» Wed Dec 14, 2011 11:53 am
It's laughable the way the OP talks like he knows "real RPG's", but from his ridiculous comments, it's clear that he doesn't have a clue how to actually "role play". He seems to be expecting the game to hold his hand through every little action and dictate exactly how much excitement and/or emotional content he gets from those actions, or from the environment, or the NPC's, or any other part of the game. It's like he's expecting the game to cater exclusively to everything that he thinks an RPG should constitute, and when it doesn't, he throws a tantrum like a child.
There are no defined "rules" about what an RPG is or isn't. I've never seen any such rules, and I sure as hell don't try to live by any. There are different kinds of RPG's, some more complex or diverse than others. I have plenty of ideas for improving Skyrim, but I'm also blown away by what it already has. The term "role playing" encompasses many different meanings to different players. As far as I'm concerned, I can "role play" with Minecraft, or ArmA 2, or DCS Black Shark, or Dirt 3... lots of games that aren't considered "RPG's" in the classic sense, but that doesn't stop me from using my imagination to get more out of a game. RPG's, in my opinion, are no different.
While it's true that there are games that do in fact, just plain svck, people are more likely to be disappointed with any game that they approach with rigid, inflexible, set-in-stone expectations. This is what he OP has done. He gives no allowance for Skyrim to be anything but exactly how he thinks it should be, or what he was hoping it would be. And since Skyrim somehow failed to provide him with the imagination that he obviously lacks, it somehow becomes the game's fault.
You don't like it? I say go get yourself a fresh copy of Battlefield 3 and close that hole under your nose.
- S -