Was anything beyond that first paragraph anything but a personal rant? I agree about making the guild storylines more intricate and complex, but bashing a game before it even comes out (hell, even announced that it will come out) seems a little... odd to me. :shrug:
In definite agreement. There's no sense or logic in reviling something when there's nothing tangible in front of us to revile. I'll wait until I'm playing TES:V to attempt to pass judgment on TES:V.
@ TacoScent:
Most of that post is based on sketchy inference, outright embellishing, and worst-case scenarios. We don't know what design and marketing direction Bethesda is taking with TES:V. Oblivion was far more accessible, that is true. I'd go so far as to say it was perhaps
too accessible, in the sense that the drive for accessibility outshone the potential for depth. However, accessibility and depth aren't mutually exclusive in game design. They can coexist quite easily.
Perhaps you find FO3 to be overrated. Personally, I saw several design choices in that game as redeeming for the prospects of TES:V. The dungeons were superbly designed, whereas many of Oblivion's felt lackluster. Each dungeon had a clear purpose, rooms were easily definable, clutter and hand-placed detail was everywhere. Level scaling was honed and fine-tuned; while it's still not perfectly to my liking, it still represents a fairly static character progression while giving challenge and random surprises every now and again. The exterior world was fascinating. I know a lot of people like to classify it as a gray and barren waste, but wandering the wastes revealed a criss-cross myriad of old roads, leftovers of rail systems and rail-sub transitions, old abandoned farms or homes blasted to pieces, with lots of hand-designed leftovers (corpses laying in bathtubs, charred toys lying around, etc), remnants of power-lines, water towers and other vital pieces of infrastructure... Fallout 3's map was alive with post-nuclear detail. A vast improvement, in my book, over Oblivion's approach. Oh, and skills and attributes that actually were given further importance via dialogue options and the like. It's not free of flaws, to be sure, and there are a lot of old holdovers from the FO series that I disagree with (such as Karma, the "melee" skill, limited armor slots, "good/neutral/evil" dialogue choices, etc, etc), but the things I mentioned and more give me extreme hope for TES:V. Most of all, FO3 seemed to perfectly capture that "stranger in a strange land" feel that I felt in Morrowind but lacked in Oblivion. It would appear that the infamous philosophy of "players want familiarity" was thrown out the window after Oblivion, and who's to say if it'll come back or not?
Further, while Bethesda is certainly not going to implement every idea on these forums (and will probably do their own thing regardless), the forums have swayed large-scale design philosophies before. Pretty much every major change of significance between Morrowind and Oblivion was brought upon by Bethesda listening to the most-complained-about things in Morrowind. You can dispute whether they changed things for the better or not, but you can't dispute that the changes were brought on by mass player input from abroad and from these forums. They do in fact read these forums. And as past history has shown, these forums have in fact influenced them.
You say, "I won't be impressed with The Elder Scrolls 5." With a prejudging attitude like that, I'm certain you are correct, as you've made up your mind already with no direct evidence. Why not wait until the game is at least announced with perhaps a screenshot and maybe a small dev diary or something before making that claim?