Yes and that is what this Old Fart is going to do move on. So Beth moved on and there is lots of old farts that will move on. Sadly.

Not sure what to tell you, since I enjoyed the game just as much as previous Bethesda games.

Yes, it was different in some features, and yes (just like each of those other games) there are things that could be improved. But the basic experience was still there - the free-roaming, explore-everywhere, ooh-whats-over-that-next-rise thing that I get from these games, and not from others.

I think it can happen to any of us anytime, it's all very subjective experience about what we love most in a TES game and Skyrim has taken a lot of steps in new directions, I expected it to be hit or miss with older fans.

And just by the wording, I make it apparent that it's my opinion. When I'm quoting Lore or an interview, I include a link to source material. Thus people will know the difference between what is fact and what is my opinion. Comparatively, the post I was referencing makes it sound like the opinion is indisputable fact, which it is not.

"Always one in the crowd"? lol

You realize Skyrim took over 3 years to make right? Baffles me that people think the devs didn't put their proper amount of work into this game. Nobody is going to produce games aimed at table top gamers because isometrics and spreadsheets are out-dated.

Please tell me how you liked Bloodmoon.

As other have said many times if you dont like skyrim just leave it.

A lot of people liked it and a lot of people disliked it.

They had to change it from previous ES games. IF everything stayed the same then they would've called it The ElderScrolls: Oblivion Pt 2 or something. Its like Final Fantasy. They're constantly changing it from game to game to keep everything fresh. They cant keep making the same game. Same with Resident Evil when they took the zombies out. How many games can you keep making about zombies?

Sorry but I love this game and everything about it, Not once have I ever said that this could be better or they should've done this. I think you're definately in the minority with this one.

I will say that Skyrim is my first ES game. I tried playing Oblivion a year after I got Skyrim and I just could not get into it. I guess Beth did something right.

Horses for courses many people will prefer it and many people will not. the first group will tend to include mostly people who have never played another Elder Scrolls game and those that do not prefer it will tend to be mostly long standing Elder Scrolls players. I would think.

Thats just my opinion but it is based on reading many of these threads.

it also stands to reason that people who have only played Skyrim will think its the best, after all they have not experienced the others so cannot offer much insight, some might say their opinion is therefore not relevant.to the argument.

But profit rules all and Beth have decided that is the type of buyer they want to attract..

My opinion- agree with the Op mostly, all 3 games had flaws dont get me wrong, but the plus points from the earlier ones outweigh their negatives whereas with Skyrim i think its probably just about the other way round, the flaws lack of depth for example slightly outweigh the scenery etc.

But essentially it is all a matter of personal opinion and in truth no right or wrong one.

Are you playing on PC? Try to fix as many things as possible with mods. I did. The unmodded game bored me to death too, and I just quit before finishing the main quest. Then I fixed A LOT of things I didn't like with mods, restarted, and started to roleplay better. Then suddenly the game was good, but still it's good in other ways than previous TES games.

This. There are tons of great "fixes" via mods. Totally changes the game based on your preferences.

I don't know how you could consider Skyrim a "simple, throw away product." Bethesda made choices to streamline many aspects of Skyrim, but they also expanded many aspects. For instance, tons more voice actors, which is a welcome improvement. I will agree with you that the writing in Skyrim is a bit weaker than in Oblivion (and some quests like the Thieves Guild are just plain dumb), but it's not "simple" or "throw away" by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore when you consider the aesthetic and general game-play improvements they made with Skyrim, it leaves Oblivion far behind.

I totally agree.

To address the OP, it's okay if you don't like Skyrim. You don't have to like it, and it's possible that no new approach to the game will make you like it. Just like in any other art or entertainment, the artists make new choices to create new works, and you are not expected to like everything that a particular artist, or game studio, creates, even if it's from a series you previously enjoyed.

But I would suggest, if you are determined to appreciate this game, that you take it on its own terms, i.e. don't compare it to Morrowind and Oblivion.

Correlation doesn't equal causation.

The removal of any number of features in a game does not directly determine if the game was good, bad, better or worse no matter the series or the genre. Skyrim isn't dumbed down, it was smarted down. Many of its systems seem to be over-calculated and overly pronounced which led to redundancy and flaws in the system.

The truth of the matter is that while "streamlining" (in the good way: making things aerodynamic/ smoothy transitioned from one gameplay element to another) BGS managed to narrow the player freedom. The idea that you have too much freedom and therefore trapped. (like when a girl goes shoe shopping, they have soooooo many choices that they either get stumped and do nothing or they binge and buy every-single-pair they see.

For people who typically complain about Skyrim, it tends to fall into the latter. Players have so many options and can so easily be good at everything, that they do so and they feel like the game is punishing them (by being to easy) for striving towards perfection.

So few choices in Skyrim are permanent or defining and therefore everything seems simplified. In all reality there is MORE to do, however; there are fewer restrictions as to what you can do.

It actually seems to me that the team developed a game that appealed to the lowest common denominators... "casual and hardcoe RP players". A person who wanted to make a living doing any 1 thing in the game, and players who want to shoot through for achievements. By being a "normal" gamer you experience this as fast leveling, a wide range of armors and equipment at middle levels, a level expectancy of 40-50, Guild main stories that are short and simple while having varied and fun radiant missions and money that is easily obtained.

My bet is that in Morrowind and oblivion you ran through guild quests and then found yourself lost in the world. Skyrim throws out the tedium that was experienced in those stories. A tedium that inadvertently demanded time and effort on the part of the player further exposing them to the small details that make the game worthwhile. I could be wrong, but I am just another member of a mass public who has something to say about information they have but no real context. I'm not a developer, or a designer or a playtester who has had any contact with someone who poured hours into making this the best game that they could make, no-doubt for themselves to play. We speak as if we know from what little information we have without a context to formulate our information.

Neither do I. It certainly isn't a throw away product for me, none of the games I play are. I rarely buy games, so I'm careful with how I choose. I know I chose right with Skyrim (I did get Oblivion first to see what all the fuss was about with TES).