i've noticed recently that alot of hate is garnerd unto oblivion. i mean people on the Lore forums sometimes say that they refuse to allow it into the canon and that it has no credence whatsoever. others say the engion svcks. i don't get it whats all the hate about?

apart from the gameplay (combat, stealth, etc), graphics and AI....most people felt dissappointed by it compared to the older games which had multi path storys, guild conflicts and acual consequences in the game.

Many also feel the story of the game is very generic (You are the only person who can find the emporer's hidden son and save the world from the legions of hell Mehnrunes dagon). Most of the other games didnt let on how important your job was until you actually had some progress where it would be suddenly revealled, or slowly over a quest. After which the story would really being.

Also the fact we had but 4 guild (plus the arena) that never interacted with any other guild nor the MQ, lack of politics in the game in favor of dungeon diving...again and again and again. Compare that to morrowind's 10 full guilds, which each battle against other guild for control and power and oyu hd a rich story where sometime you could backstab one guild to help another.

Oblivion also didnt add much to the lore, and what it did add was most generic fantasy, look at morrowind and the sort of lore it made, the creatures, landscape and stories all were unique to the game.

end rant.

The problem with the lore in Oblivion is that it is very contradictory to the one established by previous games. Also many things in it are way to simplified and Oblivion definitely did not try all that much to expand on the existing one, but rather concentrated on ignoring it, which is sure wrong. This is about the main reason why most people claim that Oblivion is out of canon. As far as the engin goes, the problem is that Gamebryo is a good engine, but Beth did a lot to tweak it and the result has its flaws. This is what gets criticised often. All in all, Oblivion is a good decent game, the problem is that many of us who played Morrowind before expected so much more. Oblivion feels to be inferior in so many areas compared to its predecessors that some fans are just disappointed.

Well said, Najaknevrec. Careful though; A thread like this could cause arguments and devolve into a VS. thread, something which the mods won't be pleased with.

@ DaMage: Good rant; I enjoyed it. I fully agree with your comments. Oblivion lacks a true ROLEPLAYING dynamic and falls back on dungeon crawling to prop up its immersion failings. On the subject of lore, I read an old post by bg2408 who made the point that whereas much of Morrowind's lore came from books, a lot of Oblivion's lore came from comments from NPC's, so Oblivion's lore was very much a "this is what is happening in the world right now" scenario.

What it could have been and what it is are at opposite ends of a spectrum, but someone says this in every Morrowind vs Oblivion thread. Speaking of which, there's another one on this same page.

Two, actually.

I think a lot of it is "accentuate the negative." I don't hate Oblivion, but I will accentuate the negative parts of it (all of which have been said already) in an argument regarding what direction TESV should go. It was a fun, great game. However, Morrowind and Daggerfall were falling just short of gaming nirvana, so having a game that's merely great feels like a bit of a letdown.

Loyalists. They think games such as Morrowind and Daggerfall are true RPGs, whilst Oblivion is action/adventure game

This is true, but it's just an advancing genre. Oblivion still has RPG elements, even if it does include a less skill based combat system and fast travel

I mean Morrowinds combat was stab - miss, stab - miss, slash - miss, you have been hit for 72 damage, alt f4 play pokemon instead. Atleast in Oblivion there's some skill involved. This is the case with most things, a lot was "dumbed down" in a way and some of us liked it, some didn't

advancing? if dumbing down a genre is advancing it i rather see the "advancing" do a grinding halt..

A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing more to add, but nothing more to take away.

Oblivion = Perfection

:blink:

I see! Simplify the game, so much, there is no way it couldn't be a pure RPG. In fact, TES V will open up, and you'll get a piece of paper, a core rulebook, and a twenty sided die. Adventure awaits!

And no, mister OP, there has not be a lot of hate garnered onto Oblivion recently. There has been a lot of hate garnered onto it since it first was released. It was a big disappointment for many older fans due to the way it handled lore (oh you should have seen it when they showed Cyrodiil and it WASN'T a temperate jungle swamp. There was much gnashing of teeth), gameplay (it was okay in this aspect, but level scaling just came along and crapped on everything. It really ruined it, but the devs realized they screwed up badly), and mechanics (cutting of any skill is never welcomed, nor do I believe it is warranted).

It was a good game, but after the gaming bliss that was Morrowind (or Daggerfall, or both), Oblivion had a lot to live up to, and it missed the mark. Its still a good game (although, for me, it wasn't really. Level scaling was just too huge of an issue. Everything else was made well, except for that. I really don't want to hit a goblin 200 times to kill it), but it was so easy to disappoint, especially going into a new generation, and a new market area where RPGs had been having trouble. But I don't mind it so much, because with a mistake comes insight. Hindsight is 20/20, and all the problems we (loudly) complained about were fixed in Fallout 3 or are going to be addressed. Of course, that doesn't mean there won't be a whole NEW set of problems. Hopefully they won't be as blaring as the ones Oblivion suffered from.

I agree that Oblivion is different from previous Elder Scrolls games and not always in a good way, but sometimes, change is good. Many people criticize Oblivion for different reasons. I agree with some of the criticism, but I also disagree with some of it. These are my disagreements:

1. Even if Oblivion isn't as original as Morrowind, it is still more original than Arena and Daggerfall. TES series has a very generic history. Arena's main quest is even more generic than Oblivion's. Arena and Daggerfall's dungeons are randomly-generated and are not as interesting as Oblivion's. Every location and quest in Arena and Daggerfall(except for those related to or a part of the main questline) are randomly-generated and generic. If one is to criticize Oblivion's "bland" world, then they should criticize Arena and Daggerfall's worlds even more.

2. Lore has been changed before. Where did Imperials come from? Why did Orcs become friendly instead of generic enemies? Few orcs in Daggerfall are friendly. I can only think of one friendly orc in Daggerfall. Since when did Orsinium become populated with actual orcs? When I went to Orsinium while playing Daggerfall, there were no Orcs. If I am to assume that they are Orcs but just don't look like it, then I can consider the developers of Daggerfall to be lazy(a common complaint about Oblivion), or, I can argue that what we see in Oblivion doesn't have to be taken seriously either. Why are dragonlings in Daggerfall when Dragons are supposed to be rare and hidden creatures? Is Cyrodiil(originally wasn't the name of the Imperial Province) a jungle in Arena(I haven't been to what is now Cyrodiil in Arena yet)? Where did all the cities of Morrowind come from? They weren't all in Arena. Where did the names Dunmer, Altmer, and Bosmer, and Orsimer come from? They didn't exist until Morrowind. When did Orcs become Elves? Why are Daedra now more than just demons? What happened to the appearances of different races throughout the series? Just because claims there are different breeds of different species doesn't mean it makes sense? Why couldn't Talos just change Cyrodiil into what it is? That is canon, but people don't accept it, overlooking previous lore changes that first appeared in the main series in Morrowind. Anyway, since when do fans decide what is canon or not? If Bethesda says it is canon, then it is canon. Since Oblivion is the latest game in the series, it's lore is the most accurate of all the games in the series, even if it overwrites some previous lore. Oblivion's lore is official, more offical than Arena, Daggerfall, and Morrowind's lore.

3. I was recently playing Daggerfall, which I love, and I realized its level-scaling is worse than Oblivion's. My level 2 Dark Elf(no Dunmer yet) knight is killing every enemy in his path and only weak enemies are appearing. Where are all the Daedra? Daggerfall's level-scaling is more noticeable than Oblivion's. I'm encountering the same, few, generic enemies over and over again. Daggerfall is easier than Oblivion. It's not the "skills actually matter", difficult RPG people claim it is.

4. Fast-travel in Oblivion is optional. One does not need to fast-travel in Oblivion. Play Arena or Daggerfall and you will see what it is like to have to fast-travel. Any fan of the series who claims to want to explore should explore on their own, not be forced to. If you really want to explore, THEN DO IT!

You can hate or love it, I am OK.

To say the things over and over, to change English Grammar / Definition and say what ever you think is right and force others to believe your opinion is all wrong.

Arena and Daggerfall needed fast travel, they were too large not to have it.

With Morrowind, Bethesda knew that they had a much smaller world, and did not need fast travel. So they implemented travel systems between cities using Silt Striders. What boggles my mind is why they didn't do that for Oblivion. Oblivion is not that big, unlike the first two games you could walk across the map in a reasonable amount of time. Yet they implemented fast travel. Why? It just boggles the mind. They had a good system and they threw it away.

You're right, fast travel is optional. But surely you can see the other side of the argument. If you don't fast travel, you can do nothing but walk or ride a slow horse. So you have to walk the same paths over and over again. At least in Morrowind you could travel between the major cities. If they implemented a Morrowind-esque travel system, and fast travel, people wouldn't complain. People who didn't want to fast travel could use the normal travel system, and people who did want to use it, could.

To summarize, I'm not disappointed with Bethesda because of fast travel, I'm disappointed because they didn't give people an alternative to it.

Except it is clearly explained with several books in Morrowind, which describe the ending of Daggerfall (the warp in the west) that shaped the geo-political landscape of High Rock and Hammerfall

Adding lore is welcome. I don't recall anyone complaining about what Morrowind added, except for 1 poster complaining about the Imperials springing from no where.


That doesn't make it right to just run up and gut everything the previous games worked on, and what people enjoyed. Also, Talos pulling the god card from his ass was only canon because of a single paragraph long book that MK wrote up as a pity write-off to the fans, because he disagreed with what they did to Cyrodiil just as much as many of the fans did.


Fast travel, in regards to traveling quickly, is not optional because its a "my way or the highway" system. Either we use fast travel, or we take twenty minutes to run across the landscape. In Morrowind there were up to a dozen ways to travel, each with their own advantages and disadvantages. Boats only ran along the coast. Silt Striders usually only along the land (and could not go over Red Mountain, so it took many trips). Mage's Travel was fastest, but only took you to a number of limited locations. Mark and Recall was fastest, but only took you to a single spot every time (unless you changed it). Almsivi and Divine Intervention only took you to the associated faction areas, which were no very numerous. The index system was diverse and large, but had many indexes one had to collect to be able to use it all. Even then, one can use a jump spell to leap across one third of the landscape at once. Boots of Blinding Speed worked nicely, too.

Exactly what I mean.

Yet no one criticized Arena and Daggerfall? Arena and Daggerfall needed fast-travel, yet no one complains that they miss out on anything at all? It's only Oblivion that receives criticism? Aren't Arena and Daggerfall too large? Shouldn't they be criticized for being so large and bland? My black horse in Oblivion is far from slow, and, like I said, fast-travel is completely optional. Why not just use it to get to places you don't feel like travelling to on foot? I once suggested there be an alternative, but I was told that people feel like they are forced to use fast-travel. That was never a complaint about Arena or Daggerfall, even though they actually required one to use fast-travel. I use fast-travel in Oblivion when I want to get somewhere I have already been to. What is the problem with that? What am I missing out on if I have already travelled through that area? Why would you want to be forced to walk from a city every time you want to visit a place out in the wild(that you have been to) when you could just fast-travel there? If someone really feels like they need to walk a boring, already-travelled path, then why can't they do it without being forced to? What you want, an alternative, seems like a great idea, but I have been told that nobody wants to use an alternative when they could just use fast-travel, but then they complain that they can't use a slower system of fast-travel when they could just use the faster one, but they also claim they don't want to use the faster system. I would be fine with either Oblivion's system of fast-travel in TES V or Morrowind's, but if I want to actually explore, I will, if I want to skip an already-travelled path, then I will also.

Oh surely, you can walk. But that's not exactly traveling fast, is it?

I don't like fast travel. You tell me not to use it because I don't have to. But that's just it. I don't WANT to walk there, but I don't want to use that terrible system. I have no options left. I use fast travel, if only because it is fast.

First off, fast travel was necessary in the first two games because, at least in Daggerfall, you couldn't actually walk from major city to major city. it's just miles upon miles of randomly generated wilderness. Or maybe it was Arena. One of the two. Anyway, fast travel was NECESSARY.

And second, why are you opposed to alternatives? More options are a good thing, Seti, and just because you personally don't see the need for alternatives to fast travel doesn't mean the rest of us feel the same way.

If you have PC you can make your own fast travel like I did. I don't fast travel on my PS3 version because I have a better and faster way. If the game fast travel got me to my destination faster than my own way I would use it but I don't. So thats not optional use of it?

Both games it was necessary, as walking off from a location into a random direction would never get you anywhere (literally in Arena, figuratively in Daggerfall). Hell, I turned up my dosbox cycles so the game ran ridiculously fast, and I moved maybe a few pixels. It literally would take multiple real-life days to run across Daggerfall.

Fast travel was not necessary in Oblivion, and I personally would have enjoyed a Morrowind style system. And teleportation. And levitation (100 point levitation is aaaawesome). And Jump (and slowfall, to stop all the leg breaking). Also, having only fast travel removed several other options that could have co-existed with it. Mark and recall were an awesome tool for mages, and they just removed it because it was deemed unnecessary. What ever happened to teleporting out of the dungeon or in the middle of combat? You can't do that with fast travel.

I don't like to use it because it feels like cheating. Teleporation without the magic skill (And being instant). Avoids all encounters with enemies without a realistic explanation. No options to stop at an inn, camp outside, etc (as in Daggerfall). It was basically teleportation, except I wanted to actually freaking teleport with my mage, especially in combat.

And I don't want to walk, because walking is for chumps.

I'm confused here. You don't want to walk and don't want to teleport because of the enemy avoid.

Answers are in bold.

I don't want to walk because it is slow. I don't want to use fast travel because it is practically cheating, being described by the devs as walking there, yet you avoid everything in the world. As a mage, I COULD HAVE had access to teleport, which I only would have unlocked after arduous study in mysticism. It would be my reward for being a well studied mage. That is magic, not cheating (and I can use it in combat or in a dungeon).

Basically, fast travel seems like a cheap ploy because it has no decent explanation or implementation that allows it to be believable. Its a teleport (that takes time). Magic means lets me teleport and not feel like I'm cheating BECAUSE its magic and BECAUSE I earned the right to use it.