This.

Yeah, that's where these "AAA" games are going; shiny and shallow You want depth, you have to go for indie and kickstarter games.

Oh, and if you haven't played Fallout New Vegas yet, give it a try. Despite being open world like Fallout 3 it focuses on gameplay, multiple quest choices and their consequences instead of just dungeon crawling. It's pretty cheap nowadays, especially during Steam's sales.

Tis the nature of the beast my friend. Beth is a company are they not, a company who likes to make money. And the best way to make more money is to broaden your fan base.

Yes the graphics will eat up a lot of memory useage thus leaving less for other options. I'm not saying that it's the only thing but it does effect the amount of stuff that one can jam into a game. Look to FPS as an example, they tend to have the best quality graphics but as a downside they tend to be rather liner and straight forward. Same principle for TES games, the better the graphics the less room they have to add in more options. Now that being said it only plays a part in the decision of what options to include in a game, a lot of that depends on the Dev's choices during development.

FO3 wasn't all that open world IMO, NV did a much better job both in the open world department and the Rp department But as well proves my point, it was released in 2010 that's only 1 year away from Skyrims release. Yet look at the difference between the two in grapichs and game play, ones a VERY good RPG while the other has lots of potential but falls just shy. The better RPG has lower grade graphics while the Ok RPG has fantastic graphics. And sad to say but the looks of a game outweigh the game-play of the game just slightly, I myself base a lot of my opinion of a game based off of the looks of the game. Metro Last light looks FANTASTIC and is an alright Rping game but it's rather liner like a FPS game but IMO is an all around good game just like Skyrim.

Skyrim falls just shy of a great RPG with alright balance but has fantastic graphics and IMO is an all around good game, if it wasn't I would have sunk nearly 5000 hours into it

*Grunts*

Yeah. I can understand that from a capitalist point of view. But once again, can they (Bethesda) make a line for the casual player while, at the same time, keeping a slower-developping game for its first crowd? Isn't there some capitalistic sense in that also?

Anyway; Thanks for the good points.

Edit: Yes, both Fallout games are great. IMO, Fallout 3 is the greatest video-RPG of all time - less technically advanced than NV, but so rich in ambience, it sticks in your head long after playing - but this is not the place for the topic!

Man. Darn those filthy console players.

You know the world isn't divided in to filthy casuals and superior hardcoe true gamers, also it's not like the new gamers liked the game because it was easy or streamlined they liked it because it was huge open world expierience same reason why people who hoped in to the series in morrowind liked the series.

Somethings go , some stay, that's the reason why at some point people stoped making text adventure games.

No not really, the cost to sustain both sides of that coin would end up outweighing the income of the franchise. It's better to expand on the fan base then separate. Besides that you are a Pcer are you not, you have access to how many mods to tweak the game to your liking? Even with a mediocre Pc set up you still have a vastly more forgiving game then I. I play on Xbox, have been an Xbox gamer since Morrowind ( that's about when I switched from PS to Xbox ) and believe you me I would sell your soul to Sithis to be able to use mods, but yet my enjoyment of the newest addition of TES series seems to be vastly greater then yours

Doesn't that strike you as odd?

You are able to tweak the game to your liking as a Pcer and yet........here we are......

You're an old TES roadie? Skyrim has been out for close to 2 years and you've just now decided to come tell us all this? I don't buy it, sorry. If you don't like it, don't play it. You aren't saying anything most of us haven't already heard, but it's your opinion and that's fine. I disagree with you, and that's my opinion. *shrug*

This is really my reason why I felt that OP is kind of making a target of console players, with all respect, that's just the way I look at it. And yes, I did play an ES game from before Skyrim.

But perhaps somebody should close this.

This thread is going nowhere good.

I'm still in the process of modding the game, but what I'm looking for (like more apparel emplacement and spears) is quite hard to implement (you end up swinging your spear like an axe). So far I've got a body replkacer, a texture one, an armor/clothing feminizer, a horse mod and one that makes your followers relax. And of course, one that gets rid of that impossible UI - the only one that's vital.

Maybe my relative dis-satisfaction has to do with the reasons why I play TES in the first place, as opposed to yours. Besides, Skyrim isn't a bad game...

... Itr's just not a worthy successor to the TES games before it, IMHO.

I'm just shocked that NV was mentioned as having a 'better open world' than FO3. I mean you are exploring a desert ffs.......

There is the Ck as well you know, you could create mods to your taste. I don't know just how far you can go with armor slots and what not but I am sure that you could get close to what you want. There's a million and one mods out there I'm sure you will find the balance of your liking.

It not being a worthy successor is just that your opinion, as others have pointed out if you really don't like it that much simply don't play it. Trade it in for something else or shelf it so that you can say that your TES collection is complete. Or mod the heck out of it until you are satisfied

IMO Skyrim is more then worthy to be called the next successor in TES series

To the 2-3 hushers up there; Please kindly buzz off. Why you post in thread that doesn't interest you is beyond me, and frankly, it's a bit pathetic - do you hope to earn brownies? I earned the right to say what I think of the game here, in this very place, as soon as I paid the bucks for it on steam, a couple weeks ago.

Thanks in advance.

The very moment you pressed the "submit" button, what you wrote, became property of Bethesda's forums, available to everyone. This, is NOT your personal space and YES, everyone can post, whether you like his/her thesis or not.

No. What is pathetic is creating an account just to rant and then acting as if you can't understand why everybody else isn't going "you know what, he is totally right!".

I'm no " husher ", just confused as to how someone with access to gods know how many mods can post such a topic. By the nine it just boggles my mind.... And before someone says - you shouldn't have to mod Skyrim to make it good - I totally agree and thus have sunk a vast amount of my time into the vanilla game. I would have done it if I was a Pcer or not, tis better to experience it first before tweaking it to my liking.

Having gripes and sharing them is not a problem. Demanding from everyone to sympathize, that IS a problem.

I've been in the FRPG genre since turn based early edition RPG's and enjoy Skyrim, I also enjoy Oblivion believe it or not despite all of the bad reviews it gets. The fact is I love the fluid gameplay and more 'realistic' combat despite losing some of the more 'classic' RPG elements. I agree I would love to see a return to a more immersive dialogue and quest system but as it stands now I frankly love Skyrim but agree it could be better. As for returning to 'dice roll' based combat... hell no!

People feel passionately about this game and this franchise. If anything, bashing this game while comparing it to its predecessors is an indirect way of giving kudos to Bethesda....

Whoa! This needs cleaning or closing - back in a while .......................

............ and as my dinner is not far off it is going to be at least an hour before I get round to it.

OK, a lot of posts have gone away. Let me remind everyone that the purpose of these forums is to discuss with each other in a civil and constructive way, to discuss the post and not make personal attacks on othe members. So, as I have now advised everyone and as I am now going to sit on this topic (on and off) for the evening any further problems will be dealt with in my usual bear like fashion.

Thanks, Rohugh.

So, in essence, I think Skyrim is, indeed, a good game - just not on par with other TES and Fallout games before it, that were excellent games. "Goodier".

The reason I think that, is because it was the so many choices one player could make about his characters that drawn me to the game - and without them, these games get closer to the mainstream.... which, as I understand, exactly what they wanted.

I am maybe "elitist"... but I was also let down. How about it?

But Arnathorn, never was combat any "realistic" in TES - it is floaty and substance-less. The die rolls are still there - it's certainly not impact physics like in "Dark Souls". The only advance in TES combat, past some random animations, has been to go from Morrowind's one-button to one-button-and-a-half in Oblivion, then to two-buttons in Skyrim.

So what? That was never TES' selling point - An open world and almost un-limited player latitude were.

This seems to just be a repeat of what is said about every game. All I really see are improvements being made. The choices being cut out like magic effects are largely useless stuff that people complained about previously. Now that the curds are separated from the whey, people are upset. The only thing I really wish stayed are cloaks with armor and the ability to wear grieves without the chestpiece. Maybe spears too. But really, the improvements vastly outweigh the things left out, so those things get a meh from me. Especially since I'm going pc anyway, but I've been playing vanilla since launch and love it all the same.

Yet another person who just can't get over morrowind...