While I do agree with some of what the OP and others have said (particularly in regard to the dumbing-down of the mass media in general for a mass audience which = $$$), I think Skyrim is being unfairly labelled as "simplistic". This game is way, WAY better than Oblivion, which was in fact guilty of all that has been said here. There is so much to explore, so much to collect and do, so many twists and turns in even the non-essential dungeons and areas that the series once again has returned to the Morrowind golden age of gritty, open-world vicarious fantasy. The world, the environment, the cities, the dialogue, and the quests have been improved significantly, and are pretty much perfect. And Morrowind is one of my all-time favorite games, alongside diablo 2. Been playing since day 1.

HOWEVER, there are still problems - but they have more to do with SUPERFICIALITY than simplicity, and there definitely is a difference. The problem in gaming today, as well as in our civilization as a whole, is superficiality. To their credit, the developers have outdone themselves in bringing us a fully realized, exciting fantasy world, with minute details such as books or notes that start quests, up to epic dragon encounters and massive dungeons full of mystery to explore (the "Lexicon" dwarven ruin comes to mind). But magic... oh lord... magic in this game has been gutted and condensed a little too far for my liking, and i'm sure most people can agree. It's because more time was spent on the LOOK and FEEL of the world, and the spells that we can cast (which is good, don't get me wrong) than on giving us more OPTIONS for the sake of options.

I'm sure if they were given more time to release the game, then we'd still have many of the fun, flavor spells that have been removed (OPEN LOCK. WTF), in favor of superficial gimmicks like the raise dead animation, which looks cool but absolutely svcks from a gameplay perspective. It takes like 5 seconds for the body to raise up, and then the AI takes over in all its worthless glory. The things that have been "simplified" were NOT changed to appeal to a DUMB audience; rather, they were changed to appeal to a SUPERFICIAL audience that sees pretty, flashy, big, and sixy - and then doesn't bother to delve much deeper. It's all marketing - you can't sell an idea to a mass audience by releasing information about "Open Lock" spells or having Pauldrons, Greaves, and Spears. No... you sell stuff by showing a big, beautifully rendered DRAGON roasting a big, beautiful city, you have to show flashy spell effects, omfg amazing graphics, and every particle of snow or blade of gently swaying grass.

Superficiality is the problem; and the media in general (music, films, television... everything) is scared that if they don't spend 90% of their time making everything GORGEOUS, then no one will watch it, buy it, or play it. And, being a twenty-something underachieving gamer guy, I can tell you EXACTLY when this culture-wide trend began - right when the REALITY TV phenomenon started to take off.

Search your feelings... you know it to be true.

I'm already done with fable.. never touching it again..I've completely lost faith in lionhead studios and the direction peter molyneux is taking it.
Fable 3 is likely the epitome of where we don't want RPG's to end up, the very worst of what simplification can bring. What I fear most about simplification isn't the inherent streamlining it provides, because that can actually be good sometimes, it is the gross assumption that the majority of the gaming market aren't playing games for any kind of intellectual fulfillment.

Entertainment is what it is. We each find different values in entertainment. But in the end, I generally agree with the sentiment that entertainment that are crafted in a more intellectual manner worth reading, waching and playing. I think the examples are everywhere.

Take the half life series for example. We can make the general statement that it was one of the best action games made. We can't say that it's strictly more complex than other action games. But it was more complex in the areas that counted, guns (gravity gun is the coolest gun ever), pacing, platforming, integration of story and action, enemy variety, etc.

When it comes to Skyrim and RPGS, I believe that while its ok to simply somethings, key elements to an RPG shouldn't be simplified. Simplification =/= becoming more ergonomic.

Haha best response on these boards!

But who's to say what those "key elements" are? As there are many different types of RPGs out there, each with their own style, gameplay, and interpretation of the genre.

Yes it does. More complex systems generally mean there's more to think about and consider, there are more decisions to make. Hence I have to use my brain more often.

Your Bethesda defense force "arguing" is getting rather bland my friend.

OP, I totally agree with you and share your pain.
Video game is dumbing itself down with only market shares in mind, we have lost the crafters to get the factories...

So true it hurst :-/

...Some of the best video games in the world were really simple.

There will always be defenders of simplification in a new game, the same thing happened with Crysis 2. Personally, I advocated the simplification at the time because I was a fan of the game and by God I was going to defend it! but after a month or so of playing it it became glaringly obvious that it's lost only a few things, but those few things are what contributed to the original game's staying power.

As for Skyrim, I've logged 114hrs according to steam, and I have no desire to play it again, it just doesn't have the longevity of the previous games. Don't get me wrong it's better than all previous TES games imo overall in terms of actual gameplay and fluidity, but as an RPG it's simply not as good. The player is now 100% responsible for any RPing, rather than having tools in game such as weapon degradation to remind you that you're not all powerful, and that things do need to be looked after.

But meh I digress, this doesn't really bother me, I'll just do what I've done with most games following this path and not buy them until they cost what I think they're worth. What will bother me is if weapon degradation disappears from fallout, where its presence is much more important.

To those mentioning having "just lost one spell school and spell making", this here thread I made a good while back goes deeper into just how much we've lost when it comes to spells.

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1291357-a-small-observation-on-the-amount-of-spells-in-the-game/

In short Oblivion, the last installment in the series before Skyrim, had 23 times more spells if we count each spell as having at least each of the 5 ranks (Novice, Apprentice, Adept, Expert and Master), and if we ignore the radius of spells (since Skyrim has a fixed radius for its spell depending on the spell where Oblivion could have radius going from 1 to 100, which would just be unfair to Skyrim to count).

And if we think about armor/weapon degeneration, skills and all of the attributes lost in Skyrim when it comes to spells and remove every single spell having anything to do with attributes or armor/weapon degeneration or anything else that was scrapped in Skyrim, then there are still 15 times more spells in Oblivion than there are in Skyrim.

The biggest key elements in rpg's is how you choose to develop your character through the story/world.

Stats are to tell you how you character has developed so thats why there is a lvl system, to give you options to how you want to develop you character.

Now when you have these choices (skills, attributes, perks, feats, whatever) and remove them like Bethesda did when they dumbed TES, then you are making the game less of a rpg.

Well, to put it frankly - you might be getting old. I am in my thirties and keep saying that since at least 6 or 7 years. All you will hear is to go away and shut up. Young people not having reached their twenties can't know how it was in the good old days - they don't even know what a real ROLE PLAYING GAME looks like. All they know is Shooters and Action-Adventures called RPG.

If I tell you that I am missing Major / Minor Attributes, uncounted spells in my spellbook, mainquest-breaking decisions and so on - only Daggerfall / Morrowind players know what I am talking about. Nobody of the thousands of Fan-children here has seen the complexity of Baldur's Gate or the like. How can they. If you complain that things are too simple, there are many people who will oppose. The times, when RPG was for geeks are over.

Bethesda clearly adresses mainstream console players, housewives/men, common folk with their products now. With their newest change of policy they try to install mods in the console gaming community. That is business. There is no place for reading, thinking, guessing anymore. People want to consume, fast as they live, they don't want to squeeze their brain after a hard day's work. These times are over because society as a whole is changing, so are the games. Why is hardly anyone reading books, why is COD the biggest sell in entertaining history?

Bethesda has a clever marketing division, they do, what the do best - ensure profit. Older people like us ("older" in terms not teen, not twen) should forget the cliché that gaming firms are the friendly geek type neighbours making games for their friends. They are hard businesmen, trying maximize their profit. And that works with the broad mass of consumers and not with some old pricks like us, who like to count their resistances with a pencil. These times are over for good.

Everything I loved about the char creation at Daggerfall and Morrowind has been simplified to the core. Magicka, Health, Stamina - I feel like I am playing Mass Effect here. No matter if I choose a sturdy Nord or a shiny Imperial - makes no big difference. Some changed sentences, a changed power, that is it. Crappy graphics which run better on my old XP-computer (!) than on my Year-2011-rig, a menu that looks like the games my children play on their consoles. Man, cut it out. Times are over for us, I mean that.

Don't think too much about that, try to be a good parent or if you don't have children then buy a motorcycle or look for a sidekick or whatever. Our times are over, seriously. If you even complain about [censored] information policy or state that you are disappointed, you are getting shouted down by a bunch of children who are calling you things I can't repeat and the company seriously does not give a damn. They have to make profit, the have their shareholders and they also have their families to feed. Gaming is not gaming anymore, forget the old times, it is BIIIIIG business now, with tens of millions of bucks to earn, look at the new shooters. And most customers, as I said, can't even understand what you are talking about. Look for some other older gamers and start playing AD&D pen/paper or the like

Take it or leave it.

Ah, by the way. Thanks for a [censored] game I already stopped playing. Waiting for the TESCS to fix out numerous bugs the QA forgot. The only impressive things are the story and the soundtrack, which is in fact, epic. As always by Mr. Soule.

Threads like these make me sad, and make me lose hope for the future of gaming.

Not because the OP of said threads brings up a disturbing point, but because the OP of said threads is so totally off base about their concerns.

I hate over simplification in games as well. And that reason is EXACTLY why I flocked over to Elder Scrolls the first time I experienced Morrowind, and haven't left since.

There is nothing "simple" about Morrowind, Oblivion, or Skyrim.

The "streamlining" this series has made as it's progresses has been a -positive- simplification. It's removed the tedium from the previous installments each time.

Overly tedious and less user friendly is not "positive" complexity. It's negative.

Punishment in a video game is a good thing. Overly punishing for no reason is not a good thing.

While up until Skyrim, Morrowind was my favorite game of all time, there are some unnecessarily bad elements of that game. It has a horrible "dice roll" based combat system, the movement speed is a nightmare (literally - when I'm running in Morrowind, it feels like those dreams where you're trying to run, but you can't, because you're stuck).

There is some negative simplification, yes. Being able to join all guilds with all characters I do not like. I believe that Morrowind did that better. If I am a full on warrior, why should I be able to advance all the way to arch-mage of the Mage's Guild when I don't have any magical talents?

However, while that's a simplification that I don't care for, there's one easy solution to that - roleplay

I'll be perfectly honest, until recently, when I started posting in these forums, that was never really an issue that bothered me, because I roleplayed. My mage heavy characters would never think of joining the Fighter's Guild anyways. My dark assassin wouldn't join the Thieves Guild. And it's not really "self imposed limits", it's just sticking within the confines of the roleplay that I have developed.

Speaking of roleplay, I do not view the loss of Attributes as a "simplification" in the least bit. I am neutral about Attributes. I don't think Morrowind or Oblivion are better or worse for having them, and I certainly don't think that Skyrim is worse for not having them. I probably do prefer Skyrim's system of perks, and no Attributes to be honest, but I really don't care about Attributes one way or another.

Why? Because I'm a roleplayer.

More numbers =/= roleplaying. Not to me. I am an actor in real life, and nowhere in the process of developing a character for a performance is there numbers or stats. What does go into the process though is a study of the character, and an anolysis of that character - his likes and dislikes, his quirks and personality traits, and his goals and objectives. Through that anolysis, it is up to me, as an actor - playing the role of a character - to decide how it is that my character progresses through the script. There are a lot of areas where I get my interpretation - the script, my director, the writer, and myself. But none of those involve numbers.

I do the same thing with roleplaying in a video game. I look at my character, I look at what I want to accomplish as a player, and I develop a character that fits that. I develop a basis for the personality of that character, and I watch as that develops and grows over the course of the game. If I roleplayed right, my character is not the same person at the end of the game as he was at the beginning of the game. And not once in any of these games has my character stayed stagnant.

I believe that Skyrim allows me for even more roleplay opportunities than Oblivion or even Morrowind. The perks system is a wonderful thing that really allows you to personalize each character. I am playing a dual wielding, heavy armored warrior. My best friend is also playing a dual wielding, heavy armored warrior. Thanks to perks, our characters are completely different, as we've perked in different areas that make our characters unique and play differently. If this was Morrowind or Oblivion, we'd be the same - Blade, Heavy Armor, Strength and Endurance Attributes - the only differences would be a couple skill choices here or there for flavor. But in Skyrim, the skills that we share are unique even, because we've perked them differently. I want to be more of a magic wielding warrior, so I've forsaken some of the combat perks that my friend has and focuses as well on magic skills. That means our one handed skills play differently. That, to me, is more depth, more complexity, and more customization for characters, and better roleplay mechanics, because we have more choice on how to build our characters. Skyrim has given me more tools to better roleplay with than Morrowind or Oblivion did. Morrowind or Oblivion, our combat skills max out at 100, and our Strength and Endurance attributes max out at 100, and that's that. Our characters are totally identical in those regards.

In Skyrim, our One Handed and Heavy Armor skills max out at 100, but he's still a different warrior than me. While I have focused on the Dual Wield branch of One Handed, and maxed out the Juggernaut skill of Heavy Armor, and maxed out my Bladesman perk, he's done all that as well as perked up into the Heavy Armor branches, as well as the One Handed power attack branch, and given his combat some extra flair. Meanwhile, I have forsaken those additional trees, and perked up into Conjuration, Alteration, and Restoration, which gives me my flair.

And in Conjuration (my favorite skill), I've perked up the Necromancy branch of perks, while another Conjurer may be completely different by perking up the Atronach branch of perks.

Skyrim is far superior in this manner than Oblivion or Morrowind. It's added more depth and complexity, because now I am using my brain MORE. But instead of using it on tedious tasks like min / maxing an attribute system, I am using it for fun purposes like building and developing a character, and watching his personality grow as he experiences the world.

And the world of Skyrim is quite simply put, the best virtual world I have ever experienced in a video game. There is so much to find and encounter, so many surprises and hidden details. It makes roleplaying a character the best roleplay experience I've ever had.

^ This. /ovation

Indeed OP... Beth have designed Skyrim around a 5 year olds capabilities. Either that or theyre overly scared of challenging the player. Its a sad thing indeed, its an avenue they should not have gone down.

Exactly.

It's not like complex games have completely disappeared. Just because a few of the major game series have been "dumbed down", that doesn't mean they all have. There are loads of complex RPGs out there, if this series isn't giving you what you want from an RPG then there are plenty of alternatives.

Totally true, although simple doesn't have to result in lack of options. That's my primary complaint with this game, a considerable lack of options (relative to the previous titles) when it comes to the things your character can DO. The world is fine, many things to do and see. The character building, not so much.

I should be able to open locks through magical OR mundane techniques. I should be able to wield a spear for increased attack distance, with the penalty of reduced defensive capabilities or reaction speed. Or maybe a crossbow, or ANY other type of marksman weapon. I want to have varying degrees of magical concealment, up to total invisibility. I want there to be more than 1 useful type of spell in Alteration before expert level (what the flunk is wrong with giving us waterbreathing, detect life, or water walking early on, if they're going to give us a ball of light that really isn't necessary?).

Destruction rune spells are one of the BEST additions to the magical schools; however, too much else was lost. I suspect that it is because the superficial EFFECT of the rune spells (and other stuff like that, you get my drift) best facilitated the marketing of the game.

A very valid point and I hope this does happen as I am a gamer and would like to see the industry grow but please don't think this will be the end of games we love like TES. Sure they won't be as mainstream as they are now but they'll still be about.
If I may use a parable: think of the world of cinema more specifically the Western Genre. Up until the early 60's everyone loved a good western- they were mainstream. Then from the early 60's onwards they weren't as popular. Then Sergio Leone came along with the gritty realistic Westerns featuring an anti-hero. This rebirth appealed to those who still loved the genre and gave the genre a boost. Since then Westerns have never really been mainstream again but there have been some gems of the genre since Leone's time.
My point being it will reach a point where gaming reaches COD X 10 but by that time there will be that many people involved they will cater games for everybody. Classics like TES won't be forgotten they'll be remade or similar games will be created to cater to the audience who prefer to think just in the way the party games that exist on the Wii will be made.
And of course the more money in the industry will cause more improvements and enhancements that will imporve gaming for all.
So yeah don't be so glum!!!

no, its not really about whats taken away, its about the reasons that things are taken away.

The reason for adding content is simple. New games need to be better than older games, developers add more content, new mechanics, new story so consumers will want to buy.

The reasons for removing content are complex. It could be that features were unpopular, it could be a perceived shift in industry standards, adjustment to shifting consumer market, move to expand existing market.

What the OP refers to is specifically the removal of content because of market expansion. I believe that so far in most games, methods of appealing to a broader consumer market are implemented wrongfully.

First off, removal of content assumes that certain complex content can't coexist with a more streamlined approach. Take attributes for example. The rational for removing attributes is that most games aren't hardcoe, having complex statistic elements might turn these customers away, thus we have to remove them.

This is perhaps the worst way to go about this. Instead imagine.

Most gamers aren't hardcoe, having only a complex stat system might run these customers away, we need to add options that streamline the interface for these players WITHOUT taking away the complex system. And this can be done quit easily.

Why developers aren't doing this I don't know.

This.

It's the same thing that's happening with every other form of entertainment, like TV, movies etc. Companies now cater to the lowest common denominator because there's more of them = more $$. Complex, deep games, just like complex, deep movies, complex, deep books, etc. do NOT cater to the simple-minded masses and therefore do not garner as much $$ even though they are much higher quality.

Name one that has recently been released.

I don't need stats to help me role-play. Good riddance.

They haven't reduced the number of different things you can do in the game, only the number of stats you can fawn over. There are more things to do in Skyrim than Oblivion. RPGs aren't about counting the number of spells you can have or the number of skills you can level. RPGs are not necessarily stat-based. From a role-play perspective, as a serious role-player, not a number fetishist, I think it's a step in the right direction. Please don't equate a reduction in superficial complexity with 'dumbing down'. The most elegant solutions are often the simplest.

If I could have it my way, all of the numbers would be completely invisible so that I had to focus on role-playing my character instead of grinding his stats.

Less =/= dumb. False equation.

This.

"Simplicity" and "Complexity" aren't, in and of themselves, good or bad things.


When people complain about "Oh, our great complex games are gone, they've dumbed everything down", I feel like I'm hearing grunge fans complaining that someone other than their little "in crowd" niche likes the music and it's gone mainstream/been ruined.

There's nothing wrong with opening up the market to a wider audience.... you can still make a good game with mass appeal. There's no need to feel "special" because you're one of the few who "truly understands" and has the brains/persistance/whatever to appreciate, blah blah blah. Yeah, games aren't your special niche anymore. So?


(I say this as someone who's been playing games for thirty years. Computer, console, and tabletop. Yeah, the industries have evolved over that time. Yeah, I'm not fond of some of the changes... but there's also plenty of changes that were good..... :shrug:)

There is lot of good to say about "simplicity", in its truest meaning, when it comes to design. The minimum amount of complexity for reaching a particular goal.

But the "simplification"/"streamlining" of most games today is not about the careful touch of the designer aiming at elegance and removal of useless parts, but much more about the "dumbing down" of the marketist that aims at making things more simplistic for an audience which feels offended if it has to use its brain, wants immediate and superficial gratification, and for which the ultimate insult is "elitist".

There is a big difference between a game that is deep but simple, and a game that is shallow and simplistic. If we're going to use quotation, let me quote Einstein : "everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler". Things that are USELESS can, and should, be removed because they just clutter the place. But don't forget the ultimate goal in the crusade for the "good" simplicity : something that adds to the atmosphere, to the immersion, to the possibilities of playing, to the variety of gameplay, IS NOT USELESS !

Stripping down games from features that made them immersive or allowed for depth and possibility is not reaching the designer's Grail of the elegance without useless addition ; no, it's dumbing down your creation into an inferior game.

Let's be careful and not misuse the (very real) goodness of simplicity, lest we just ends up with bland and boring productions like so many of today's games have become.

List examples please. Whats a recent complex RPG alternative.

Simple games aren't necessarily bad. If their core design revolves around a simple mechanic, simple is great. RPGs on the other hand is a complex affair.
The main problem is, the number of complex rpgs is decreasing dramatically. Compare Fable 3 to Fable 1, compare Mass Effect 2 to mass effect 1, compare witcher 2 to witcher 1, compare dragon age 2 to dragon age 1.

This is a great explaining of desired simplicity vs the simplification thats taken hold of the industry.