Couldn't agree more Jackal.

@EJ Oblivion is much better then Skyrim.

I loved all their games. Maybe cuz I'm old and just don't care that it's a game and it isn't my real life. I care more about my roof leaking, which it is and getting fixed tomorrow. I play the games because I love them. They each have taught me something though.
Morrowind taught me that I can play on an xbox and be awesome.
Oblivion taught me on the PC that I can build my own PC to play a game and absolutely LOVE the beauty of Cyrodill.
Fallout 3 taught me that I can play a different game and totally love it's dirty but yet absorbing game. (the dlcs were awesome, especially point lookout? is that the name? with the boardwalk and hillbillies?. I loved it.
Fallout NV though NOT done by bethesda kinda, gave me choices I thought were confusing yet so much dang fun. Dialogue was best ever.
Skyrim: pretty, but yet i've done 160 maybe less, i'm not sure misc quests. I haven't touched the main or civil war quests with this last character. I'm loving what they did.
The buggiest games are Fallout NV and Skyrim, the rest were fine.
Guess I'm old. I played Mario wayyyyyyy back. My son got it for christmas from me. Best gift ever. the nes/snes. Both
So yeah. I'm grateful to do what I do, when I can do it.
so call me a fan girl whatever.

I love Bethesda games, And MARIO!!!!

isn't this what the original fan-base has been saying all along?

Uldred

Sorry but I'm not the type of man to just trade $60 for a paper weight. If you got sold a car and the engine didn't work but the manufacture said "don't worry we'll fix that eventually, but you should really love the paint job". You'd be upset right? Whats the difference to that and to what Bethesda did in releasing a broke game?

While major things like streamlining can't be fixed, there are a few things Bethesda can do for the GOTY edition that will make amends.

1. Make NPCs recognize your status in guilds and for the MQ.
2. Stop NPC introduction lines after a couple of interactions.
3. Enable NPC random non-lethal brawls upon collision, with guards choosing to ignore them or throw them in jail for a day. PC ( with high speechcraft ) may be able to breakup fight, if PC fails he is hit and part of fight. (chance of going to jail)
4. Only allow PC to align with one faction in addition to imperial/stormcloak. This will add replay value.
5. Add consequence to actions, NPC with bad disposition to you shouldn't want to train you. (Faengold/Sven)
6. Allow beggers/theives/bad kids to attempt to pickpocket PC. Where upon if you catch them, you can turn them in to guards.
7. If married, allow spouse to notice any disease you have and offer to go to the market to get a remedy.



Wait these all sound like good modding material..

Forget the GOTY edition! Fix the broke game you sold PS3 users or give a refund. On a side note, you can't call it game of the year if the game is broken. GOTY should be reserved for working titles that have working quests that players can finish.

What happened to the series...

There are increasingly fewer guilds with any sort of competing interests. The guilds that remain are shallow and the top rank can be achieved with minimal effort. For example Morrowind had skill requirements to advance to the top. Why can a hack and slash barbarian become the leader of the College of Winterhold by completing a few insipid linear dungeons? Even if Oblivion's guild quests were mostly boring (exception Dark Brotherhood) at least they had content and semi-realistic progression. With Skyrim I feel like the guilds serve no actual function.

Forget any notion of increased realism/depth. For example, an unreasonable amount of non-player characters are unable to be killed. I mean seriously what happened to consequences for your actions? Weapons and armor don't decay. There are no custom spells. Every quest tells you exactly where to go and holds an arrow over the head of the objective. I can't get into a game where there is a magic arrow that marks every target. Each game in the series progressively gets fewer weapon and armor choices. And don't argue adding a few mini-games creates immersion. They aren't even skill based, for example why would a character with 15 in smithing be able to create a flawless item every time. You can have smithing maxed out in a few hours, what a complete joke. And the removal of attributes in favor of perks is clearly a ploy to cater to the COD crowd. Though not necessarily the idea of perks just the way it was implemented.

Then there is the fact that the lore of each province since Morrowind has seemed shallower and uninspired. Nords or some variant are the cornerstone of nearly every fantasy universe and there is literally nothing unique about Skyrim and Nordic culture in comparison to most generic fantasy universes.

In conclusion call it streamlining and justify it any way you want, but the Elder Scrolls of the past was about simulating another world where anything was possible. Skyrim is one huge step backwards and you can boast of merits through its rave reviews, records sales, and mountains of cash generated but time will be its ultimate judge.

Yes. It was boring before. It's not as boring now. There are other improvements to be made, sure, but Skyrim is a mountain of better than any previous TES game.

For the most part, i agree with whats said here. The guild design since Morrwind has been rubbish. You can become Archmage in Oblivion without casting a single spell, and in Skyrim, you can get there with a whopping repitoir of 2 spells. The reliance on internal, world shattering storylines is anot far, far too over the top. Does the world need to be under threat from the Daedra, Hist crazy mercs AND the King of Worms at the same time? Skyrim isn't much better, what with the Eye of Magnus, the closing of the Ebonmere and the Assassination of the Emperor, on top of the return of the dragons. Too many world changing events all at once dilutes the importance of each.

I also agree with the Lore thing, but to a lesser extent. There is still some of the beloved esestential nonsense and mythos in Skyrim, more in fact than in Oblivion, which was basicly a textbook Demonic invasion. Paarthunax is himself something of a Vivec junior. Still, i would like to see more books, since i think asking for in-story elements is a lost cause in a voice acted open ended sandbox. We'll see what Bioware can pull off with DAIII, see if the same depth of conversation is possible in a Skyrim style game.

Finally, i agree that 'essential' characters should go. I remember in Morrowind, i watched my brother murder Cassius Coscades, and a box appeared at the bottom of the screen telling him he was now unable to finish the main story. THAT is the extent to which characters should be essential. If someone blunders and kills them, let them reload and not make the same mistake, dont deny them the ability to kill someone.

I do dissagree, however, that the removal of atributes and the switch to perks is catering to the COD crowd. I think it is the logical progression into a less spread-sheet based RPG, something which i completely endorse. With some refining, the Perk system could bring back many of the old 'skills' which we lost as specialisations and radically increase the number of potential character builds we've seen. As it was, if you played Oblivion or Morrowind long enough, every character would turn out the same. All skills at 100, all stats at 100. The only unique atribute was your birthsign. There is absolutely no way, short of cheating, to get all the perks. This means it has infinately more individuality than the old system had.

All and all, i would say TES has grown. Rare is the person who keeps all their childhood friends when they grow up.

My only issue with attributes and skills is the narrowing down and lack of basic physical biology in the character. Every character, save Khajiit are EXACTLY the same aside from a racial trait and some skill improvements. It boggles me when my Nord can climb to the peak of The Throat of the World, delve to the bottom of Blackreach, brawl with man and mer without a weapon in hand and bare knuckled. Yet no matter how long or far he runs, no matter how much he climbs or jumps, no matter how many knuckles he's bloodied, he never gets faster, his jumps never higher, and his punches, never harder. It seems to be lacking in basic anatomy, adaptation, and can a Wood Elf haul as much weight as an Orc? The bodies of the characters are locked in a timeless shell, never changing or developing from basic physical activities. There's no independence in the characters anymore, aside form their independent skills and perks, but they all run the same speed and carry the same weight (Unless you fortified the Fatigue) but they basically hit just as hard. There's no more slow moving tank of an Orc with a power defence and offence, or a fast moving agile Bosmer who's nimble and cunning movements make him a fearsome contender. It's ok though, I can still swing my axe a bit and gain magicka from it.

The best for whom I would ask? Although you and probably others feel excited in Skyrim, this may not apply to everyone. To be honest, I feel the other way around. Playing Skyrim is like repeating a song even if its a good one - it becomes boring sooner or later.


Sure, Skyrim is not a bad game but it is not a good game either since Bethesda made many mistakes. Not so big ones that make the game unplayable, but mistakes that are recognized by those who are used to former TES titles. Skyrim was made for a wider audience, it became easier to handle and easier to understand for those who weren't into role playing yet. But difficulty and complexity were key features of MW and also Oblivion, these features have been cut down while other things like good looks and straight forward playing were pushed to attract attention of casual gamers and players who are used to a more simple gameplay.

Experiments are fine but as you can see from the day when Skyrim was announced until the time after the release that many of the high expectations that were forced during the pre-release time were not fulfilled. You can see that the presentations during this time were only marketing orientated. There's nothing bad in this but the development lacked of new and creative ideas to make the game more then just average.

I just have to ask this: Why would they want to step back to the shallowness of Neverwinter Nights? I find Skyrim to be the deepest RPG since The Gold Box. No, not even Baldur's Gate comes close.



"Difficulty and Complexity" are no more "Key Features" of Daggerfall, Morrowind, or Oblivion than "Game Breaking Bugs", "Fetch Quests within Fetch Quests", "Horribly Shallow AI", and "Fugly NPCs"

the "Key Features" of Morrowind, Oblivion, Daggerfall, Skyrim, and Arena are "Massive environments worth exploring", "A living, breathing world", and the series mantra: "Be who you want to be, do what you want to do." Skyrim has managed to hit the first two dead-on, and falters only next to Oblivion on the third.

Morrowind is in last place in regards to "Meeting the developers vision". Is Morrowind a game? Yes, it's actually a Great game. Is it a good "Elder Scrolls" game? HELL NO.

I have no idea what you're even implying here. Neverwinter Nights had a class system that meant that the player had to actually have the slightest clue about what they were doing. I mean your statement would make sense if you'd have meant it in a "Why go back to Neverwinter Nights when we could go back to Pool of Radiance" or somesuch, but I don't think this is what you meant at all. The wide array of class, dual-class and prestige class choices offered a wide slew of options for the player. It had a system of "perks" and stats that meant that there was an actual semblance of strategy in the way a character levelled and played. If you screwed your min-maxing up, your character would get stomped in online play.

Skyrim doesn't even come close to being deep in this aspect because there is no consequence for your choices at all. The perk system offers branching lines but choosing one doesn't mean that you'll lose the other. It simply means you have to throw more experience into an easily levelled skill like smithing, alchemy, enchanting or conjuration to farm perk points. There's no sense of ever having to think about the levelling choices your character makes in Skyrim because levelling smithing can give you points to make you better at swinging a mace. There is no thought process involved in Skyrim's system in the same way that Neverwinter Nights has one because there is a strong focus on balance and strategy in a levelling system like NWN because it NEEDS to be balanced in order for it to work. NWN had a huge online following during it's time and for years later and if it didn't work the whole concept of online play would crash into the nearest wall. Skyrim has no such thought assigned to it and as such the levelling system is without reason at all. Points can be randomly assigned to any skill the player desires with no consequence attached. There's no need to think about what you need to put your next perk point in because they're so plentiful that they become valueless.

Neverwinter Nights is on the other hand a poor example of a system to compare a TES game with because as we're all aware, Skyrim has now done away with any sense of classes at all. A better example would be something like Arcanum, where your skillpoint choices meant everything. Levelling took forever and you had to choose between being able to use that schematic or being able to shoot your gun better, or whether that extra point in charisma was worth it. The points meant everything because if you didn't put them in the right places getting through the Boil or the Black Mountain Mines. Your skill points were most certainly finite and every decision needed to be weighted. Remember when you had to actually think about your decisions in an RPG? Well, not in Skyrim!

I understand that in a game that manages to make dragons just as annoying as cliff racers applying a finality to perk points is going to be a next to impossible task because due to constantly respawning mobs the game basically throws experience points at you (It doesn't help that I can stand in front of one of these godawful essential NPCs and spam [attack of my choice] to constantly gain levels) meaning that the player will never, ever be short of perk points or levels. Due to level scaling you don't even need the points most of the time, because everything is just as easy as it was from the first part of the game.

Skyrim's "deep" RPG system perpetuates a state of stasis in which nothing ever changes, levels are infinite and choices are meaningless.

I have no idea what you're even implying here. Neverwinter Nights had a class system that meant that the player had to actually have the slightest clue about what they were doing. I mean your statement would make sense if you'd have meant it in a "Why go back to Neverwinter Nights when we could go back to Pool of Radiance" or somesuch, but I don't think this is what you meant at all. The wide array of class, dual-class and prestige class choices offered a wide slew of options for the player. It had a system of "perks" and stats that meant that there was an actual semblance of strategy in the way a character levelled and played. If you screwed your min-maxing up, your character would get stomped in online play.

Skyrim doesn't even come close to being deep in this aspect because there is no consequence for your choices at all. The perk system offers branching lines but choosing one doesn't mean that you'll lose the other. It simply means you have to throw more experience into an easily levelled skill like smithing, alchemy, enchanting or conjuration to farm perk points. There's no sense of ever having to think about the levelling choices your character makes in Skyrim because levelling smithing can give you points to make you better at swinging a mace. There is no thought process involved in Skyrim's system in the same way that Neverwinter Nights has one because there is a strong focus on balance and strategy in a levelling system like NWN because it NEEDS to be balanced in order for it to work. NWN had a huge online following during it's time and for years later and if it didn't work the whole concept of online play would crash into the nearest wall. Skyrim has no such thought assigned to it and as such the levelling system is without reason at all. Points can be randomly assigned to any skill the player desires with no consequence attached. There's no need to think about what you need to put your next perk point in because they're so plentiful that they become valueless.

Neverwinter Nights is on the other hand a poor example of a system to compare a TES game with because as we're all aware, Skyrim has now done away with any sense of classes at all. A better example would be something like Arcanum, where your skillpoint choices meant everything. Levelling took forever and you had to choose between being able to use that schematic or being able to shoot your gun better, or whether that extra point in charisma was worth it. The points meant everything because if you didn't put them in the right places getting through the Boil or the Black Mountain Mines. Your skill points were most certainly finite and every decision needed to be weighted. Remember when you had to actually think about your decisions in an RPG? Well, not in Skyrim!

I understand that in a game that manages to make dragons just as annoying as cliff racers applying a finality to perk points is going to be a next to impossible task because due to constantly respawning mobs the game basically throws experience points at you (It doesn't help that I can stand in front of one of these godawful essential NPCs and spam [attack of my choice] to constantly gain levels) meaning that the player will never, ever be short of perk points or levels. Due to level scaling you don't even need the points most of the time, because everything is just as easy as it was from the first part of the game.

Skyrim's "deep" RPG system perpetuates a state of stasis in which nothing ever changes, levels are infinite and choices are meaningless.

Aside from your assessment of Skyrim's levelling system being completely off-base. (Who the hell plays like that?). "Munchkins Only" is NOT a "Deep" Roleplaying game experience. You've also displayed supreme ignorance of Skyrim's leveling system.

Wow... so, you're upset that Skyrim chose not to turn its back on the series vision (Be who you want to be, do what you want to do)? From what you said of Neverwinter Nights, you have NO freedom in that game - If you want to be anything, you have to play the game the way others dictate it to you. In Skyrim, you're allowed to play whoever the hell you want, whether it's a skilled swordsman, a heavily-armored juggernaut, a cunning thief, master wizard, http://livinginoblivion.wordpress.com/2011/12/10/the-elder-strolls/, or anything in between.

As for MK's quote - That has NOTHING to do with the vision of the series, which is Player Freedom. It just indicates how Self-absorbed MK is with his Mary Stu.

Except for the fact I said that Neverwinter Nights is a terrible example to use simply because it does adhere to a class-based system whereas TES has never, ever done that. Arcanum, Fallout 1/2 or hell, even System Shock 2 offer more suitable examples to compare to Skyrim's levelling system.

Your last paragraph in your preceding post indicated you have no clue how Skyrim's leveling system works - There aren't infinite Perk Points, because there aren't infinite skill levels. Also, Skyrim's a game meant to be played - Unlike other games, it's "over" content-wise long before you reach the Level Cap - In some games, that's where the "True" game begins - which is [censored] game design. And even the examples you gave for Arcanum and Fallout are antithesis to TES - you're supposed to be able to play a TES game the way you want to - You shouldn't be forced to choose between "Being more effective" or "Playing the Character you want to".


Skyrim creates its depth by NOT restricting the freedom to play the character you want, though some builds are painfully inadequete but still "Possible", such as Diplomats. You can't get ALL the perks you want - there are over two hundred in the game, and you can only attain level 80 or so before hitting the levelcap.

Good changes from MW to OB


More interesting ways to complete quests (such as DB contracts)
More individual styles of architecture
Major AI improvements, resulting in improvements in other areas such as stealth gameplay and combat as well
No more frustrating hit and miss combat, yet still skill based
Fairly captivating guild questlines of decent length
Some skill simplification made sense
Better graphics
You move at a decent speed

Bad changes from MW to OB


Fewer armour slots and no more layering
Fewer armour and weapon styles
Architectural styles less diverse from each other
Less choice and consequence
Far, far fewer factions to join
Half as many quests (MW ~ 400, OB ~ 200)
Less settlement content overall
Much smaller population
Landscape and political structure neutered from previous descriptions and rather generic
Lack of realistic world design (lacking in agriculture, manned forts etc.)
Ugly NPCs
The scaling, oh god, the scaling
Some good skill and weapon types removed, eg. spears

Good things from OB to SK

Back to ~ 400 quests (including radiant quests and misc. objectives)
Dungeon design, though still pretty linear, is much more proffesional and able to create a unique sense of wonder
More believable world again, economies make sense and political problems seem real
War added in fairly succesfully and forts are actual manned forts rather than just dungeons
Attractive NPCs
Radiant quests, most noticeably effective in random quests for the guilds.
Better graphics
Terrible scaling ameliorated and mostly decent
A few more armour types than Oblivion though still less than Morrowind
World art design improved from Oblivion
Dual wielding and better looking combat
Improved stealth detection system
More visceral magic

Bad things from OB to SK

Less settlement content and population than ever, can feel kinda empty at times
Loss of most of the interesting quests, eg. DB contracts are just "go here, kill person" again
Absolutely TINY faction lines with mostly terrible pacing and little of interest, major exception the thieves guild, no more factions than Oblivion (Unless you count each sides of the war as 2 though they're virtually identical)
Dragons are scaled to the player too much and are woefully easy to defeat, and have lousy AI
Equipment slots further simplified
Few spells and no custom spells
Very simplistic and underdone magic system
Attributes completely removed, no such thing as strength or speed anymore, a master swordsman could not break through a paper bag with a small mace and all races end in ties
Perks, which could have been good, implemented in an extremely haphazard, easily exploitable and nonsensical manner
Architecture neither more uniquely distinguishable between styles (like MW) or having many styles (Like OB)
Generic town architecture used in more than 2/3 of settlements including hold capitals
Lack of random conversations
Mountains actually seem to mainly function by making areas between them feel incredibly small, and are often far too small themselves to be taken seriously





There are my current comments. I have more, but I can't think of them right now. My Skyrim comments are more detailed since they're fresh in my mind.

Series is better now than it ever has been.

Late, but I just wanted to say that this post is excellent.

it was mainily a joke, everyone says how morrowind was the pinnicle of the tes series, when really it dropped just as much stuff as the other game. I couldn't stand daggerfall, i tried to play it way to late, i loved oblivion skyrim and morrowind.

The change from Daggerfall to Morrowind is different. The whole design philosophy was changed from huge scale simulation/focus on content to micro scale representation/focus on detail. Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim all had similar scale and design philosophy they belong to the same category and can therefore be far more easily compared.

You can Like Fallout 1 & 2 more than Fallout 3 & NV or vice versa but they are too different to actually really compare. Comparing Fallout 1 to Fallout 2 and Fallout 3 to Fallout 3 can be done much better since they are the same kind of game.

Actually, Skyrim and Oblivion returned to Daggerfall's focus on Simulation and content.

.....with barely half the content.

If I could get DF and DOSBOX to work even passably well on my system, I'd play more than the starter dungeon. What little I saw looked promising, and character creation was extremely flexibile (even though I don't care for the UI). Sadly, that's where I left off the first two times I tried it, and this time I didn't even make it out before the inability to get the controls to function reliably made it too frustrating to continue. It's one thing not to hit the opponent due to low skills, but when you can't even swing at them due to mouse interface issues.....game over.

To me each game seems to lose replayability as the series progresses. Morrowind I keep finding new things in the world everytime I go exploring. Oblivion I have put the most hours into but I can no longer vanilla because it is so bland without mods... Skyrim is even worse. I've played 50 hours and everything is already becoming generic and familiar.... and annoying. Theres no depth in either of them. Sure Morrowind is dated but the content and depth beat the heck out of Skyrim and Oblivion by a long shot IMO.