I have to say I think it's quite funny to see all of these Oblivion supporters on the forums these days. I can remember when Oblivion first came out it got just as much abuse as Skyrim seems to get now. I wonder if Skyrim will only gain majority support once TES 6 is released...

I actually think Skyrim is an excellent game. I was first introduced to TES through Morrowind. I then played Arena and Daggerfall just because I wanted to discover the full series. When Oblivion was released I thought it was awesome, until I realised that some of the role-playing aspects and a lot of the lore I was expecting hadn't been included. Instead what we got was a more 'user-friendly' playing system - for example the new combat system. I don't necessarily have a problem with this though, as I can see how Bethesda are trying to make the player feel more involved - as if they are personally playing out the role of their character. The flip side of this however, is that skills-based roleplaying has to take a bit of a back seat, and that is a bit of a shame.

Then Skyrim was released. I've put in around 40 or so hours so far, which I appreciate isn't a massive amount of play time, but I can honestly say that I love this game. I think Bethesda have done pretty well in recapturing some of the 'magic' (excuse the cliche phrase) of the TES series. Much more lore than in Oblivion, a more fantasy-esque setting aand storyline(s) and, I also think the perk system goes someway to creating a balance between skills-based roleplaying and user interaction. Admittedly, there are some role-playing aspects that have gone through radical changes, and others that are all but dead, but I do think Bethesda has acted on some of the feedback from Oblivion and that they have definitely taken a step in the right direction with Skyrim.

I would just like to say that I am not trying to create a divide here between Skyrim haters and Skyrim fans. I am hoping to try and engage everyone in a sensible debate over where they think Bethesda has gone right or wrong with this game (or indeed with the direction of the series as a whole).

Happy debating!

I don't like the fact that skyrim is kept simple, so console gamers can play it, too.

Todd Howard himself said that. (regarding the seize of the city and the low number of npcs)

I was also around here before and after Oblivions release I remeber it a lot different, It didnt get near as much forum complaints as Skyrim, that much im sure of.

Yeah, I can see why many people share this view. Although I would argue that it's probably more reflective of the gaming industry as a whole. It's a shame really, but everything is much more commercialised nowadays, and there are few game companies out there providing for a particular niche gamer.

Vote No + Skyrim.
Skyrim is better then its predecessors (not for the roleplaying aspect, there is is pretty much the same) but lacks lots of depth it could easily have if it wasnt a console game beeing restricted to their hardware.
For a console game it is amazing what Bethesda accomplished though, what makes it even more sad that it is one.

Skyrim as a whole is huge improvement over its predecessors, because its predecessors weren't that deep in gameplay. Complex, perhaps, but not in meaningful ways.

Sadly I had to vote no on the first poll because Skyrim falls into the same trap as all other TES, meaning that only meaningful interaction you can have with the world is heavily scripted ones. So once you go through them (which takes plenty of time, and hence I would give this game 9/10 easily), the world becomes static.

Really? From what I remember Oblivion took quite a lot of stick - seeing as it was the first to introduce the 'user-friendly' system and move away from the entirely skill-level based gameplay. Perhaps I'm mistaken. I suppose a reason Skyrim could be taking more flack is because the people who disliked Oblivion possibly expected more from Bethesda than what Skyrim has to offer?

I could not wait for Oblivion to come out and no one was more disapointed it wasn't available at launch. However that disappointment died the first time I maced someone in the face and they crumpled to the floor (rag doll physics gogo!).

However the game breaking part of Oblivion, which Skyrim has so far fixed, was the fact that as you leveled up the most pathetic worm of a minion had glass armor / weapons and was super strong.

Skyrim, although it has it's own issues, fixed this by adding easy, medium, and hard (boss) difficulty enemies in a good mix so I can still 1-shot basic enemies while the harder ones are a much greater challenge.

Going back in time I bought Morrowind for Xbox and was immediately dumbfounded as to what to do, where to go, the plethera of skills available, and just how big the world was. I really wanted to like that game but I couldn't kill anything I swung my sword and just got miss miss miss... at least I could get spells to do damage until I ran outa mana then I was just screwed.

Of all the complaints I've heard since the game released the only one is possible game breaking is the HORRIBLE spell system. If you can enchant to increase 1 / 2 hand damage IT'S A DUH THAT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THE SAME WITH SPELLS...