It might be just me, but I think this threads only purpose is to start a flame war.

If you have been a part of the community for a week you can answer that yourself.

All you have to do is read any of the 100's of threads on why ppl like or dislike Skyrim....and it's not like you have to do hard search.

Some of the titles alone make it pretty obvious.

There's always going to be people who don't like it, no game is perfect.

Cheers

dual weilding system was poorly implemented

perk system is worthless fluff, the only thing new it offers is more restriction(perks were in previous es games)

lolcombat is more like it. combat could have been good if they implemented the stuff they said they were going to, but instead its just oblivion combat

lol you really don't know what your talking about. perks have always been in the elderscrolls games, the current perk system is just fluff and more restrictions. the level up system is horrible. a good level up system doesn't force you to play a certain way to avoid breaking the game. that is sign of failure. meaningful differences between weapons? are you kidding?

Saying some people seeing Bethesda as the evil empire is a legitimate point...? Come on.. not even my 12yo niece would think like that.
Also i'm all for innovation and evolution but not for taking away choices and core elements. Change is not always good.

Again, you're making sweeping generalizations to some large group of people. Seriously, your words are worse than conspiracy theory to say there are *really* those who want for Beth to fail, com'on. When you make your MJ/Skyrim anology, you are doing nothing more than giving your opinion, and that's fine, most understand you really like and enjoy the game and that's what is important for you. When you go on to say that when those who would disagree, hate Beth, wants the company to fail and anything less than Skyrim being the "best game ever", is just ad hominem and hyperbole on your part as it only means that "for you". There's no legitimacy in your being the only one as "right" in your opinions.

did I say Terrible? lol I'm jumping into a hot pit even trying to give you a viewpoint but I'll bite.

Loving morrowind or Skyrim really doesn't mean anything to be honest, I personally don't care if you hated them all and Loved Daggerfall, not my problem.

Morrowind 2.0 has 0 function outside some kind of rude dismissal or undercutting a faction of folk who Like not what morrowind is but what it offers, statements like 2.0 never come to fruition because there is no such thing as Dagoth ur Returns or Numidium Strikes back, no matter how mush Todd and Co wants to beat" we make the games different each time" that statement only proves true in story, and setting. its still TES and it still has the races for the past 3 games now.

Yeah Wazikashis because there is no weapon variation, since Morrowind harken since Dagger, Oi Since Arena every weapon type has acted the same and has given 0 deviation, which is why varietion in the Types is prefered over Knife, Sword, Bigger Sword, and handheld-stick with a metal piece at the end. I don't know what game your talking about but for Skyrim the feel of each weapon has not changed.

And the "drastically changing" perks don't exist if you'd take a gander at the dozen or so threads saying how useless entire trees are. theres nothing revolutionary about them, they're for the most part skill bonuses that existed in Oblivion made Manual.


Do you agree with anything I said? most likely not. thats the point trying to be made, peeps are different have different views. point and Case? don't attack them for it. as you can clearly see I did not with you.

Have you seen just how limited Skyrim is compared to former games in terms of spell diversity ? Or just diversity as a whole. Have you seen how many Daedra are lost from previous installments ? Have you seen how limited information gathering is in Skyrim compared to at least Morrowind and previous games. Have you taken a peak at weapon and armor diversity between the games ?

The argument that there is meaningful balance between weapons is weak because there were also differences in how much damage weapons dealt in previous game and Skyrim has all the same amount of general balance issues previous games had. I myself accidentally made myself OP just by practicing one skill, and then normally, not abnormally. I'll give you one guess what skill that is. Attributes had meaningful applications in previous games as you could alter them through spells and often characters would be characterized a lot more around their attributes than they can be in Skyrim where you mostly just have the 3 archetypes, the warrior, the mage and the thief. Perks do shape your character but you could just as easily shape your character in previous games. Yes it is true you could become a "master of all" in previous games but you had to play so rigorously to do that chances are you'd long be finished with all content relevant to your character before that happened unless you were powerleveling. I myself finished every single possible thing you can do in Oblivion before hitting the highest level. Attributes also allowed for guilds to restrain ranks better, in Morrowind you wouldn't become arch-mage with an intelligence of 25 and even more importantly something that could have been implemented in Skyrim you didn't get that rank unless you reached near mastery of at least one spell school.

Skyrim bears the illusion of balance and content but the balance is not there and the content may actually have 400 or so quests yet for some reason the few guilds in the game got nearly no quests with guilds such as the Companions only requiring you to do 6 quests before you're at the top of the guild. So what exactly did they spend all this effort on when it comes to quests ? I find the distribution of the content to be quite poor and largely revolve around just delving into dungeons and killing the boss at the end of it.

I'm telling you, there are people who don't like Bethesda. Have you ever actually read some of the forum topics about Bethesda. "They sold out." "They will never make another good game again." "Morrowind was the only good game they've made." "They are incompetent and stupid" etc etc. These people deep down have something against Bethesda. Have you ever read some of the [censored] they spew on [censored]? There you will find some real haters.

Haters will hate, that's what they do. I'm a hater in some ways. But I'm also a lover. A Skyrim lover. And a Bethesda lover. And I will stick up for them against the onslaught of people who secretly hope Bethesda would just go away because they won't make Morrowind again. Don't tell me you don't see those things in certain posters. Not everybody, but some.

But again, I'm not saying everyone is like that. Some people just don't like the changes they made because deep down, these people don't like change. That is a proven fact. There are a lot of people who hate change. Human beings in general fall into this category, most of them anyway. So these big changes being made from game to game upset these people. They upset the apple cart. So instead of adapting and evolving along with the series, these people become bitter and despise all of the changes. It's just what human beings do. There's no logical reasoning to it.

Do I agree with every single change? Of course not. Who wouldn't LOVE to have 82 different armor slots, including a ring for every finger and toe, pauldrons, wakizashis, and a million other things I can complain and nitpick about. But do I agree with the OVERALL DIRECTION OF THE SERIES? Absolutely. Like I said, I love Skyrim, I think it's perfect, and wouldn't change a single thing.

Yes, things evolve. Sadly, they do not always progress. Mario, Zelda, etc... they went from 2D to 3D. That is evolution. But they still retained the essence of what made them. Mario is still as pure of a platformer. Link still swings his sword and adventures around the world. They do everything you expect them to. The features are there. They have gotten bigger and, for the most part, better... as far as gameplay goes. One can argue plot and story quality depending on each title, but that's a different issue.

Morrowind took The Elder Scrolls into the modern 3D era. That was evolution. That was progression. However, it still removed a LOT of the actual gameplay mechanics from Daggerfall. That was a bad thing... that was regression. Between the leap forward into 3D and the leap backward as far as features, there was at least some type of balance. Even though you couldn't do as many things and the world was much smaller, there was much more to do and the world felt real in form and variety.

Oblivion and Skyrim kept the 3D evolution that came with Morrowind, but they removed so much of the actual gameplay mechanics... the core that Morrowind retained from Daggerfall. That's the problem.

Ps. Read further in my post about Tom Clancy to compare.




Just imagine how much more you could do with perks to 27 different skills compared to 18. And then compare that to the 35 skills you would have in Daggerfall.




If a "Morrowind 2" (going by gameplay) had been released instead of Oblivion, I dare say it would have been JUST as successful. In fact, it would have probably have ended up doing much better. Oblivion's success came from timing and the success of Morrowind. If Oblivion didn't have Bethesda's name or Morrowind's legacy, it would have most likely not have had near the success. Then again, the lack of RPGs on the Xbox at the time could have made any decent RPG successful. But don't believe it's because of Oblivion's quality on it's own. It's just as Skyrim's success came from Oblivion's success. And all of that success is based on the increasing popularity of consoles. Again, Morrowind 2 would be doing just as well.




As far as games go, let's not compare the junk of today to the original Tom Clancy games. The original Rainbow Six was a true masterpiece, blending strategy and execution in a shooter. The original Ghost Recon was also amazing. Tactics, teamwork, realism. Compare that to the "Rainbow Six" and "Ghost Recon" games of today. They are all about flash and action. There is NO realism in them whatsoever... no teamwork... no strategy. It's yet another example of how a game series can spiral downward from greatness.




Are you truly serious about that? Whenever someone uses the title of "best game ever," it usually doesn't end well. I specifically remember Halo being called that.

I would say Skyrim is more comparable to Cameron Newton than Michael Jordan. He may be the flavor of the month, but it won't last. His legacy will be tarnished when everything comes to light.

There's another matter. Who shall we compare the Monkey Island series to? Legend of Zelda? Dragon Age: Origins? Personally, I would consider all to be superior games.

Since I'm in a typing mood, I'll respond point by point.

Morrowind 2.0 is a very real mindset for some people. Not all, but some. They want Morrowind back. They complain about all the changes made from Morrowind to the current iterations of the game. They just simply want Morrowind again.

Each weapon has changed. Morrowind had no bleeding damage, or bludgeon damage, or sword damage. You get very real options with Skyrim combat. And again, they wanted to make each weapon different and unique, and have less of them, rather than having more weapons just to have them, without them being different. Wakizashis fall into this category.

I don't listen to any threads made about perk trees being uselses. Frankly, I highly disagree with that. None of them are useless. Even lockpicking is useful if you want to easily pick Master locks. I see viable options with each tree and consider them superbly balanced, and good.

And finally, I'm not attacking everyone. I stated that there are some people who want to see Bethesda fail, and you disagreed with that, even though it's true. I didn't lump everyone into that category. If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it. But if it fits....

hahaha still full of crap

I think it’s because anything you spend enough time on you become possessive of; so when a game maker changes the formula, you almost feel like they just defaced one of your prized possessions. So the way I see it, the volume and variety of responses to the game is indicative of Bethesda’s successes as much as their failures. If you want to see a community that is really resistant to change, just look at any of the various Dungeons & Dragons factions out there and their reactions to the various editions of that venerable franchise, some of those guys flat out scare me with the rhetoric they throw around.

Now that's not very mature. If you disagree at least attempt to bring up constructive points about why you disagree. Don't just throw short insults at people.

And I prefer the combat. :shrug: ~specifically... I prefer RPGs where the combat is totally (or near totally) PC dependent ; and the skills too. Naturally this influences my attitude and opinion toward RPGs like TES.

* I would honestly rather be able to select a target and have them attack to the best of their ability; or cast spells as best they can (and with the risk of failing to cast them if they are not that proficient). :shrug:

:foodndrink: mutual respect.
For me... I don't mind an assigned character, and I view a rigid class as both representing what they did in their life prior to the start of the game; as well as the PC's general .... well I don't want to say "role", because I don't mean relation to roleplaying here, but the term fits. Consider my meaning the "role" as the same as Knight, Bishop, Rook, and Pawn have roles in Chess. Class defines the function of that PC within the mechanics of the game, in addition to defining the PC's past learning and aspirations ~and to me that last part is related to role playing. So when a series drifts away from aspects that are key elements (to some) to the RPG genre... they may start to develop differing opinions as their likes and dislikes are met or ignored.


Eh... I feel that its most likely the way it is with Fallout. Anyone who professes liking the older games of the series (over the new ones), likely has them still installed and has likely played them in the last few months.

This is directed toward Bethesda...

It is INSANITY to make daggers work like longswords! The ONLY things they have in common are that they have a sharp blade and held in a hand.

It is INSANITY to ever put axes into the blunt category (I'm looking at you, Oblivion)!

It is INSANITY to remove polearms/spears if you want variety! They provide reach like no other melee weapon.


Alas, it's like playing a game of "Rock, Paper, Scissors" without the paper. Where'd you put our paper, Beth? Inside our stolen sweetrolls? The cake is a lie!

well if i have to keep repeating myself it will be short crap

hah!

Can't please everyone...

Well, for me it is a certain game breaking issue where each of my characters turned into an overpowered beast of boredom by just advancing naturally in the skills they use between level 20 and 30.
Combine that with the problem that the huge ups and downs in difficulty get even more pronounced when you increase the difficulty and you have the game pretty much unenjoyable for me.
While the rest of the game might be fun, and I wont ignore that on a theoretical level, I dont really care if it is because I have no character that would allow me to experience that.
Makes you see the other issues much clearer if the main part is no fun at all, when you enjoy the game they are in background I guess.
They were in the first 20 or so hours I played this game at least.
Most other people who are more critical probably have the same or other issues that broke the game for them I guess.


Disclaimer to avoid unneccessary comments:
Smithing and Enchanting were not abused, not even really used at all in fact, various levels of self gimping have been applied.

Relax. Once the Modders get turned loose, they'll do the same thing to Skyrim that they did to Morrowind and
Oblivion. I enjoyed both vanilla versions, but the update mod for Morrowind is superb, and fully Modded Oblivion
is light years better than vanilla. Same with Fallout 3 and Fallout:NV. Can't wait to see what they do for Skyrim.
Now if only Daggerfall could be updated with modern graphics..... ^_-

Starkiller

Yeah that dude never really makes valid points... I've seen his posts before and they usually tend to go something like that. Its ok to disagree, but you should always have a reason. The hate doesn't start until people start making valid points that they have no counter for; then the "you're full of crap" lines start coming out.

By the way, why do I sound angry? Because the devs know what I know. They don't limit the game because they had to, they limit it because of choice. Or rather I should say that the gamesas executive management does. Most of the employees would probably love more freedom, but unless it's related to selling more copies, it's presumably an expense that isn't needed. Makes sense from a cold business perspective, but it is somewhat infuriating from a gamer-perspective to see them piss all over your segment because the casuals are so much more profitable and predictable.

Even so, I would love for anyone to mention a game for casual gamers that has survived for nine and a half years? Morrowind was released May 1, 2002. Almost a decade AND PEOPLE STILL PLAY THAT GAME! That's amazing customer loyalty, amazing love for a game, and some stupidly strong emotions that gamesas are taking serious care not to repay or cater to in any way. Does anyone here really believe they'll be playing Skyrim ten years from now? If I thought any gamesas employee ever bothered to read these forums, I'd ask them to tell the world how they feel about Skyrim and whether they think it's going to last ten years. Of course, I'm guessing that even if some gamesas employee wanted to respond, he'd be tied by contract clauses and company policies and being the least bit critical about the current direction might well get him sacked. Can't have "lowly grunts" talking strategy with the great unwashed, can we?

So even if it did happen, and of course it won't, it would presumably just be the usual marketing spiel about how we're getting more features (by hollowing out existing features and sacrificing any kind of depth), how the world is getting bigger (and massively emptier), and how the graphics pwn that in the previous games. Oh, and how we have fully voiced over NPCs, which makes it next to impossible for modders to add any non-generic NPCs to the game that won't stand out like a pink Trabant at a Ferrari convention. It's silly but it's the way of the world, the way of the market, and the way of business.

Now, some quotes, since it's late and I'm in the mood for it.

@ Fluent

Say what? You think, just because some people (myself included) think gamesas sold out, that we want them to fail? Nothing is further from the truth. We don't want them to fail, we want them to use their massive resources to make a game that actually has the depth and quality we know they can put into a game. Why the heck else would we bother writing essays on this forum? Just to troll the fans? Come on. Just about any of the so-called haters will be more than happy to provide a long and detailed description of the shortcomings they're complaining about. And they (we) do. And every so often, the moderators consider it flame-bait and take it away just to avoid incidents and keep the peace, at which point peopel such as yourself get to pretend there aren't any flaws in the game. That it's "perfect".

Fact is, gamesas did sell out. They had an initial vision for what TES should be, easily depicted in their earlier TES games. Those games didn't sell so much until Morrowind, so gamesas changed the formula to appeal to a different target audience with their existing franchise, and in doing so they upped their profits considerably. From the perspective of the fans of those earlier TES games, that is the textbook definition of "selling out". That you like the new style better than the old is completely irrelevant. They abandoned their TES vision in order to make money. They changed target segment in order to make money.


Personally, I don't care about the company name, I care about the product they release. I bring valid (I think) arguments, valid complaints, and I have *never* seen them actually refuted by you or any other "Bethesda lover". I say depth, you say it's intact, I ask what skill you need with magic to become arch-mage, you say what exactly? You don't need to cast spells to be arch-mage, do you? Surely a mage guild would be happy to let some archer or swordsman lead them, right? Yeah, no, not happening. Just like it's a cold day in Oblivion before warriors will let a mage lead them or thieves will let a paladin lead them, and so on.

By the way, for all the bashing the Morrowind dialogue system took, I could at least ask your average townsman about this or that. I can't in Oblivion or Skyrim. Sure, the Morrowind answers were carbon copies, but at least I could ask people about stuff, and modders eventually took it upon themselves to make NPCs less generic. In Skyrim NPCs are more different, but they can't say more than three different lines ever, and modders can't bloody change it. Doesn't matter if you're only ever going to spend 50-60 hours on the game but it svcks badly if you're the "let's play for 300+ hours" kind of nerd. Guess what, I am. Therefore, I ask where the depth is and you'll never be able to do anything but try and dodge the bullet by calling me an unrealistic hater.



Arrogant assumptions and generalizations are just that, arrogant, don't you think? Most of the people I've seen that aren't head over heels in love with Skyrim are simply suggesting that console gamers and action gamers generally aren't hardcoe RPG fans. That doesn't imply any negative qualities, any more than suggesting that fans of red nuances aren't generally fans of blue. It would be really nice if you'd be kind enough to not imply, suggest, or promote any negative generalizations based simply on the fact that one doesn't think Skyrim is perfect. Believe it or not, I'm literate in two languages, I'm academically well educated by almost any standard, and my IQ is not below 90. I'm much too anolytical to sustain a purely emotional belief, and yet I don't love Skyrim.

And yes, there are plenty of logical reasons to not like the change involved with Skyrim, though i suppose it requries certain premises which you don't meet. If you don't have a thing for meta-gaming then of course you're going to fancy simpler games and like a move away from having to plan anything in advance. If meta-gaming is part of what you love about games, you're of course not going to be thrilled when one of your favorite franchises is simplified to the point of ridiculousness. It really is that simple. You and I don't want the same. That doesn't make either of us stupid. You alleging that I'm dumb or a hater or irrational for not wanting what you want, well... Quite a different story, I would think.

its simple really.
In short opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one but we dont necessarilly need to see it. Unfortunately these forums are awash with opinions good and bad.
A lot of the negatives you will read on here are just people venting thier frustrations when the developers break things that where working fine.
Steam and wherever console users get thier updates from for good or bad has allowed bethesda to attempt to roll out patches as quickly as posible unfortunately this has backfired as quality control has suffered. This for me has been the single biggest cause of the negative comments on these forums.

As for skyrim itself; wonderfull rich world that one can clearly see bethesda has spent a LOT of time on. just wish they had spent as much time on the quests and relied less on radiant ai... oops there goes another opinion lol

Personally, it is not the changes from previous games, but realizing what this game would've been had it not be taken into so many directions, with an emphasis on quantity over quality.
So many situation that were not explored.
So little choices in the game play to make real choices beyond the good-bad.
So many forced aspects.
So many faction conflicts the player doesn't get to decide a side, or no side at all.
So many mechanics which are staples in many AAA games, which were not implemented.
So many repetitive quests.
No sense of urgency or imminent danger.


I have said this many times : playing Skyrim is, in a way, like playing Tetris; highly entertaining, but highly repetitive, with no real blow-my-mind moments

Fully agree here. I vastly prefer games that have fixed classes instead of the Skyrim system that we have. At least perks let you specialize and be more of a class instead of a I-can-be-anything-because-there-are-no-restrictions character. This is one of the main reasons I like MMOs so much. I prefer specialization over JOAT