Skyrim is Soulless

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:53 pm

Please someone show me the game that is as massive as morrowind, fallout 3, oblivion and skyrim where your actions are like those in some bioware games. New vegas got close but it had far less interesting quests than fallout 3.
User avatar
David John Hunter
 
Posts: 3376
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 8:24 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 12:59 pm

What is happening? Is skyrim starting to get underrated by all the complains?.....
all i have to say is oh my god...but well i dont care what people say about skyrim :/ i have been looking forward for a new elder scrolls gamefor so long! and i am more then happy with skyrim.Can you guys never be happy? I am so happy to have skyrim at least.i wish everybody here could feel the same.
I am so glad i can finnally relax and enyoy the lates elder scrolls game<3
User avatar
Monika
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:50 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 12:22 pm

Being that the definition of a soul is fairly ephemeral, and the author fails to define it, im going to define it within the scope of his intention. The soul, that he refers to, im guessing is by and large the characters. Skyrim does alot of things, but its characters in general are fairly puppet like. that is the nature of making something this huge with the plethora of options given to you. Would I say that Skyrim has as much soul, within his definition, as say ME? (ME haters back off, you can put in any other game that you think has good characters, this is just an example.) No, im afraid Skyrim doesnt. however when a game like ME shines is in this aspect. Skyrim builds soul not just through characters, but environment. there are books to read, filled with characters and drama. there are situations where u find an alchemist hut with his notes and further down the road you find his skeleton with a handful of flowers (whatever). THATS soul as well, and Skyrim can boast gobs of it and way more than any other game.
I would love if in the future Skyrim could bolster its capacity to render some full blooded characters, with unique animations and voice acting etc. It would create moments in the game that felt more unique, where you might have ppl that you really care about alot more. all that is great.

but to go around making the accusation this guy is making, he clearly isnt seeing the other half of the game. not too surprising, western dramas have been character driven for a long time. ppl define most of the scope of a drama by its characters. however Skyrim takes a leaf out of something different, and if you cant see that you are mistaking the tree for the forest.

Except Fallout 3/New Vegas have a similar format and yet manage the 'soul' quality well. I also disagree with the narrow interpretation of what the writer means by soul; the quality referred to is unquantifiable for the most part; it's a sense that what you're doing in this world actually matters. It's not exclusive to characters, a great example of which is the destruction of Megaton in Fallout 3. The game is forever changed by a simple choice.
User avatar
Fluffer
 
Posts: 3489
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:29 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 12:44 am

I want Bethesda to design and create the world and lore, and let BioWare populate it with NPCs and Quests (although not the DA2 team, more the BG2 and DAO team).

Please?
User avatar
Arnold Wet
 
Posts: 3353
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 10:32 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 6:54 am

Obsidian did a much better job when it came to implementing reactivity in the game world and they had a fraction of Skyrim's development time. It's not a question of time, it's a question of creativity and the drive to make a game that feels real. A static game world that pretty much ignores what the player does, forcing them to pretend that they matter and imagine making an impact, is the complete opposite of a roleplaying game.

And while we're on the subject of reactivity, you do realize that it'd be a simple matter of adding a few more lines together with a check to see if the variable"FortGreymoorCleared" is set to true, in order to have said hag react to the fact that the player just slaughtered everyone around her. Then add a second check, for the variable "FortGreymoorOwner", to see if it's taken by Imperials or Stormcloaks and add further reactivity. The Gamebryo tools already supported this in New Vegas. Why wasn't this functionality used?

In fact, why wasn't the entire plethora of tools available to craft a living, breathing world used to make a living, breathing world? When compared to New Vegas, where decisions truly matter and the world reacts to them, Skyrim feels static and lifeless, like a theme park.



Christ. Roleplaying is NOT the same as play pretend. When you have to pretend that you've made a difference and imagine stuff to make the world feel real, that means that the developer has failed to create a roleplaying game. Roleplaying is creating an unique character and playing him out (in accordance with the background chosen, skillset, their views) in a dynamic world that reacts to your choices as you make them. Western RPGs come from the pen-and-paper background, where the Game Master continuously reacts to the players' actions and changes the adventure in response to their actions. This is why a game is supposed to react to the player and his choices, not expect the player to take on the role of Game Master for himself.

The reviewer is not the problem. You are the problem, when you state that (basically) it's wrong to expect the developers to create a good story and it's good to have to write it yourself.


Do YOU realize that out of all the millions of things they have to worry about- that maybe, just maybe they didnt have time to spend days upon days of programming every possible NPC reaction just so a few overly critical people without imaginations can say "meh, this game still svcks, well at least she reacted to me"

If every NPC could read you a story of your adventures, people like you would STILL complain that they missed a few details. Whats the point? If a game like this is "soulless" to you, then no amount of wasted man hours programming more reactions would change your opinion.
User avatar
Phoenix Draven
 
Posts: 3443
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:50 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 9:39 am

Most of the complains can be applied to any TES game... If you didn't like those, what would have made you think this game was for you?
User avatar
Amy Melissa
 
Posts: 3390
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:35 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:47 pm

Most of the complains can be applied to any TES game... If you didn't like those, what would have made you think this game was for you?



Probably the hype.

Just saying, it's not my case. I love Skyrim just the way it is :tes:
User avatar
Louise Andrew
 
Posts: 3333
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:01 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:22 am

Most of the complains can be applied to any TES game... If you didn't like those, what would have made you think this game was for you?


Its true, you're right. But its not unfair to expect/hope for some evolution at some point. I do think that there needs to be some evolution before the next installment in 4-5 years.
User avatar
Bedford White
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:09 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 12:53 am

Blugh, what a distasteful article.

Anyone remember when playing an RPG meant you had to use your imagination? I think that's the problem with people today. Because games are getting so much more advanced and realistic, people are becoming more and more unwilling to use their imagination and instead are expecting the game to do everything for them. Skyrim is by far the most immersive game I have ever played in my entire life. It's been a month and I have already had countless experiences that have totally immersed me into the game world.

It's like everyone forgot that they still have to use their imaginations, no matter how realistic a video game gets.
User avatar
Maddy Paul
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:20 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:43 am

That "someone" wouldn't be you, by any chance? :mellow:


This claim was inevitable. But no, that isn't me. I don't use Twitter or write articles, English is a foreign language to me, let alone write things about gaming.
User avatar
BRAD MONTGOMERY
 
Posts: 3354
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:43 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 12:10 pm

A fraction of the time, a fraction of the world? Skyrim is huge, not just in physicality but in scope. They wrote a language for it, for god's sake. The micromanagement level of this game is insane. I can't believe you're not acknowledging that when comparing it to other games.


A lot of rather meaningless words come from you. How is Skyrim huge? In what scope? Prove your statement. Yes, Bethesda did invent a few words for a fictional language. It isn't particularly notable, fantasy and science fiction writers do that all the time. How about George Martin? Or John Tolkien? Or Andrzej Sapkowski? In which ways is Skyrim's scope bigger than that of New Vegas?

Maybe because, as was already pointed out twice...she's already used in a quest?

Yeah.

Let's illustrate further your scripting theory- who said the fort was taken by anyone? My character could have cleared out that fort and I don't belong to either of those factions. Oops, there's another string you have to create. What if there's a thieves' guild quest that involves that fort? Better create yet another scripted reaction. Also, we must ensure these reactions don't interfere with one another because the player has the opportunity to join every faction in the game.


Yes, they should've done exactly that. Bethesda had the resources, staffing and all the time in the world (five years is a lot of time in the industry) to create a complex game with a lot of interplay between factions, characters and the player. What, exactly, is wrong with expecting a reasonable amount of interaction from a roleplaying game? Again, Obsidian coded in a lot of such interaction, with much less development time.

Your anology doesn't fit- a truer comparison would be if your GM couldn't make it that day and wrote a campaign with some notes on which direction to take it if you made certain choices. Even being your friend and knowing your playstyle, he could not have predicted each and every choice you could make, so you're going to have to ROLEPLAY to excuse some missing data.


Sorry, pen and paper roleplaying games don't work like that.

In the end, this is a computer program. It's not unlimited, it's not omnipotent.


Reasonable interaction and reactivity in a game is not omnipotence.

And you are blowing everything out of proportion- all I said was if you have a problem with an NPC not reacting to a particular set of circumstances, roleplay a reason for it. That's not rewriting the game, it's explaining behavior.

God, I would hate to play a tabletop game with you. You're the player who kicks his chair and swears at other players when they come up with some unorthodox method of getting around an obstacle. "IT'S NOT IN THE GAME GUIDE RWARRRR"

Chill out.


You're equating roleplay with play pretend. As I pointed out, this is not true.

And thanks for jumping to conclusions with that ad hominem. If I ever needed any more proof that you cannot defend your view or back it up with any sort of reasonable argument, that's that.
User avatar
Sara Johanna Scenariste
 
Posts: 3381
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:24 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:46 am

Except Fallout 3/New Vegas have a similar format and yet manage the 'soul' quality well. I also disagree with the narrow interpretation of what the writer means by soul; the quality referred to is unquantifiable for the most part; it's a sense that what you're doing in this world actually matters. It's not exclusive to characters, a great example of which is the destruction of Megaton in Fallout 3. The game is forever changed by a simple choice.

Honestly, I played an hour of New Vegas and got bored, even though i was quite excited for it. Can't say why, but I can say that if you want to continue the discussion within the scope of NV, im out since I can't say I have a strongly founded opinion. To me, the world seemed forced and arbitrary, whilst Beth worlds allow you breath it in at your own pace. I find their worlds more mature. However again, I only played a bit and was turned off.
User avatar
MatthewJontully
 
Posts: 3517
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 9:33 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:50 pm

I love the die-hard fan-boys that disagree with this article.

Open your eyes. The article is true. Get off the honeymoon stage already and start looking at the game closely.

The article applies to pretty much all NPCs.

Here's an experiment: Go to whiterun and wait until it's dark. Kill someone without being seen. Now wait a day. Observe how npcs react. You'll notice all they do is just say one line of dialogue and walk away. Then as days go by they ignore it.
User avatar
Nitol Ahmed
 
Posts: 3321
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:35 am

Post » Wed Dec 14, 2011 11:55 pm

Seems like people here dont like elder scrolls....Maybe elder scrolls isnt the game for you guys?
User avatar
Christie Mitchell
 
Posts: 3389
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:44 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:20 am

Basically everything that morgueanna said. Cpt_Calavera's lego anology was really true too.
User avatar
Roberto Gaeta
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:23 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:27 am

I love the die-hard fan-boys that disagree with this article.

Open your eyes. The article is true. Get off the honeymoon stage already and start looking at the game closely.

The article applies to pretty much all NPCs.



So anyone who doesn't agree with your point of view is a die-hard fan-boy?

Nice way to invalidate your argument.
User avatar
Luna Lovegood
 
Posts: 3325
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:45 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:35 am

People need to stop using FO:New Vegas as an example of a 'free' RPG.

That game had way too many locations and interactions that were all 'directly' tied to the main quest. Everywhere you went the game tried to force you to do the main quest. I got sick of it really fast. Yeah, the NPC's all had a decent line of dialogue, but since pretty much every interaction was related to the main quest with few exceptions, it just said 'scripted' to me...
User avatar
Nina Mccormick
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:38 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 3:17 am

So anyone who doesn't agree with your point of view is a die-hard fan-boy?

Nice way to invalidate your argument.
Yes because all they're dong is denying it.

The npcs are soulless. You can make up some BS about how you imagine the npcs aren't, but it's Bethesdas job to make that imagination reality, not your brain.

Here's another example: None of the guild quests matter. They're just there for story and loot. That's it.

Want proof? With the DB after you kill the emperor nothing happens. NPCs just mention it and walk as if it doesn't matter. Absolutely nothing in towns change and the imperials go on their merry way.

That's not only soulless npcs, but a soulless game. Another example is once you finish the main quests the npcs don't react at all. There's no celebration for the dragonborn and dragons continue flying around attacking people.

Once again, soulless.

Don't get me wrong though. I still love the game ( I have over 100 hours played ). That doesn't stop me from seeing the flaws of it since I'm not blinded by my love for it like so many here.
User avatar
Curveballs On Phoenix
 
Posts: 3365
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:43 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 11:34 am

why do i ever come on game forums? it's all the same.
User avatar
john page
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 10:52 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:11 am

See, my own take on Agnis is that she lives, has always lived, and always will live at, Fort Greymoor. Her comments said to me that it didn't really matter who else lived there - they were all transient occupiers. Only she was constant. As such, it didn't really matter to her whether the bandits lived, died or were replaced.

She's kind of like a ghost who hasn't died yet.


And this is a valid point, but there are 2 dead bodies laying right where you are trying to sweep. If I came into your house and laid two corpses and you were only worried about cleaning around them. Why would you even be worried about cleaning at all.

To the people that say use some imagination, sure that helps, but this really is the center of every complaint people have with the way the Skyrim feels and plays. Do we want a fully immersive game that deciding what route to take has massive impact on the game? No of course not, but when you leave 2 dead bodies on the floor of a fort somebody is trying to clean, and you come back later and there are new occupants, and the bodies are still there and they still try to sweep over them? I don't how crazy, delusional, deaf, blind, or whatever you going to notice and there should be some change in the reaction.
User avatar
Roanne Bardsley
 
Posts: 3414
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:57 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:27 am

Its true, you're right. But its not unfair to expect/hope for some evolution at some point. I do think that there needs to be some evolution before the next installment in 4-5 years.

Yeah, but It's still a TES game... You could have expected things, but for [censored]s sake don't moan the exclusion of things that never were there in the first place. This article is asking for the Matrix, but aside from that, you can find several tenths of threads regarding the lack of choice/consequence when you compare It to the FO series.

In this sense, TES games never had much: In Daggerfall you had 6 endings that were mostly the same, In morrowind, joining some factions excluded you from others and you could kill vivec and still complete the MQ. In Skyrim you have a big choice regarding the DB, another big choice regarding Paarthunax and another choice regarding which side you want to fight for in the Civil War. You never really had much "Action and consequence" in TES, nor story-driven companions, the story always flowed arround major characters from which you only had a glimpse, just as It happens here (Paarthunax, Tulius, Esbern, Delphine, Arngeir, Ulfric). You are the only worhty char in the TES series, and I'd rather keep It like that unless changing so didn't mean losing other things, a rather unespected happening, if you ask me.
User avatar
Courtney Foren
 
Posts: 3418
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 6:49 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 11:15 am


...but it's Bethesdas job to make that imagination reality, not your brain.




And that's why this kinda game is not for you my friend.

Go back to MW3 or Call of Duty.
User avatar
Damned_Queen
 
Posts: 3425
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 5:18 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 4:47 am

i think the problem on this forum is alot of complainers and the general public have a laymans understanding of what goes into making a game ( movies, animation, tech in general) and what is and whats nit possible or practical.

"hurr, just program lines in it"....really?? ok. Im sure the Devs will get right on it next game. keep your fingers crossed.
User avatar
josie treuberg
 
Posts: 3572
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:56 am

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:59 am

Nobody said that Skyrim is completely devoid of such instances of reactivity. Question is, why are they limited to meaningless, completely optional sidequests, instead of being an integral part of the core game experience? Y'know, instead of having reactivity (which isn't equal to depth, by the way) hidden in obscure places, have it occupy the front row and have eg. Whiterun's citizens react with more than one liners to the battle of Whiterun?


I am in my 30's in the game and have barely even touched what are considered main or even side quests. I have mostly just wandered around random places helping with quests that pop up (and create in the misc quest area) I've seen a good share of examples like I just pointed out so I really can't see what you are saying. Perhaps when I eventually get around to doing the "main and sidequests" I will see a difference. Sure not every NPC has dialogs, but I see enough that it makes the world come alive for me. And to me, the misc quests are not meaningless.

Considering the limitations they have (with 360) I'm quite happy with what they put out. Is it perfect? No. Could it have been better? Sure.

It is by far a much better game than many I have played but it is also not the best either (Though it is in my top 10)
User avatar
sally coker
 
Posts: 3349
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:51 pm

Post » Thu Dec 15, 2011 9:19 am

And that's why this kinda game is not for you my friend.

Go back to MW3 or Call of Duty.
Who are you to say it's not for me? Way to be selective in reading my post.

Find something you can attack but leave everything out.

Way to invalidate your argument. Am I doing this right?

Go back to pokemon. This game's clearly not for you since you like doing kid things like imagining events in a video game rather than wanting the events to unfold before your eyes. Heck, why play video games at all when you can just IMAGINE things! Save $60!

Way to go.

( Take your blindfolds off )
User avatar
P PoLlo
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:05 am

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim