Skyrim Takes:

Skills
Weapons
Weapon sub-categories (wakazashi's, etc.)
Armour Slots
Ability to wear multiple things together
Attributes
Quest content
Dialogue content
The neccessity to use that thing between my ears


Skyrim Gives:

Graphics
Modability
AI
View Distance
Physics


All skyrim gives us is what a modern system gives us. None o fthe actual design is improved upon, and the mechanics are destroyed.


Regardless of whether or not you agree with these points (that's irrelevant), there IS reasoning behind the preference of previous games and it's NOT just "nostalgia".

There is no why or what you don't understand, it is simply a matter of preference for each player. What you ask as to what you don't understand, are simply differing opinions for this game, and it isn't inherent only to this game. This goes on with many games, especially those that are big selling games. No philosophy involved, just the tastes in the style of the game. I like it, but in my opinion, Morrowind is better and none of them touch Daggerfall. What you don't understand about the gripes, is that *your* (<--- my emphasis) experiences are yours and may not arouse anything that strikes you the wrong way about the game, no matter what aspect that may (technically, aesthetically, etc) bother the other gamer(s). It is a matter of understanding *how* someone may not like the game, and that there are reasons why they don't, that should be an understanding right there. Now, just to spout hate without any critical thinking to why someone doesn't like the game, I just ignore those posts.

There are widely divergent views of this game because of the membership of the forum and the 'believers' in the genre. This is not a cross section of America, nor even game players. There were very high expectations of the game, and the views on this forum tend to swing in absolutes.

A lot of, "Masters of their Own LIving Rooms".

You'd have thought in the first days Bethesda had committed sins ala Nazi Germany when bugs were discovered and the patch quickly assembled was not quick enough and caused additional stress.

Kindly speaking though, many people were emotionally attached to the product and change is always difficult.

The Game is fine. It does not please everyone, nor can it.

If the next edition of the Scrolls had appeared sooner, things would have gone smoother. A five year wait really charged the air.

The same patronizing twaddle can be said about those that blindly shout down anyone that dares raise a voice of concern.


For the OP....your story would not be the same if the majority of things you enjoyed about TES have been cut out or ignored. Overall, SR is a very lame experience for me. Not that it is a bad game....just that I cannot do the things that I should be able to do in the TES world....

Or when you see good designs that need tweaking and improved, trashed and replaced with bad design (character development).......well, things like that are annoying to some, but not understood by many....add on to that really bad designs like the UI...the complete lack of content...things that make one wonder what they had been doing for 5 years of development....

These are things that may not bother some people if what they are looking for in a game is still present....

:shrug:

I think Skyrim is an example of a game which its benefits outweigh its issues. Yes, there are bugs and glitches...but the game is just so so beautifully conceived. It's hard to hate it.

Just like there is a reason to preferring new games.

To the OP: You think like a player who has played a video game for the first time.

This brings up another good point, evolution


TES can be seen evolving throughout the years, weather its good or not is debatable, but I do think that other RPGs will attempt to copy at least some of what was given to use with Skyrim. And so the games will continue to evolve.

What are you talking about? I didn't say otherwise..

Again, these vast opinions are nothing new. These same differences happened with Morrowind from Daggerfall (not on this scale or even Oblivion's), though the release timeline was the longest between those two than any other TES game. The same thing happened with Oblivion, where there was even more divisiveness than here with Skyrim. I remember the Morrwind lovers screaming over how streamlined Oblivion was, yet it sold immensely well.

this is the biggest load of crap i have seen yet on these forums.

They nerfed some of the mechanics and improved some. The nerfed ones are where people think the older ones were better. The improved ones are where people seem to enjoy in this game so they like it over the previous. Quite frankly on this forum people are running around in circles because of this.

I concur.

Many aspects of the game are clearly not nearly as good as they could be. Some others have been dumped down - others though were improved. For me it's the worst TES out there - yes worse than Oblivion not by much though - i have explained why in many posts. It is a great game but far from what it could be, or what the FO series are.

The way i see it whoever hasn't played too many rpgs or just wants a glorified theme park and not an rpg finds it perfect. It is a good game but for me, it's clear that some aspects were rushed and quest/character development/gameplay choices/diversity especially have been dumped down.

Bethesda was going belly up after Daggerfall, if they had made Daggerfall 2 there would be no more TES, they would have gone bankrupt. Morrowind saved them, temporarily, it was a positive change but only enough to prolong the inevitable. Oblivion, however, put them over the top. Now Skyrim is continuing the trend of "popular demand." That's probly the thing that kills the "classic" fans the most.

I'm sorry, but your reply just smacks to the complete lack of objectivity, and lends too much to being subjective. You like the game, that's fine, I will never ever slam someone for liking Skyrim (or ay game for that matter). When you say "they" and "there are", all you are doing is making sweeping generalizations about a large fictitious group to support your lack of a good critical response.

Tom Clancy or Tolkien?

It's not that members of the same segment are playing two different games, it's that two different segments are evaluating the same game. One segment wants flashy action and a world that is speedy, somewhat easy to navigate, and which looks awesome. The other segment wants to sit on their asses and ponder about how they might use their pyromantic abilities to simply melt the lever in a lock or how one could perhaps do a Bruce Lee-style kick in the throat on an enemy mage through telekinesis, while they're being very careful to apply the right spells to the right enemy, knowing that failure todo so could mean death. That segment is incidentally also filled with warriors who can't help wondering why their mace-master who has sworn to never use bladed weapons is in fact just as lethal with axes as he is with maces, or how you can learn to make a 60 lb suit of armor feel lighter than a 6 lb suit of leather?

Those two segments don't match well. The former segment are considered intellectually lightweight, console kiddies, casual clowns, insincere in their gaming, surface scratchers, and so on by the latter. The latter are considered haters, whiners, hysterical nutjobs, nostalgic fools, or simply nay-sayers by the former.

This leads us back to the question I opened up with. Do you prefer Clancy or Tolkien? Clancy tells good enough stories with a lot of fast paced action and then to hell with the tedious details that might ruin his good idea for a story. Tolkien draws his own world maps and designs his own freaking language, just to provide background lore for his fictional universe. As it happens, I like both. I've read all the Ryan / Kelly books I've come across, many of them multiple times, and I've read The Hobbit and LOTR a couple of times too. They're both good authors in the sense that they tell stories that entertain me. They just don't do it the same way.

To bring the anology into perspective, there really are a lot of authors like Tom Clancy. There are many authors who can write good, action-paced stories. There's only ever been one Tolkien, as far as I know. Imagine if Tolkien had decided, after the Fellowship went big, to expand his target segment and had started dumbing down how magic worked and who (or rather what) Sauron is? Imagine if he'd shortened Frodo's trek through Mordor to make it less repetitive and stressful on younger readers? Imagine if Frodo and Bilbo could simply live happily ever after in the Shire to the end of their days? It would ruin LORT and we'd have nothing else in its place.

Similarly, there really are a ton of action games out there. There's no need to ruin one of the last RPG franchises to create yet another action game that the action game segment will have forgotten all about in a year or so. And so I see the half-emtpy glass (all the hollowed out or flat-out missing RPG elements) rather than the half-full glass (how it's actually a great action game), because I'm not looking for what gamesas wants to provide when I play a TES game.

Seconded.


amazing isn't it. Being a Critic or saying Hey whats up = hates the Game, Bethesda, and everyone that supports them with an extreme passion it seems these days. I CANNOT wait until this Us v them garbage goes away. the forum really needs less hate and less dismissal of others just because of view points.

Why would anyone who enjoys the series would want to see Beth Tank? I'm sure most of the "complaints" are from people wondering WHY was something done the way it was.

Well it doesn't kill me since I still love them all. I actually prefer Skyrim over some of the older ones...

I think that line is getting old. I still play Morrowind, I started playing after Oblivion, I still throughly enjoy it for its story and gameplay.

Dual wielding system
Perk system
Actually fun combat

My point is, there is a large, real group of people who want to see Bethesda fail. It oozes out of every complaint they wager against the game. They look at Bethesda as the evil empire.

I didn't say "everyone who complains is part of this group", did I? I brought up a completely legitimate point.

Like I said, Skyrim is Michael Jordan. The best game ever. Those who complain against it are just throwing rocks at the throne. But don't take my word for it. History will weigh favorably for Skyrim too, years down the road. It's an instant classic that won't be soon forgotten.

And a lot of people complain because they don't like change. It scares them. They want everything to be exactly like they remembered it from years ago, with no evolution, no new ideas, no nothing. Just keep it the same. Tell me these people don't exist too.

Oi so many games once held that thought, never to be forgotten. you'd don't hear Widespread talk of Morrowind, Oblivion, the Mass effect series or even NWN just to name some "decent" ones. Skyrim's no differen't only known by those who know or stumble across it.

no sorry your post doesn't ring true, in any sense from where I'm standing. its not the change its how its happening, what kind of logic is they want something exactly as it was years ago when it already exists.

still a load of crap. quit talking out of your butt

So explain to me how this "terrible" change is happening. Enlighten me. I must be stupid, because I think the changes to the series have been great! I love Skyrim. I think it's perfect. And guess what? I love Morrowind too. That doesn't mean I want to see Morrowind 2.0. It would be nice, but I'm quite satisfied with the direction they've taken. People are complaining about completely menial things like wakizashis. Really? Wakizashis? In exchange for wakizashis you get a great balance of weapons in the game that actually have meaningful differences between them. In replace of attributes you get one of the best level-up systems ever in a video game, including perks which can drastically shape your character however you want. For every thing they have changed in the series, you could argue they made it better, smarter, faster, stronger. I see nothing wrong with it.