I voted maybe. Fact is, we don't know. I hope it will be better though. (And yes, if you haven't found out already by just about half of my posts in this forum, Daggerfall is my favorite game.)

Though honestly, if its just like oblivion fused with better gameplay mechanics and actually feels like it has the same spirit of the past elder scrolls games, I think that would be phenomenal. I loved oblivion, but the main thing about it to me was that it just didn't feel like an elder scrolls game. It felt watered down and less like Tamriel. This could be fixed, and if it is in Skyrim, I will be one happy Argonian.

So true. I enjoyed Daggerfall, Battlespire, Morrowind, and Oblivion. I don't compare them, because if I enjoyed it that's all that matters. I will always enjoy my fond memories of playing through these games.

I mean I think a lot of Daggerfall fans (like me) completely look past the fact that game had so many bugs it was nearly broken. Why do they look past it's negatives? Because, they enjoyed it!

As for the poll, I rather not vote.

Haven't played Daggerfall... Yet. So I don't know.

As long its above (not just a little) Oblivion it will be worthwile.

Oh, shut up. Of course they won't have a better character progression in your opinion, you already concluded that no game in the future will ever do it as well before the games have come out!

How about instead of forming your opinion of future games before they are even made, you wait until you have details about the character progression to form one? Then you won't look quite as biased.

It's tough to compare them, but even knowing next to nothing about Skyrim I think we can be pretty sure, based on trends in the industry, that it will be a very different game than Daggerfall. Daggerfall was the type of game that could have only existed on the PC in the mid 90s. It was just wildly ambitious in a way I don't think we'll see again. So while Skyrim could quite possibly be as good as Daggerfall, in the sense that I'll have just as much fun sitting down and playing it, I don't think there's any hope that it will recreate the complexity of that game.

There are a few things that might see a return. I loved how if you took to long on certain quests or gave the quest object to the wrong party, you were hunted down by thugs. There was some of this in Fallout 3, so let's hope it comes back. A lot of people like the advantage/disadvantage system from Daggerfall, so there's an outside chance something similar might be in Skyrim, though it will probably be simplified quite a bit, maybe built along the lines of the perk system in Fallout. I'd happily buy everyone on this forum a drink if Skyrim included the same character creation system from Daggerfall, but I get the feeling that won't be the case. In Daggerfall it was possible to use disadvantages to create a very weak character, and I'm worried that this is something game companies and gamers would never tolerate today.

Most of Daggerfall's other features--trials, seasons, the calendar having actual relevance to gameplay, the enormous list of skills--are likely a thing of the past. I'd love to be proven wrong.

The only justifiable answer in this poll is "Maybe" considering that not only has nobody played it, nobody has even found out any significant details about the game (well, a few GI subscribers might by now). Even then, we all have our prejudices, and the concepts of "better" or "worse" are so very subjective... And that's a good thing. I can already tell you that Skyrim will be the best TES game yet to some people, and the worst to some others, as well as all points in between.

Not really true. We know that it's based on an engine that's been built around their experience with Oblivion and Fallout 3, meaning that we know it'll probably be at least similar in overall design to their last three RPGs, and we know some very vague and basic things about the plot. We also know a fair bit about the current Bethesda as a developer and as a company, and about Bethesda as they were in the mid-1990s when Daggerfall was developed and released. From all of that, it's easy to at least make an educated guess on this question at least in terms of specifics, like "will it be as big as Daggerfall?" (no), "will its plot be as heavily driven by more complex politics and regional conflict as Daggerfall's?" (probably not), or "will it be more stable and complete of a product than Daggerfall?" (yes, absolutely).

We obviously can't say much that's all that definite about Skyrim right now, but we still have enough information about the game and the company making it to make some pretty solid educated guesses as to the sort of game that it's going to be, and as to how that game will compare to Daggerfall.

Assuming the POV of the poster above, my educated guess:

Will it be as big wide in scope and range as DF: No
Will politic meddle in, will we be able to change politic: No
Will we have as many skills as DF, and way to make our character unique and yet manageable as DF: No
Will skill influence your character as much as daggerfall : Probably no due to obliivon trned and market trend
Will you pass as many hours on it as you did in DF, assuming you re a DF fan: No

I played Daggerfall the other day. First time. I got to the first Rat and it beat me to death. I stopped playing after that.

To the point, If Skyrim lets me leave the tutorial dungeon (which Im sure it will, every main Elder Scrolls game had one except Morrowind.) without dying, It will surpass Daggerfall.

Daggerfall wasn't really that big in terms of scope. Sheer land and dungeon size yes, but scope... well, what they had planned for it might have been, but the finished product really isn't.


This wasn't really involved in Daggerfall either. You never meddled or changed much of anything in any meaningful way - the main quest's political involvement came more from writing than from anything that actually influenced the game world or involved your character in any way.

Short attention span syndrome ? Or weak resistance to adversity, aka weak will ?
You sir named probably the worst reason why someone would shut down a game.

There are tons of reason why you would not like it. Being beated by a rat doesn t speak well of yourself, neither does a need of tutorial, and even less not trying to learn..

OOPS confusion with arena...on those 2 points. yousirareright.

I think my point stands. Everything you've listed gives us nothing more than assumptions, even if grounded by other facts... Even the most recent clues to the plot, our most concrete pieces of information, give little more as fact than the names of our chief opponent and protagonist, which alone say precious little about the game. It's not reasonable to judge a game on our own assumptions of it, when said game is still a Pandora's Box of myriad combinations within a single package.

That, mind you, will disappear in a day or two, as a great many concrete facts will come flooding in.

Yes, a thousand times better.

They're strong enough assumptions to make them more or less certain, though. Saying that it'll be more stable and finished than Daggerfall isn't quite the same as saying that it'll be like Oblivion - one's something that may or may not happen (the latter), the other is something that absolutely and without a doubt will happen (the former - I'm not entirely sure that it's possible for something that's been in development as long as Skyrim, or that the developer's already claiming is as close to ready for release as Skyrim supposedly is, to be in anywhere near the state that Daggerfall was when it released). Whether or not we're working with assumptions, there's still a range of validity on those assumptions and several of them are definite enough to be worth simply assuming as true until we have reason to do otherwise.

We will see.

I know the answer!!!
Greets Nostradamus. :tongue:

i really wish i could play daggerfall to have something to compare to.

It was simply a joke, I definately will get back to playing it sometime before Skyrim.

I'm not sure if it will or not. It has a lot to live up to. If it really wants to beat Daggerfall it will have to be the best TES game of all time.

It's free, if the obtaining is the problem. Go ask the guys/gals over in the past games section. They'll help you out. I'm tired and must sleep.

Anyway, considering I consider Oblivion and Falllout 3 to be better games than Daggerfall (I definitely don't think Arena is better, though, and as for Morrowind... meh, I'm not quite sure), yes, I believe Skyrim will be a better game than Daggerfall as well. It's all subjective, though.

Kinda hard to say at this point with how little we know and have seen. I hope it will be as good, and I'm willing to bet my hat that it will be.

This isn't meant to insult anyone in any way, but why are people supporting that piece of two year development, all broken promises, unfinished, buggy, repetitive product known as Daggerfall? I've played the bugs out of Daggerfall, and that's to say I've played it a lot, but it is a perfect example of half a game/an unfinished, rushed game. If all it takes to make an amazing game that blows people's brains out is to make Daggerfall 2... then why is Bethesda bothering with these longer development cycles involving significantly more people, a much more polished product, much higher budgets, much higher detail, and much more general... fun put into them? Daggerfall's got some good mechanics (character creation, reputation system, banks), but it's just an empty shell... an incredibly delicious, although very brittle, empty shell.

With that said, yes, I do believe it is an entirely subjective thing, but I personally don't see why Daggerfall is a bar that must be reached. Then again, my bar is Oblivion, and I know many people would disagree with that. Still, if Skyrim launches in the condition Daggerfall does, I think my head might explode, and that's not a good thing. A game that supposedly crashed every 10 minutes and had an unbeatable storyline is in HORRIBLE condition. I think, on top of Bethesda's recent criticism over New Vegas (I know they didn't develop it, but it's still relevant to their image), such a game may either ruin them financially or critically (the latter is much more likely, as gamers don't really care much about bugs, in the long run, it seems).