You know, there's this mentality that anyone who has any mass negative comments to make about Oblivion absolutely hates Oblivion. I'll have you know I throw the book at Oblivion. There are so many things I find flawed in its mechanics, so many design and gameplay styles which I do not find to my tastes, so many staples of an RPG removed. And yet I do not hate Oblivion. In fact, I played it for three years. I still play it. I still recommend it to people as a worthy purchase. I find your comment of "you could just not play it" laughable. I can have serious critique of a product, voice those serious critiques as I wish, and still enjoy that product as I will just fine, thank you.
My point
is this is not the place for anyone to bash Oblivion, because Morrowind can be bashed just as hard (it should be noted that I don't lean one way or the other for preference).
And there are a lot of things on that list that I actually agree with. Children, against my desire to have no essentially-flagged characters. Multiplayer gameplay. Nudity, not that I baldly consider anyone who wants that level of realism "desperate," but I don't want Bethesda to have to deal with the fallout of legitimately making it a part of their game. Dragons, as the lore is concrete that dragons are rare and sacred and not to be thrown out in a game lightly. Destructible environs. A significant rework of how they currently develop the world, and a large usage of resources.
Okay.
But for everything else, there are large arguments that can be marshalled against them.
Levitation broken and pointless? I can't believe you've used levitation much. (and as an aside, since when was having an intrinsic point a requirement for something to exist? There was a spell in Morrowind, Resist Corprus Disease, that was completely useless, as the player could never catch corprus outside of a scripted event. But it sure added to the believability and three-dimensional qualities of the world as a whole).
I used levitation quite frequently. It was necessary with Morrowind's difficult terrain, including all the swimming trips, and even having to use levitate to get the high fane, or to get the bow for the ashlanders (it's been a while since I've done the particular quest). I honestly just don't see its merits in Oblivion. As far as Corprus Resistance, that isn't really a fair comparison, because for all intents and purpose, it didn't even do anything.
Thrown weapons, crossbows, and staves are redundant and therefore pointless? Then I guess you wouldn't object to the next title removing different varieties of weapon quality, getting rid of, say, iron and silver and ebony? You wouldn't object to removing both the blade and blunt skills and simply making a single "attack" or "melee" skill? After all, simplification in the case of redundancies is perfectly acceptable, right? Of course not. RPGs are about options and customization via choices in all aspects. Multiple types and varieties of weapons, even if they are seemingly redundant, falls well into the category of "choices in all aspects."
I didn't call thrown weapons or crossbows redundant. I actually kind liked thrown weapons, but I don't mind just using a bow instead. Crossbows wouldn't be redundant, they would be, literally, useless. Realistically they have less range, less firing power, and slower reload than a bow. The only real benefit is that it would be more accurate, but with Oblivion's weapon system there wouldn't be any difference in accuracy except for the arc. As far as staffs, they have a different function now. It's not like they've been removed. As far as I can see, they're more useful now instead of doing something what a warhammer does.
None of this means I wouldn't mind seeing these features in a future TES game. My point as far as weapons is Bethesda did what they did, and I can see the merit in their decisions.
Cities that are "closed" purely in a game-mechanics-only sense are "safer?" Minus the fact that hostile NPCs can still *cough* enter said closed cities, just as the player can. Closed cities was and is nothing more than Bethesda's sacrifice to prevent the cities from overtaxing framerates. And if they can find a way to reduce the framerate crunch (Umbra, rendering optimization middleware already licensed by ZeniMax Online, their sister company), then closed cities will be a thing of the past.
Fair enough. But there
are mods that open cities. Sorry, Open Cities.
Fast travel is optional and the world isn't designed around its use? Then I guess such quest-lines like the Fighters and Mages guilds don't at all send the player bouncing from guild-hall to distant guild-hall after every completed quest. And I guess I have the option to see someone in the world whose job it is to transport individuals, pay that person, and then travel. I guess I have the option to use Mark and Recall and Intervention. Oh wait... Fast travel undermines how distance is represented and dealt with believably in the world. And it is a major base mechanic of the game that pushes out all other systems of travel, so it is just as optional as Combat is optional within Oblivion.
I never said anything about Mark/Recall or Transport (both of which are features I miss), but Fast Travel is by no means necessary, and if it really bugs someone that it isn't that realistic, they can walk.
And as to what's the point of rehashing and re-pointing out things that we feel were inadequate or poorly-done... God forbid we're trying to articulate arguments to sway the design philosophies of TES:V, just as widespread arguments swayed the design philosophies of TES:IV.
But this is
not the place. There are a couple threads dedicated specifically for suggestions for TESV.
My point isn't to make an argument on which game is better, I'm just tired of seeing threads hijacked into "Why we should all boycott Oblivion" threads. And this isn't directed at you. I won't mention any names (Qawsed, Dager), but I'm just trying to say that there's no point in arguing about which is better, because everyone has their own opinions on both games, including me, and this isn't the place to opine on what was wrong with Oblivion. Bethesda's intent through M'aiq was, as uesp.net says: "to poke fun of the things that forum members complained about on the official forums, and as partial rebuttals to those comments." The fact is, Bethesda did what they thought would best market the game, and that is their only obligation, and it looks like they were successful.
If there were things anyone didn't like in Oblivion, go post in the TESV suggestion thread or something, but don't do your Oblivion bashing here.
» Fri May 27, 2011 10:30 am 
. state it, but do it non-hostile and with the word "Maiq" in it at least 2 times 