short. Longer than the factions, but that's not saying much. A full faction quest chain will probably take 3-4 hours (not counting random footwork between locations), a full playthrough of one of those two sides probably takes 5-6 hours. And once you complete one, go back and try the other. Surprise surprise: the quests play out almost EXACTLY the same.

And you simply can't compare the depth and personality of the New Vegas factions to that of the Skyrim factions. The Stormcloaks have a right to their religion, but they're racists. That's literally the entire depth of the faction in one sentence. Meanwhile this forum has had dozens of heated debates between the NCR and Legion, discussing philosophical points such as "do the ends justify the means? (Legion)," the morality (or lack thereof) of the Legion's style of slavery, the price of freedom, whether crimes through negligence are as bad as intentional crimes, the meaning and impact of corruption, etc etc etc. There are no discussion points to be found within Skyrim; you walk into Ulfric's castle, hear a speech from him and the military commander that basically says "we're racist and power-hungry but we've got some good reasons for starting this war" and then that was that. That was ALL you will see from the lore; there will be no further discussion of their characteristics and your support of them won't change how successful, effective or happy the communities are.

I'd hardly call that "highlighting" because there's nothing TO highlight. They literally gave them ~3 characteristics. Freedom fighters, power-hungry and racist. No details delving into those characteristics either.
And just because New Vegas provides you with about ~30 NCR sidequests to the Legion's ~6 doesn't mean you don't get a view of both. How you interact with the other factions is affected by your own faction, and several of the NCR sidequests can be solved in a pro-Legion way. Skyrim on the other hand....I've yet to find a true choice in a quest. Pseudo-choices where my choice doesn't change a darn, yes, but not real ones.

To me, a good RPG should have interesting, in-depth characters to expand off of and plenty of choices available for the player to help make each player character unique.

I mean, to make the argument of my disappointment with Skyrim short and sweet....remember the release of Honest Hearts? How disappointed we were that there wasn't a pro-Legion playthrough of it? I mean, technically there was, but that path cut the DLC incredibly short. We complained, and Sawyer answered and said he was sorry, but he just couldn't find a way to realistically provide the character with motivation to support the White Legs (considering their culture), kill those who saved him and have a sure-fire plan to make it back to the Mojave. Fine, but we were still upset.
Now compare that to Skyrim. What if I'm not a Nord or an Imperial? Hell, what if I'm a High Elf? Where's my option? With ~8 potential options on the table, it's pretty disappointing that they only focused on two. I mean, a MINIMUM of 3-4 would be nice. Or what if I make a mage? Have you tried a mage yet? Pretty lackluster.



Fallout 3 had an issue where it only provided support and activities for a Brotherhood of Steel member and nothing but. You COULD play the bad guy, but supporting the Enclave or anyone else made your character come off as a total psychopath. Skyrim suffers from the same tunnel-vision, only providing support for a human warrior.
Don't get me wrong, of course Skyrim is a fun game with plenty to do, but I definitely think it's not a very good RPG. More action-adventure by far, imo. Or at least, New Vegas beats the snot out of Skyrim RPG-wise SO bad that I've simply become accustomed to New Vegas now and can't settle for less.

If that's actually what you think, then you ether haven't been paying attention or you've missed something massive.
(Minor spoiler follows)
Specifically, that the Stormcloaks don't just have a right to their religion - the Stormcloaks are right. It's not a situation where people have a right to a belief. That god IS real.
There is a lot more going on there, things that (because TES is a fantasy game) can't be compared to the issues in Fallout (which is rooted in real world).



Skyrim has only been out a week. Give it time, and you'll see the same.


If you actually think that then I KNOW you're not paying attention.
*Massive Skyrim SPOILER*



There are plenty of choices in Skyrim... just not a lot of immediate consequences.

But this is a dichotomy that has long existed in cRPGs/wRPGs. Some RPGs have choices and consequences (like Fallout 1) and some are 'epics' with a larger story, but reduced player agency (Baldur's Gate 1/2).

One isn't more valid than the other.



Well, does your elf agree with the goals of the ELVEN Aldmeri Dominion that the Imperials are supporting, or not?



That's just a confused statement. Why wouldn't a mage join one of the two sides?


I don't agree. I'm an elven assassin, and I think there is plenty of motivation for the path I'm traveling.



As an RPG I agree that New Vegas has an edge. Both in character building and in choices and consequences.
But again, Skyrim is a different kind of RPG. It has a different focus. As a rule, in Vegas you roleplay by choosing what outcome you want in a quest. In Skyrim you roleplay but choosing which quests you do.

You say that like it's some in-depth secret that requires a ton of research to discover. No, I'm pretty sure that's the first and only reason they'll ever name. There's NPCs shouting about Talos everywhere.
And that's exactly my problem. You hear all their reasonings from the beginning and then they never expand from those. I mean what difference does it make whether they want to prevent his worship or kill the god himself? None at all, imo. I mean that's like asking me if a man did something wrong if he assaulted another men, then after I give you my answer, you say the assaulter is actually murdered the other man and ask if he did something wrong by doing so. All that does is increase the drama, but it's not exactly thought-provoking. I prefer thought-provoking, personally.

This.

I'm pretty sure that it's obvious why that would be a problem for the humans...
Lets do this again when we can argue spoilers.
Or perhaps take the argument to the Skyrim spoilers forum.

you mean like something that really makes you think about the very choice you must do that will seriously change the outcome of the game? if so, hell yes.Skyrim is a bit like Fallout 3 in a way..no seriously, the pathway choices are kind of the same with the whole 'karma' thing we got in the Fallout Universe.

I haven't went that far in the main story yet, but I've been playing alot. I still enjoy Skyrim more than NV, but I enjoy th TES series more. On a technical and lore standpoint, i find Skyrim to be superior. Again, I'm not saying that NV is horrible, I very much like it as well.

i went to skyrim, then i went back to new vegas and told all the NPCs about this magical land where you don't slide sideways across the ground when you strafe. then i went back to skyrim and we all had a good chuckle about it.