I agree. I was not impressed with Morrowind and Oblivion's main quests and could only stand to do each one once. Side quests, however, I have done many times in many different orders, depending on what character I was roleplaying. I find it much easier to roleplay an Elder Scrolls side quest than an Elder Scrolls main quest.

In fact, I'd be perfectly happy if TES V was composed of nothing but side quests.

At first I thought to myself, "this is a dumb question. The only answer can be 'both.'" Then I read through all the posts, and thought about it. In the end, I have decided it was a very good question, even if the asker didn't realize it.

What was the main complaint reviewers had of the original Fable? Too short. That game could be completed in about 15 hours or so, first time through. And as I thought about reviews I've read of other games over the years, I think that "too short" seems to get more attention than "not top quality." In fact, it seems people tend to be more forgiving of a game that is mediocre if it will svck up more than one weekend. Quality only wins so many points.

Having said that, I think anyone with a whit of common sense would answer the question with "I'd like to have my cake and eat it, too." And why wouldn't we? Why should we have to sacrifice one over the other? I'll wait a little longer for the devs to finish the game. Let's get real: if Duke Nukem Forever actually hits store shelves and it manages to be a great game, we would forgive the wait (actually, probably a bad example; that game has been in development so long it's passed the point of aggravation and entered into the realm of comedy).

So I would implore any software developer to finish the project first. I mean, wasn't Windows Vista just an unfinished version of Windows 7?

you should have an option for both quality & quantity.
I would like both,quantity as in many,many different things to do,bigger game etc.
Quality....do you just mean graphics?....because quality is more than just graphics.
I would like better graphics if possible,but i would prefer more quality in the story,side-quests,weapons ,armor,more combat moves,better quality spells etc, i could go on.
But i just want a great game,i loved oblivions graphics,i even did'nt mind morrowinds graphics. A game is not all about graphics to me ( it helps )..but its not the be all & end all of games..especially RPG's.
Like i saidi think both are important,but if i had to chose one,i would say quality....but i dont just mean graphics in that,i mean overall.

I want replayability and no large chunk of quests with a consecutive order where you can complete every quest in one run through anyway
I want a large number of quests which may even sometimes conflict with each other. thats what made morrowind entertaining and oblivion bullcrap.

Some form of compromise is the only viable answer. On the one hand, I don't care HOW "good" a game is: if it only lasts 2 hours, and doesn't have much replay value, I'm not buying it. On the other hand, you can have a huge amount of bad quests, bad landscape, and bad gameplay, and adding more of the same doesn't make any of it tolerable. The game has to have enough quantity to last a decent length of time, with enough variation or options to allow multiple playthroughs with a real difference, all while offering at least a "reasonable" level of quality to make it enjoyable.

Um ... quality requires adequate quantity. It's not an either/or.

You need a bit of both, really - Morrowind was very detailed for its time and still boasted what felt like a near endless amount of vanilla locations and items to find, and that's excluding the additional content brought in by the expansions. As a Daggerfall player though, I think quantity is also very important in making the world feel realistic and overwhelming.

I was never that kid back in the sixties when offered the apple and the lollipop, would grab both running for the playground.

But when I see how fast the tech is being competitively worked on for optimum enjoyment out there, in this, I think I will be.

Both. Yes, both.

http://i664.photobucket.com/albums/vv7/altair48/Untitled.jpg

Here is how I thought

Quantity = Morrowind(Loads of quests, items, skills, etc)

Quality = Oblivion(Graphics, Facegen, LOD, Voice Acting, Havoc)

Yeah, but you could easily mix those around a bit.
Morrowind had more quest, but they were also of better quality, more entertaining, and more "roleplaying" style.

I don't want an extremely high quality quest with no options available to me. I do not want to play a Final Fantasy game. I want to play MY story with MY character, not the developers story with any random character because it doesn't matter.

For me, its clearly a mixing of the two. You can not have quality (in an RPG like TES) without a good quantity of choices. You can not have straight quantity with little quality, because then every quest is "Go to X place and do Y task." over and over again.

But for me, if I were to say one way or the other, I'd have to go with more quests with less quality (which, obviously, would not be evenly distributed. You'd get boring fetch quests, and then you'd get really interesting investigations or assassinations or what-have-you) than fewer quests with "higher" quality. I don't want my game to last 14 hours, thank you very much.

A game that focuses on quality, which requires enough quantity to be good overall.

I think, whether it's one big quest line with a lot of branches.

Or several disconnected quests, catered to different character styles.

The point is that it's the quantity of paths that matters, not so much the quantity of quests, or even "epicness" of them.

EDIT: However, I prefer the latter

Quantity, go big or go home

but seriously, both.

The point is, the OP should've been a little more descriptive in what he meant by Quality/Quantity. Quantity=Morrowind/Quality=Oblivion was what I thought when I first voted.
Quality is good, but what if you don't like the few choices that are there. They are good choices, but you would rather something else.
Getting rid of spears and less skills was a step away from quantity. Todd said that he was trying to make the few skills good of quality.

Level perks for skills(at journeyman you get to zoom with a bow) was a good step towards quality, but so much was lost and so little gained.
Saint_Juibs hamburgers vs steaks is a bad example, because one of those hamburgers(variety of skills) could surpass a steak(level perks) any day. But McDonalds hamburgers are never better than steak and yet this one is, I'm confused.

Ok, one of those hamburgers is Spears. I used them all the time in Morrowind. Come along Oblivion with its "steaks", level perks were nice but I'd much rather spears and other skills back.

However, TES 5 can only be better than Oblivion in my opinion.

Well that depends on who's cooking the steaks >.<

I'd take a McDonalds Hamburger over the steaks that are currently being made in this house anyday.

I deleted my vote because i agree, it shouldnt be quality or quanity it should be quality AND quantity

i'd rather 6 good steaks than 12 hamburgers or 1 awesome steak. and by hamburger not talking about Mcdonalds hamburgers i like those but like burgers on the grill

As I said in my original post, I was speaking theoretically about the issue of quality vs. quantity in general, not Morrowind vs. Oblivion. We get it, x_death, you want to be one of the cool kids, but could we maybe not turn every thread thread into a Morrowind vs. Oblivion debate? Pretty please?

However, since you brought it up, I would actually prefer a lesser number of skills that are balanced better and more diverse than three times the number of skills, but having many of them be redundant or wildly over/underpowered. Again, not necessarily talking about Morrowind here (I think it handled the balance between quality/quantity quite well), but generally speaking, more doesn't always mean better, and actually usually doesn't. And before somebody tries to strawman my argument and tries to make me look like a fool, I'm not saying that I want one "physical attacks" skill that encompasses daggers, swords, axes, spears, bows, maces, hammers, and whatever else I'm forgetting. But to a limited extent, I think less is sometimes more. Somewhere between Morrowind and Oblivion would be satisfying to me, though obviously as long as there is a focus on making the skills relevant to the game and not just including them so they can include as a bullet point on the back "over 200 skills!" or whatever, I would prefer more.

We don't welcome outside members, don't you worry.

*Whew* That's a load off my mind. But wait... am I one of the cool kids???

Always quality, I'd rather have 200 interesting quests than 500 errant boy quests. The same way I'd rather have a smaller detailed world than a vast emptiness.

However I do feel that there comes a point where lowering quantity will reduce quality as well.

Nahh, Hircine and I are the cool kids. Maybe Hamsmagoo. You are one of the lame kids. Nahh, I kid I kid. You can be part of the "slightly cool but not at Stabs level" club.

:woot: :woot: :woot:

Whats your problem?

I never dissed you or Oblivion so why are you attacking me?

I was talking quality vs quantity and what I thought it meant. Quality is good, so is quantity, but when it comes down to it I wanted quantity.

Edit: I used to respect your opinion alot.

These debates just get tedious after a while. When I want to argue about whether Oblivion deserves to be held on the same level as Morrowind and Daggerfall or whether it's only fit to be used as a frisbee for playing catch in the park, I'll go to a thread that clearly advertises that intent. When I want to talk about something general like, as a design philosophy, the concept of quality vs. quantity, I go to a thread that advertises that. It's annoying when the first seems to constantly weasel its way into the second.

Also, your complete 180-turn of opinion baffles me. It's fine that you realized you have issues with Oblivion, everyone does. I do. It's even fine that you decided you don't really like Oblivion. Whatever, to each their own. But it's like you take every opportunity to make sure everyone knows "Hey guys, I'm one of you now! I hate Oblivion too!" And when you say things like how you think that to accurately reflect the game's quality, Oblivion's theme should have been thirty seconds of flatulence, I can't understand it at all.