My point is that there are a bunch of people out here who think they know what they're talking about when it comes to what most of us want or need in a game.

The reality is that they/you are a vocal minority.

Meaning the majority of gamers don't really care what you think about the game.

Every game forum has it's complainers... because for some unknown reason those complainers feel the need to get some kind of pat on the back from like minded haters.

Okay. You guys can all group hug eachother while the huge majority of players enjoy the game.

And those musical artist you mentioned are actually loved by a lot of fans. Millions actually. I don't happen to like them though, but I'm not on their forums trashing them or telling them how to be better singers.

YES! And I suppose there may be different theories about what a "fantasy" game should be like. Should it be "realistic" in terms of real world physics, or should it be more of a cartoony Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon type of experience. There is no right answer since it is a "fantasy" and the world is big enough for games of all types. But I for one appreciate "realistic" fantasy and have not desire to spend much time at all playing "cartoony" fantasy games. Hopefully Bethesda continues its trend of making more "realistic" types of TES games.

It doesn't matter if the people who currently enjoy the game care whether or not we have issues. People's voices concerning criticism isn't for you.

It's for the people who actually have the power to change what people are criticizing. Y'know, the developers.

You realize that this forum is just an example of what actually happens in game development process, right?

I'm currently working on a project and have all the mechanics worked out, one person out of our current ten person team pointed out a criticism he had of one of the mechanics that no one else thought of. After review we learned that he was correct and so we compromised to keep the original mechanic but balance it better.

He was the minority while everyone else was happy with what we had.

I'm sorry, but the people currently enjoying the game aren't our audience. We aren't trying to start a Kony or Occupy movement here, we're simply coming to the open forum that we hope the developers read. If you agree with us that's great, if not, that's fine too.

I disagree with some of the OP's points including the sound but I 100% agree with him about the combat. I fear though that Combat isn't going to get any better in the future titles and the reason for that is 1st Person view. I don't think it's possible to have the combat that Dark Souls and Reckoning has in 1st person view, it would move too fast for anybody to react. Only way you could solve that is by having the game be a 3rd person view game but then you would alienate the fans (Me Included) who love 1st Person view because of Immersion and it feels better in 1st person view.

What are you talking about? The next game is not going to have "skills" cause they make the character too "unique" and they just make the game too complicated. Plus, skills are just derivative of how much damage you can do with various weapons and magicks.

So with the next game we will get no "skills" but instead you will have three "abilities" and they will be Magic, Ranged and Melee. Every time you level up you can put 10 points into one of these three "abilities" that will increase the power/damage output of your magic, ranged and melee attacks respectively. You will also get your 10 points to put into magicka, stamina and health.

Wouldn't that be a much more elegant solution than the current overly complicated "skills" system we have with 18 skills and 280 odd perks, most of which are completely unnecessary to the enjoyment of the game?

So, i guess we can thank all the forum experts that criticize games as a hobby for the many changes in the TES games.

This is what forum complaints and whines have brought you. A game you don't like.

Do you guys need any more proof that what you're doing 'helps'.

This game would be much more like Daggerfall if people would not have complained so much.

So yeh... keep it up... you make a difference.

So you're basically saying: No criticism = Leaves us in... what, 1994? Criticism = Game we have issues with.

You realize many people who have complaints about Skyrim still enjoy parts of the game, right?

And you realize that the next TES game is probably at least 5 years away, and will be created with the new gamers in mind, what's trendy then, what system specs are available, and what Bethesda wants to try that's different.

Every TES game has been drastically different than the one before it, and I expect the TES VI to be very different.

So asking for changes is the perk system, for instance won't make a difference because the next game will most likely have a completely different system that will give you guys something new to complain about.

What about Skyrim was added or removed because of complaints in Oblivion. Any ideas?

Lots of stuff was changed from Oblivion to Skyrim due to fan complaiints. Bandits in glass and daedric armor. Having to worry about efficient leveling. Characters all being the same once all skills were at 100. Just to name a few. I am not saying Bethesda got it all right, but they clearly changed a bunch of stuff that fans on this forum complained about.

That's not quite true if the current gaming market continues going the way it is going. Back when Oblivion was released we hadn't quite hit on this "casual era" that we are in now. Hell, Call of Duty 3 was only just being released and Call of Duty is a good benchmark series to measure the change in the gaming market, not to mention the "actual" casual games.

Also, from my understanding the differences between Morrowind and Oblivion are not as large as the differences of Morrowind down to Skyrim. Skyrim, if I am correct, is the first game to actually do away with the Attribute/Stat system. That in itself is a bit of information to be taken when projecting what could happen in the future. That projection is why people come here and say "the perk system doesn't work, having no attributes doesn't work, etc," because if it isn't brought up, the next game may in fact be made similar to what people disliked.

Also, with the rise of Title Updates, patches, and DLC, changes to the perk system may not be completely out of the question for the current game.

I was not around the boards during Oblivion but one complaint I have seen about Oblivion was all (or a lot) of enemies scaled against the players level and it would not be uncommon to see Bandits in Ebony armor (I haven't played Oblivion since 2007 so I can't say for certainty how much this happened to me). Level scaling, for the most part, is now gone in Skyrim. Completely removing level scaling is a bad thing.

And now many complain that the game is too easy. Level scaling and bandits in glass armor made sure Oblivion wasn't too easy.

All characters the same at level 100.. and now we hear complaints that the perk system doesn't allow enough difference between characters. Bethesda even removed classes so we aren't stuck with the same thief build... and people are whining about that.

Most complaints in Skyrim have to do with a change made from Oblivion about something. And then players complain about it.

I'm done here. Not trying to change your mind or anyone else's, but I think most of the complaints about Skyrim are silly, and you guys seem to give yourselves way too much credit as 'instruments of change'.

This is the process balancing goes through... it's normal.

"Let's start Health at 125."
"Eh, that seems too high, how about 95?"
"No, that's far too low, 115?"
"You still seem a bit too powerful, how about 105?"
"Nah, still get one shot by a power attack from rats, how about 110?"
"Yeah that could work."

I don't even have to read any of the posts, to know this is a battle between the dovahkids defending Skyrim with every ounce of their being to make sure no one says anything negative about it and the old guard trying to say how Skyrim is ruining TES.

Not just Ebony. Daedric. I still play Oblivion. Once your character hit a certain level, just about every other marauder that was wearing iron armor at the beginning of the game is now clad in Daedric and all of those light armor wearing bandits are clad in Glass. Daedric armor is as common in Oblivion as mudcrabs and rockjoint. That is one complaint that Bethesda responded to and improved upon greatly. And say what you want about combat in Skyrim, but it is a vast improvement over Oblivion, probably in large part due to complaints about how boring and repetitive melee was in Oblivion. Now removing attributes, spellcrafting, most of the spells and spell effects, etc. Well that's a different story.

Obviously you did not "read any of these posts" because a lot of us "old gaurd" as you put it really enjoy Skyrim but just want to see it made better.

Okay, I guess that too broad of a generalization. However, I'm right with the Dovahkids.

Unfortunately now we have very few enemies that scale to our level, thus making the game too easy.

I too could write a list of little things which could be improved upon or I dont like, but I could write a much longer list of everything I love about skyrim.
People are so fast to criticize when they have been treat to such a wonderful game.

Funnily enough, some old-school RPGs had systems that were quite similar to what you're describing, yet you could still make a large array of varying characters with them. To be fair, though, within a given Ability were the specializations that allowed said diversity. That said, I think that the fear of simplification is a bit overblown; it may be optimistic of me, but I suspect that the system currently in place will be improved upon for the next title. The way I see it this version of the system is a prototype, and the next game will have a more robust version built with what they learned from this one.

Consider Morrowind's and Oblivion's character development systems: the one in the latter was quite similar to the one in the former, but you couldn't break the game during character generation and you had to be more careful where and when you put your Attribute points when leveling up. Unfortunately, they largely sabotaged the latter's system with the horrendous creature leveling system they implemented in response to the complaints about the former's static encounters, to the point where you had to warp your character's growth just to survive, let alone thrive.

In Skyrim, they chucked all of that out the window, as it was a horrible mess and would have been a massive pain to fix, and went with an almost completely new system instead. That said system needs work is undeniable, however it's not the train wreck some folks claim it to be. I actually prefer it to the previous system(s), even though they are more in line with what I, as an old-school gamer, expect of a character system, because it doesn't have their needless complexity.

I know that sounds like a contradiction in terms, but it's actually not. In a complex system, there is a finely-tuned interaction between skill levels, attributes, and (where applicable) class specializations that allows for a wide range of character types, while in a needlessly complex one, such as in those two games, you get lost in the micromanaging of various stats to the detriment of the character's proper growth. That's not to say it should be impossible to mess up; a properly-done complex system allows one to make almost any build one chooses (there will always be some the system doesn't provide for), with the caveat that not all such will be viable for a given play style or level of difficulty. At the same time, it doesn't bog the player down in minutiae in the process nor have hidden 'traps' for the player to fall into, such as the situation in Oblivion where making a character whose specialty wasn't one of the combat styles meant you were screwed once the Tier II and III creatures started showing up.

First of all, good post by the OP. Great way to express concerns of the game. People should take notice.
On the other hand, there are certain elements I would like to comment on:

For those that think I am a too much of a fan, I have no intention of communicating to them. Even if I am positive towards the Elder Scrolls and Skyrim, it doesn't mean that I don't have issues with the game. It only means that right nowi I'm concentrating on responding to the things I mostly disagree with.

Could the game be too easy? Maybe, but I think the advantage of an Elder Scrolls game is the possibility to do things the way YOU want to do them. That means the player has some of the creative power of shaping the char.
In my case, I play a Khajiit specializing in stealth, bows and dual wielding daggers. And that means ONLY daggers. I have chosen perks that improve faster strikes, more damage per strike, dual wielding bonuses, stealth damage bonuses when dual wielding daggers and better stamina for power strikes in normal combat. That means my char inflict the most damage possible with daggers both in stealth mode and in normal combat. To succeed in normal combat my char needs to be fast and inflict as much damage as possible before the enemy can retaliate. The thing is, and here's my point, I don't wear much armor. Much because a dagger person must rely on stealth and agility. Too much armor would be in the way. Because of my lack of armor this causes a more challenging game. Especially against heavy armored orcs or similar with giant warhammers that easily can kill me with one power attack if I don't pay attention and use my improved movement to my advantage. I may wear boots and/or braces that will fit my clothes, but never chest armor and helmet. This makes the game more challenging and you need to think creative to beat an enemy. Sometimes a follower would do or maybe a potion or wear an enchanted ring or necklace to improve defensive or offensive abilities. If I used a shield or a sword and improved this I would get overpowered. This is essential for a game like Skyrim. We have the freedom to take advantage of something or not.

Are the Elder Scrolls/Skyrim too mainstream as a fantasy game? Well, I don't think so. It's quite unique in several ways. There aren't many other fantasy games that are placed in a more "down-to-earth dark mediaeval" setting. Amazingly enough there are not lots of games that do this. WOW or other online fantasy could be great games, but doesn't have this feeling of real people struggling with their lives.
In addition to this there aren't many first person fantasy games either. This is one of the strong points of Skyrim, and before it comes along another good first person fantasy game its possible to compare, and really discuss the combat system and how to improve it. We can of course do it now, but I think it is difficult in a technical point of view to suggest what Bethesda should do.

It seems that some wants to keep the free-roaming that is typical for a Elder Scrolls game but at the same time want to implement features from other classical rpgs. I don't really understand this because I think it is good the game differs from other games. My opinion is that classical rpgs, no matter how fun they are, are more streamlined and have less freedom than Skyrim. I'm sorry, imo The elder scrolls will never be BG or KoA or Witcher or D. Souls. It's up to the rest of the Gaming community to make a game that can compete with Skyrim on its turf. I don't want to see my char in third person and click on a button on the bottom of the screen. I want to look.my enemy in the eye and really hit him.

The story and the choices in Skyrim could have been deeper although one could get a random encounter that can tell an interesting tale.
There are other things too, but due to technical challenges and no other games in this size its difficult to say what things they should do. Many seem to ignore that fact...

I didn't really read everything but I did saw something that caught my attention. You said something about Fable's Combat is better than Skyrim's... This prolly is true for 2nd+ but Fable is a totally failure. I played #1 and #2. #2 was so pathetic that I didn't even had it long. Played it for like a week and just got rid of it.

I do agree Skyrim's Combat System is very 'basic' but Idc. I kinda like the idea of it being basic, if you ask me. It allows players to fight without needing the 'skill' to do it, like other games does. Before anyone say anything, Skyrim is a game that only needs Basic Combat Controls. You don't need all those special moves or combos you may see in other games.. Skyrim, and all Elder Scrolls, weren't made for total-combat reasons. Also, Basic Combat can easily be quite fun and hard if used correctly. Look at RuneScape, the combat system in that MMORPG is simple. You click attack and that is pretty much all you need to do. Maybe switch to another weapon to do a special attack but it all still is quite basic. The funny thing is, the hardest boss I've ever fought was on RS. Jagex was able to use Basic Combat and make an enemy that is quite feared and requires a little thinking of how to use the combat system. This example prove that even Basic Combat can bring challenges.

Overall - Skyrim's Combat system is Basic. It truly doesn't need a upgrade and works just fine. It does what it is required to do and I wont complain about it.

That is all for now. I'll come back and read the whole thing when I have the time to do so.

This is the most interesting part of your criticism imo, the rate of success and challenge level. Now, many people confuse challenge and success with difficulty, as in for example how difficult the lockpicking is, or how difficult it is to defeat an enemy. But challenge and reward are more like a basic currency in a game mechanic, like supply and demand. If we supply a lot of challenge, the rewards for success should reflect that and if we supply less challenge the rewards decrease. And just like you say, some of the least challenging aspects provide the greatest rewards while more challenging aspects provide meager rewards. Hunt down the spirit of a legendary rebel leader, through several sub-quests and a pretty good final battle, be rewarded with an artefact that if not already obsolete compared to what you have, it will be quite soon. Stand in the same place and safely mass produce iron daggers on the other hand, and be rewarded with the ability to craft artefacts of legend at will.

I don't feel like I need the challenge level itself to be much higher, I don't like the master level where every battle becomes a war of attrition or a save/load fiesta, but I do agree that I am rewarded very highly and very quickly for doing very simple and non-challenging tasks and as a game mechanic, the currency of challenge-reward is not properly balanced.

No, it's not.
It's a good game (very good at best), but that's it.

Everything OP mentioned is very realistic.
And even if it wasn't, it's still good to set something as a goal which one can work towards to.
No one asks for a prefect game.
People just want to see clear improvements.
For now, Skyrim has only clear improvements in combat and graphics over previous games.

Only criticism I have are the damned bugs. Apparently I've completed a dark brotherhood quest, even though I've never even seen nor joined them yet, and apparently I have to return to some guy who is sitting in a boat, and I've never even met him either. I hate this game sometimes.

Your point of view can't be the objective reality,keep in mind this next time you want to moralize on other's opinions.


Another opinion,and such remains even the exhaustive one of the Op.

And what if everyone of us open a thread like this with his wishes,critics,opinions and Dlcs ideas for Skirim ?

let's see...hundreds and hundreds of "i think,i want,the game misses this and that.." and with opinions already expressed elsewhere perhaps,hopefully most synthetically.