» Thu May 03, 2012 1:27 am
I'd call Arena the worst, simply because it was a primitive effort in so many respects, even for its own time.
Daggerfall was an overly ambitious attempt at something awesome that was only partially successful, with the strongest character development system and politics, but repetitive random quests and minimal detail. I'd love to see a spititual "successor" done in the same "old school" RPG style, but with modern algorithms to create the generated worldspace, modern graphics, and "intelligent" random quests.
Morrowind was a slightly "dumbed down" RPG, but an improved exploration game with a detailed world. It offered a lot of player options and choices of equipment, spells, and factions, most of which you had to work to get (not necessarily balanced, but who cares in a single-player game?). Until someone else makes a decent character-based RPG (similar to DF or MW), after a decade it's still the most modern open-world sandbox RPG that the "old school" players have.
Oblivion removed "failure" from skill checks, and made many things almost entirely dependent on the player's skills with a rodent or controller, making it a far weaker RPG, but a more exciting action game. It attempted many new things (physics, radiant AI, etc.), several of which were ony partially or crudely done. The blatant scaling made it increasingly tedious and boring, the longer I played it, and the lack of fixed placements meant that there was rarely anything of interest to find in all of those ruins.
I can't rate Skyrim, since the Steam requirement makes it impossible or highly impractical to play, but it sounds like even less of a character-based RPG than Oblivion, but with an improved worldspace. I don't care for "action" games, so to me it's only one step above Arena.