OK, I am late to the Elder Scrolls party, joining in with Oblivion and then going backwards. Traditionally, I'm more of a D&D/Neverwinter guy, but when I finally ventured into this series I saw all the ways Oblivion, and now Skyrim, are the games that NWN and Dragon Age could/should have been.

That said, there are things I was (perhaps unrealistically) hoping for in Skyrim that make me rather nostalgic for my dust-covered NWN game. I'm new here, so apologies if these issues have been discussed to death elsewhere...but I've been playing RPGs since D&D pnp hit shelves (yes, I'm that old), and have a breadth perspective on what can be fun. So, as I finish my first run-through of Skyrim, I'll record the things I miss...

1) Lack of consequences for actions/decisions...I don't like a game where careful planning allows you to tick off every quest box. I like mystery and consequences. Kill this NPC? I lose out on 10 future quests, with uber loot I'll have no way of knowing about. Too bad, so sad. Not enough of that in Skyrim.

2) Lack of diplomacy options...I'm no prude, but in Skyrim it feels like I did alot of, well, killing. I miss the more subtle elements of even 15-year-old PC RPG games were I could talk to the bandits. Maybe even co-opt them. Or just lie to them. But in Skyrim, 99% of the time the ONLY option was to kill them. The only tangible benefit my speaking skills produced were better prices at merchants...pretty much useless by mid-game when you are swimming in money. Back to diplomacy, it allows me to role-play more when I can either play a psychopath, or a sage budda.

3) Too many character build options that all lead to same end: Top assassin/thief/archmage/warrior. I miss playing as a Mage, or as a Tank, or whatever, maybe a LITTLE of column A and column B, but I usually like that when I pick a path, several paths will close forever. Helps with immersion, and helps define my character. I don't like being a master of all trades, because by level 70, I figure my character is pretty much like everyone else's (physical features notwithstanding). How would someone every reach level 80 just as a mage, without even lifting a dagger? I don't see how you can do it.

4) Bland companions...I like having a buddy, not a bunch of nameless/faceless meat-shields. With so many interesting characters in Skyrim, it was too bad I couldn't adventure with any of them. I just left my 'companions' at home to keep my wife company.

5) Very few random red herrings...I LOVED how Oblivion had notes and maps and stuff that sounded important but were dead/loose ends. Like real life, not everything that looks important is. I like not knowing if object A will be important or not. Adds character and mystery to the world.

Don't for one second think I'm not having fun playing this game...it is a landmark in gaming, IMHO. There are dozens of things I find original and amazing in this series. I think this game is money well spent. These are just the feelings of a old-school pnp guy.

Thanks for your time...cheers!


Nanny

Agreed on all points.

2,3, and 4 are nothing new to the Elder Scrolls series. I'll give you 1, and as for 5, you're just not looking hard enough.

I agree with all the points you have made, but in particular with number 1. I really hope that when they make Elder Scrolls 6 for the next gen consoles they will be able to use some of that extra processing power to add a layer of choice and consequence that is completely missing from their games so far.

Kind of in the same vein, I would love to see some sort of repercussions for ignoring a quest for too long. It just seems a tad unrealistic to have all of these quests where people are depending on you to save the day and then you decide to spend a week smithing some new swords. Not a timer or anything like that, just have circumstances change if you wait too long before undergoing a quest.

Kind of a D&D Player myself, and I do agree with a lot of these (Although i'm not sure what you meant on the last bit)

The only git I have with skyrim (other then little things) is that the main story kind of svcks. It had a lot of potential but it just doesn't ring my bell, it was kind of short, boring and too easy.
the Main D&D game I loved to play (And still play) would be Baldur's Gate, and that game had one heck of an amazing plot. So many fun little bits and pieces.

With Skyrim I expected some epic main storyline quest, but it was nothing new. It brands the game more of a Fantasy open world Sandbox then an RPG.
There are like you said a lot of 'Character Defining' things lacking in Skyrim, which kind of makes me sad.

1.) This I completely agree on. There shouldn't be any essential characters except maybe like one or two just to make sure that the entire game is still playable. Like why do I have to wait until the end of the Imperial Legion quest line to kill Ulfric or why do I have to wait until the end of the Stormcloak quest line to kill Tullius? They don't even offer any quests except that one. It's not even as if you don't know what extra quests they offer.

2.) I guess so but it would be a little annoying to go to a dialogue option every time I get into a fight with a bandit. Maybe sheathing your weapon will show that you want to talk?

3.) In Skyrim, gaining levels isn't what you want. It's gaining skill points. I've played a pure Mage before and my current character is a warrior/stealth hybrid, leaning heavily towards stealth. All I want to do is level my Sneak to 100 and get my one handed to 100 as well. I don't want to get to level 90. I want to get my one handed, sneak, and a few other skills to 100. Most likely, you're only going to get one or two skills if you stay true to your play style.

4.) Kind of agree with you but I think Skyrim wants you to feel a connection through adventuring with them, not through quests and dialogue. Maybe that's why Lydia is so loved as she's the first companion you meet if you just go through the main story and since they need a companion, they take Lydia. Then they start liking Lydia because of certain reasons. I personally like people through their personality and that's why I like Aela so much. Not doing Companion quest line for my current character though so...

5.) Yeah but I also love the feeling in Skyrim where you pick up a book, read it, go to the location in the book, and you can actually see what it describes or get the artifact. It's so satisfying and it also provides a sense of a real environment. It feels like those books were written by real people who actually saw or heard of that thing you just got. But of course, many books don't have that, which also provides a sense of a real environment.

I agree on all your points, but 1 and 2 are the ones that I'd most like to see. Consequences are NOT mutually exclusive with an open world game, IMO, and actually improve the experience. It's a trade-off of a little theoretical "movement" freedom, for a different kind of freedom, i.e. the freedom to actually change the world

I'd like to see BGS challenge themselves to make a speech and/or pacifist build a viable option in their next game. Even if it didn't work out entirely, just the thought process during the design phase would open up a lot of avenues and enrich the game.

I think the story had a lot of promise, which to me is what makes it frustrating. They have a great idea (maybe not groundbreaking, but still exciting) for the MQ, they have great lore, but the story just isn't that important, except as brushstrokes. That's fine, but if BGS fleshed it out a little more, it would be a lot more satisfying. OTOH, many TES fans don't even do the MQ despite hundreds of hours of gameplay, so BGS definitely knows it's demographic.

I think Skyrim is less an RPG and more a sandbox action-adventure. Every release since Daggerfall has been a step further from being an RPG. Some of their decisions really are streamlining, but many are not. There's a simple rule they consistently follow. If something is broken, and it's an RPG mechanic, then it gets cut in the next game. But they make great sandbox action-adventures, and if you play on PC you have the option to make it more RPG-like with mods. Otherwise, you have to adjust your expectations, because the game designers aren't interested in making RPGs.

We will never get an Elder Scrolls game that fixes those issues unless it were to be developed by Obsidian. And even then, we would be plagued by horrible bugs in exchange for deeper RPG elements.

Half of your things you "miss" you can choose to do. It's not the game's job to hand hold your role playing. I remember reading something awhile back where when of the people that was involved in the creation of those early pen/paper games criticized it when people stick to strict builds with a never changing operating procedure. I think the example was something like "It's more role playing to make up a reason why your good character would be adventuring with an evil one than to always refuse," or something along those lines.

Putting a bunch of restrictions in just for the sake of it would be the wrong thing to do, especially when it goes against the very spirit of this entire game series. If you want to think you can't be in thief and magic organizations at the same time for example, then just don't do it. Nothing's making you, and it should be of no concern to you how others play.

These aren't issues they are personal preferences, most of which you can still choose to play in line with. I'll agree that diplomacy would be an interesting path but I wouldn't call it a game flaw personally.

The red herring thing sounds like something that would be extremely annoying personally. I think all that would do is draw accusations that you have to buy the guide to play effectively without wasting time trying to figure out what's flavor for lore and what's something you can actually act on in the game. Heck in many old video games the red herrings were not there as some creative insight but because they ran out of development time or just left things in by mistake that got scrapped.