TES has always been more actiony than most RPGs. It is classified as a Action role-playing game "emphasizing real-time action where the player has direct control over characters, instead of turn-based or menu-based combat." such a definition would hold true even for daggerfall.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_role-playing_game

Yes, Skyrim is my favorite ES game to date.

Blasphemy!

You clearly haven't been playing your games correctly.

The sarcasm is strong in this one...

Sure, Oblivion was fun. I played that everyday, especially when DLC came out. Eventually I got bored and stopped playing it. Once I saw that Skyrim was coming out, I played Oblivion some more and played a wee bit of Morrowind, which I despised greatly because I couldn't even hit a mudcrab with my dagger. Then came Skyrim, and I just loved the game to death. Sure, every game has something that it missed out on from previous games (IE: Spell Making in Oblivion).

I agree.

I really enjoyed playing Oblivion. I have not played Morrowind yet so I do not know about that.

I am really enjoying playing Skyrim.

Each game has something about it that I really like.

Huh? Are you kidding? Did you not understand the controls? Did you use some sort of a super mudcrab mod?

When its a series its a perfectly pheasible thing to do. A series should try and improve on its weaknesses and not just outright remove them that is what a lot of us are having issues with.

Before anybody has a retort to the "a lot of us" I am referring to the people on here the Bethesda Forums.

No, he played Morrowind with a character who didn't specialize in Short Blade. In that game, it was completely possible to be right in front of someone, hacking away with a weapon and never striking them if your skill was low enough, because the combat was run by dice rolls.

Oblivion was a disappointment to me
I find Skyrim much more atmospheric, more conduicive to exploring (probably mostly because of much better level-scaling), and character development to be better
I do dislike the lack of initial character definition

Skyrim comes a close 2nd to Morrowind in my rating of TES games

Skyrim is a great game but a terrible RPG.

I've been with TES since Daggerfall and have been playing RPGs since long before that. Skyrim is by far my favourite TES game and one of my favourites of all time.

After so many years I am sick to death of generic D&D style number-crunching. Skyrim is a far more fluid and organic experience for me.

Tell me, when you try to hit something in Morrowind, is it dependant on your timing, control and aim with your mouse whether you even get the to-hit chance roll or not? Clearly your ability is still very much a deciding factor in your character's success in hitting an opponent. To make a comparison with a tabletop rpg, if you say that you attack a goblin with your sword and the GM responds by giving you a 20-sided dice and tells you that you need to roll a 12 or more to hit (based on your character's ability) then it is entirely down to the number on your character sheet (i.e. your characters ability), but if the GM gives you a 20-sided dice, puts a cup on the table and says that you need to successfully toss and hit the dice into the cup and roll a 12 or more to hit, then it isn't so much your character's ability anymore...the only difference between Morrowind and later TES-titles is that the GM decided that you didn't need the 12 or more on the dice anymore, he just adjusted the actual damage you inflicted from successfully hitting the cup according to your character's ability instead.

All of the TES-titles are equally dependant on player skill when it comes to combat, if you want to argue about player skill vs. character skill you can bring up lockpicking, because that was entirely based on character skill in Morrowind and entirely based on player skill in later titles, but don't try to claim that combat is any different because one uses a formula based on character skill to calculate to-hit and the other uses a formula to calculate damage, both do the exact same thing in terms of actual outcome.

I second this.

I work for Belethor at the general goods store?

But you're not swinging at a wall. You're swinging at an opponent. Just being in range doesn't guarantee a hit. Stand within a foot of, and take a swing at Mike Tyson. I 100% assure you, you will miss. His evasion STAT is simply too high compared to yours. Also, when he strikes back, he's going to obliterate you because of his absurdly high Strength stat.

This is the system used by (like you didn't see this comming) Morrowind. Your stats are measured against your opponents stats. And for the last (&*^&*^ing time. IT'S NOT RANDOM. It is stas Vs Stats. Here's the actual formula, courtesy of wiki:

Chance to hit = Attacker's weapon skill * 1.25 + Attacker's Attack (e.g. Warrior = 10) - Defender's Sanctuary (e.g. Thief = 10) + (Attacker's Agility - Defender's Agility) * 0.25 + (Attacker's Luck - Defender's Luck) * 0.125

See any function calls to *random or any dice rolls? The "chance" in chance to hit refers to the fact that different opponents have different stats compared to you. Not trying to be rude to anyone, just find it annoying when folks repeatedly say they dislike peach cobler because it has too many apples in it.

On topic. I think Skyrim kicks Oblivion's butt.

I help my mother sell fruit in the market

Do you get to the cloud district often?! oh waht i am saying...of course you don't!

I actually advise the Jarl on political matters. My input is invaluable, of course. But this is all probably a bit over your head.

Like depth and variety.

nailed it

Skyrim is the best for me

Skyrim is missing a lot of things from Oblivion. The biggest part is the lack of (Guild) Quests and variety of them. You are always visiting a Tomb or a Cave.



Maybe the Graphic. But thats it.

First off D&D rules are just a cheap knock off of real life. They're a way to simulate what we cannot do because the medium is so confined. There is no way to represent physical actions, or mental actions realistic within that system.

Now onto your Mike Tyson example. Your example is flawed because you're asking a normal person who (most likely) has no training in fighting to take a punch at someone who has made a career out of righting. I could ask Mike Tyson to play the drums like myself (and I'm a novice) and he would have a hard time doing so.

If my character is say... 20 years old at creation and my skills are in combat I expect him to be able to take on a lowly bandit because he most likely has been training with a sword for about a year or two (at the minimum). When he cannot even hit a bandit with his sword then something is wrong, yes you can argue that you'll miss and I think that is appropriate, however for an RPG in which you're in total control of your character missing via some internal equation is stupid. It works in a turn based RPG but not an an action RPG.

To sum it up I hate the idea of missing in an RPG where I define my character. If I've created this elaborate back story that my character is a knight who has been wrongly prosecuted then I do not expect him to miss against a level 1 bandit. It destroys my backstory, any sense of immersion and makes it feel more like a game than an experience.


To be fair going from a shallow puddle (I'm bob and I'm an argonian) to a slightly shallower puddle (I'm bob I work at the general foods store) isn't that big of a step back.

To me it easily beats out Oblivion and Morrowind.

Oblivion's the little brother that gets beat up all the time. Don't hate on Oblivion!

Since Oblivion was inbetween the Morrowind RPG and the Skyrim RPG, it was a little bit of both
and neither at the same time. The graphics and combat were better, but not good enough to make
up for the things lost from Morrowind. Now that the action/adventure aspects of the game are
far better, it defines itself. I'm not sure I like Skyrim better, but it still is a very fun game.