Might I point out that this is just the vague speculation of a journalist from a relatively restricted demo. I'm not even sure that comment related to the gameworld, it was 'Skyrim is approximately the same size as Oblivion' not, 'Skyrim is approximately the same size as Cyrodiil', and don't forget that 'size' could equally mean 'scale' or 'scope'.

You cant compare the level of detail and depth of the gameworld of those games against that of morrowind or oblivion.

Besides, i dont know why people wants huuge maps...i mean, oblivion was big but was pretty much empty and the landscape felt pretty boring. I much rather have a smaller map, but more detailed landscapes and unique places.

Ok AGAIN... folks.. the last 2-3 times they were asked how big game x was and compared it to game y they ment the entire game NOT the map.

As in main quest side quests .. in simple terms if you played ob 150 hours you likely will play skyrim that long too as the content is about the same..

But the map may be bigger or smaller then ob.. most likely bigger as making a mountain as tall as the one they talk about wouldnt work very well in an ob sized map.. spoecialy as its only a tiny part of the skyrim map. They have to cram a giant mountain AND an even bigger canyon.. some grand forests and tundra and snow and blah blah blah AND 5 great cities and a bunch of towns... and some lakes and ruins and dragons and mamoths and and and..

Until they say skyrim is x square miles they arnt talking about a ,map.

You are comparing 2 other games, which have nothing to do with TES, to a TES game. Red Dead Redemption and Just Cause 2 are both games where you only play one character and not even close to the amount of side missions that TES has. TES is so much more complex as an RPG, something the other 2 games are not, than the time needed to create a game world that size AND make the RPG aspect of the game would take way too long.

You can't compare games that aren't even of the same genre and expect Bethesda to do the same just because someone else make a huge game world in a completely separate game.

Why is it disappointing? From the sounds of it, there is going to be a lot more to explore. And Oblivion's map was actually quite large. Plus Cyrodiil by lore is a lot larger than the province of skyrim. So that means that we will be seeing a lot more of skyrim than the condensed Cyrodiil. Add to that, when other province mods are cranked out, they would be scaled larger in landmass. I was actually hoping for Skyrim to be the same size if not a little larger than the cyrodiil they portrayed in Oblivion.

I guess you didn't play those two games. they ARE very detailed. skyrim should be at least the size of red dead.

I wonder what would happen if they come out and say Skyrim is actually smaller ^^ I would be so sad

Talking about world map size, was Morrowind bigger than Oblivion? Someone can answer this plz I would like to compare Morrowind vs Skyrim concerning size
thks!

That is quite true. One thing we must remember here is that the way Oblivion's map was structured, most of the more rugged terrain was towards the borders, which made navigating it a lot easier. By comparison, Skyrim is going to have lots of mountains, so you'll likely often find yourself in situations where the place you want to go is just a little further, but you have to go a long way around because there's unscalable mountains in the way, especially if the game doesn't have levitation (Not that I'm using this as an argument against levitation, I actually want to see it return, but it can't be denied that having it makes all those mountains much less inconvenient, that's part of why it was such a useful spell in Morrowind.) this should produce the illusion of greater size. Not that I've ever felt Oblivion's world wasn't big enough, I certainly wouldn't have complained if Skyrim's world was larger, IF it did not come at the expense of the detail of the world itself, but I can live with a map of about the same size as Oblivion. Really, what's most important to me is that the world feel more varied and interesting to explore, because that's the real problem I had with Oblivion's world, it felt much less satisfying to explore than Morrowinds. Really, if I could choose between a game world the size of Daggerfall's that was bland and repetitive, or one no bigger than Oblivion's but quite interesting to explore, I'll go with the latter any day. In the end, even if you can make the biggest game world ever made, if you can't keep me interesting in exploring it, than the whole thing is just wasted space.



Maybe in 2030, but by then, Crysis level graphics and physics will look pretty dated.



And what alien planet do you live on where the size of the game world has anything to do with "targeting a more mainstream audience"? Or are you just looking for any oportunity you can find to accuse Bethesda of neglecting their "fan-base" in favor of the "mainstream audience" (In doing so implying that both are always mutually exclusive.) even when it makes no sense?

Oh, right, I forgot, whenever something in games isn't made EXACTLY the way you like it, it's the fault of those "mainstream" or "casual" gamers. It's not like there can ever be any other reason behind design decisions. Nope, it's all those eviiil casual gamers trying to ruin all our games, what else could it be?



No, Oblivion's map was actually somewhat bigger than Morrowind's, but to some players, it didn't feel bigger.

Morrowind was quite a lot smaller than Oblivion in terms of map size

I would actually be very happy if the map size was the same as OB, with a few less dungeons and more varied landscape types I think it will be perfect. Plus, I am guessing (or hoping) that you will be spending a decent amount of time climbing around mountain passes which would be awesome and not take up extra square miles since it would be vertical.

Yes, i′ve played both of them, and i′m refering more to how they are "built", if you use the construction set on pc you will see what i mean.
First, JC2 and RDR, unlike a TES game, don′t have as many detailed and varied landmarks (dungeons,cities and buildings with interiors). JC2 and RDR have randomly generated "peds", while Oblivion′s enemies and NPC′s are hand placed and given unique ai packages, dialog, quests and scripts.
You can′t just create a Landscape the size of Just Cause 2 and fill it the same way than Oblivion and Morrowind did.

Quality, not quantity.

As long as the world is interesting, and can hold my attention. I don't want a vast number of bland places like Oblivion. I would much rather have fewer, yet more distinct and detailed locations. Plus, with more stuff to do in those locations.

I have played both of those games. Neither one is nearly as complex as Oblivion, much less what they are planning on for Skyrim. Again, you are comparing 2 games that are not RPG's to an RPG. I'm sorry, but there is so much difference between the 2 that comparing them won't work. Just look at all the classes you can choose from in Oblivion, Red Dead nor Just Cause 2 had that. Look at all the buildings that you can go into as well as dungeons, not even close to the same amount in Red Dead or Just Cause 2.

I understand you want a larger game world, I would love one too. I know that's not possible within a time frame that workds for them. You need to realize that too.

you really can tell that red dead redemption feel less "alive" than oblivion/morrowind ? I can't. I don't care about the technology behind each of the games, I SEE that Rockstar made a huge believable game, and I expect at least the same size from Beth concerning a late 2011 game.

I don't want that.

@groquooic2- How many dungeons did Red Dead have? Over 200 like Oblivion? How many sidequests, specific named NPC's with dialog and quests? Rockstar didn't have to fill that game world with anything near the amount of detail, loot, quests and unique NPC's so they could afford a larger game world. Skyrim being the same square miles as OB Cyrodiil would be just about perfect once you factor in less dungeons, huge mountains and varied landscapes. Not to mention a giant Canyon.

Just think though...look at a map of Tamriel. The size of Skyrim is much smaller than Cyrodiil. But being the same saize means it will be bigger in area...

It's not like the engine limits the size of the world. I mean Daggerfall was in 98 and it was 63,000 square miles while Oblivion was 16 square miles. It's about how they want the world to be and Oblivion was an ideal size.

I fail to see how this is a problem. Oblivion's game world was huge, but the intrinsic, somewhat dull nature of the world reduced the apparent size to the player. As long as the landscapes and environments of Skyrim are varied with booming mountain ranges, stark tundra, and lush forests, I don't think this is bad news at all. Considering that Bethesda has 100 people working on the game, I'm expecting a deep gameplay world and experience. If anything, this news was welcoming. I'm glad they managed to keep the world size this large.

game are evolving. open world games get bigger and bigger. sorry to be disappointed by learning that skyrim will be the same size as its predecessor. the problem is that beth has no competition on consoles, on the RPG side. sorry but after playing Just cause 2 or read dead redemption, I will have great trouble getting into this whole "epicness" that skyrim will try to get the player into, knowing the midgetness of the gameworld. gaming world is evolving. and yes, TES games have more "quests" than other free-roam non-RPG game world, but that's not the point.

I'm ok with Skyrim being the same size as Cyrodiil, I thought it was plenty big. Of course you can argue that Skyrim being a desolate northern country there should be lots and lots of open space with nothing in it. But then we're back to fast travel, cause how long will you actually be running around, encountering nothing but wolves and bears, before you get bored and fast travel to some action?

I like to run around and explore myself, but it gets old eventually, and I for one will start fast traveling out of boredom. I'm sure BGS will make it plenty interesting. Hopefully so much so that I'll never be tempted to fast travel, cause that kills it a bit.

It's quite dejecting to me, if actually true. If the scale of the map is that size I at least hope there'd be flying available, since already one loss is established (the map being approximately the same size as Oblivion).

Oblivion was NOT a small gameworld. Sure, it doesnt compare to something like just cause 2, but it was pretty large. Try playing it again. Obligion was shaped in a weird way too, and Skyrim is more like a big circle, so you can go all the way across in any direction without barriers.


Besides they said "approximately the same size"--which could be smaller or bigger (hopefully bigger by a little).

I see. So as long as the game world is enormous but not particularly detailed (Just Cause 2), that's ok. Absurd. I'll take a more detailed, focused gameworld over a large chunk of land just so Bethesda can say "Hey, look guys...Skyrim is actually as large as Greenland (but you'll have to walk for hours to see anything interesting)" anyday.