I agreed with the "game the devs wanted" comment because there's little reason to think otherwise.

Not being privy to any of the insider meetings at Bethesda, I don't claim to know what went on during the meetings. Being human, I'm guessing there was some dissent and some give and take between some people on the team, but what we got was, at least, pretty much the game the lead developer wanted us to have, certainly on the grand scale.

Things like quest length don't have much to do what I'm talking about, and a lot of that, you're right, may have been decided by time and economics. What I was talking about is the big picture stuff, realized in how the game feels and plays. It does include things like an emphasis on action (combat), a game that's easy to approach, and one that rewards the player constantly and minimizes failure or frustration.

A lot of the modern games I've played lately all have a very similar feeling and use many of the same conventions (quest arrows, exclamation points, etc) to achieve that, and I'm just sad that Bethesda has chosen to follow suit.

I remember in Morrowind not being able to cast spells or create potions my character had learned. That, to me, showed the "difficulty" in practicing these things, much like in our world. It's one thing to look at, read, and understand a car manual or a cake recipe, but anyone who's tried to actually do either of those things knows that you only get better at them with practice. Since not accomplishing the task can lead to player frustration, Bethesda has chosen to remove failure and every time my character tries to cast a spell or create a potion, it succeeds.

In Tamriel, there are no gummy cakes or stripped bolts.

Anyway, while I don't agree with a lot of the choices the developers made when designing this game, I have no doubt that what we got is what they wanted us to have.

Previous TES games were too shallow, despite the massive number of quests. I never finished any faction or story questline because the gameplay was too dull to keep interested in the story. For mages and melee fighters, the gameplay is still too dull and shallow, but for stealth and archers, the gameplay and enemy AI is much much deeper in Skyrim. For the first time I find myself getting the point where the shortage of quests is a noticeable issue. Which brings me to the OPs point...

The OP seems to be railing against the reduced number of faction quests. Yeah there are less main quests, but that doesnt make the story shallow, but merely short. If you want it to last longer, just take a few radiant quests in between the main faction quests. If you rush through the game, then of course it will be too short.

In any case, we can all rest easy. Mods, Patches, and DLC will likely fix any gameplay or content shortage issues.

Can you defend you opinion about previous Es games being shallow?

This is one of the best games I have played in years. It certainly has its faults but the good completely out weighs the bad in this game. If you are a minority fighting a majority you will most likely lose, especially where money is involved. If you don't like this game don’t buy it or any other Beth games. It's that simple. And yes I played both Morrowind and Oblivion, Skyrim is a natural evolution of both those titles.

Well I've played all the previous TES games
IMO (and its only that of course) Skyrim stands up well to previous games in the series. I don't find the lore/background as interesting as MW but the world is diverse and interesting, much more so than Oblivion which is the only TES game I can't go back to and replay (I tried whilst I was waiting for Skyrim and playing Oblivion feels like a chore)

I doubt there's a single happy programmer at Bethesda. Sure the executives are happy, they've made their money. The artists behind the game want to fix the game.

Hopelessly simplistic AI - skyrim AI is vastly improved across the board (see below)

Simple hack n slash melee - mildly improved in skyrim by better tempo, flanking AI, bash mech, staggering, & various perk mech

Bland/OP magic system - mildly improved by Ward System (needs tweaking), dodging & cover AI, conjuration/illusion AI, & various perk mech, only benefit lost was spellcrafting and that is a controversial balance issue likely to be addressed by mods and patches

Mediocre Archery system - The best mechanic of prior TES games just got a juicy upgrade: dodge and cover AI, Legolas-like time slow perks, the damage-ammo rarity balanced for complete Archer experience, Angi's interactive skill-up challenges. Even the main quest enemy (dragons) seems geared torward archer playstyle. The only losses are the wonky mid-range crosshairs, and the removal of physics-arc-trajectory by arrow type/quality.

Prior TES games also had cookie cutter dungeons that were poorly thought out for all three main playstyles. Skyrim not only accommodates the BIG 3 (stealth, melee, & ranged), it also tailors the faction dungeons/locations to the skill set of the intended archetype.

I could go on, but I need to sleep eventually.

This isn't a new phenomenon at all.

Any game with an established fanbase will cry and moan and be resistant to change. They overglorify past experiences and wear nostalgia goggles to a point where they cry about superior systems. It's actually very predictable and very humorous to watch. The conservatism builds with the established community with a matter of course and if game devs listened to this "golden age" conservative community, their games would stagnate, wither, and die (predictably and inevidably).

Go find a Fallout fan-forum and you'll see fallout fans moaning about the fact that Fallout 3 wasn't turn based. Seems ridiculous to an outside eye, but to the conservative community, turn-based gameplay might as well be "the way of the future", rather than a stale, antiquated mechanic that masquerades as something sophisticated.

Viewed from an optimistic viewpoint, Skyrim is an absolutely astounding game. It adds a number of rewarding gameplay mechanics, rewards, etc, and introduces a large number of RP elements. It does a number of things extremely well and it showcases a game that has been crafted and built with an artistic eye and an obsessive attention to detail. Numerous problems from previous games have been addressed. Animations (not Beth's specialty) have received special attention. A few things have impressed me quite a great deal. Firstly, that daggers have finally been given a distinct gameplay niche with the sneak attack perk (Before then, Daggers were mostly just an RP fantasy). Spears still do not have a gameplay niche and thus including them doesn't really add anything of value (Players will just get enemies stuck on rocks and poke them from afar like I used to do on morrowind). Radiant quests have also impressed me a great deal. Shouts have shown a great deal of creativity with magic, adding numerous effects where normally the greath Beth has taketh away. I'm enormously happy with what has been done with Smithing as well.

Viewed from a very critical viewpoint, Skyrim has a few gaping flaws (A clear lack of meaningful choices and shallow characters, two very important examples). Lack of content is by far, not a problem with Skyrim. The game is handcrafted to a degree that outstrips Morrowind and Oblivion, that much is clear. As for the vaild criticisms, I do believe that the community ought to beat these criticisms to DEATH on these boards so that Beth knows full well that there are a few mechanics that should be on the drawing board for ES: VI. That said, most of the actual problems with Skyrim aren't things that Beth took away, but rather things that Beth has not yet added into the game.

I do not hope TES stays the same. I hope it changes dramatically. I look forward to seeing more dynamic games with fewer characters with deeper programming in the future.

I would like Spellmaking to make a return and I hope that Beth will find new creative ways to combine spells as well.

When I played Oblivion countless discussions were there telling us how great Morrowind was and what was wrong with Oblivion. In Skyrim a lot of that has been addressed. And now of course we see the same kind of posts. It's OK, but there is a slight difference here. There are now a silly amount of copies sold. That does not mean that the game is better, but it does mean a lot of players have never played the previous games. We are talking about millions here.

What it does mean is that gamers are getting annoyed by these Morrowind fans. Who cares about Levitate, Mark and Recall, and fast travel? There is also lots of nostalgia. Fact is that Morrowind was a great, but also a pretty buggy game with lots of flaws that are hidden by pink glasses. What is interesting now are the issues people encounter in Skyrim. The past can be a reference for some, but it is abracadabra for most. I have played the past TES titles, but I don't live in the past. It is time to move on.

Then there is the mechanic of throwing in phrases like immersion and deeper role playing experience. Both usually indicate that one liked the other game better. It's OK that we loved our old games, but it is often mixed with elitism and a false sense of entitlement. The fact that one is posting about "these issues" for a long time, does not mean they are valid or that Beth should implement any of those.

Fact is that Beth did implement a lot of those. The cities are still closed, but they feel open. Lots of little towns are just part of the wilderness now. Silly banter has been reduced. Voice acting has been improved or at least the number of voice actors have been increased. The world doesn't feel empty after you have played the game for a long time. There is a silly amount of content. One doesn't stumble upon a dungeon around every corner. There are hidden and hard to find locations. There is a mutually exclusive quest line. The leveling-up has been improved and you can now safely select the things you want to do. The list goes on.

It is also obvious that there are still a lot of issues that need to be handled. The game is buggy and for some unstable, the user interface for the PC is bad beyond belief, the PS3 users aren't exactly happy either.

It doesn't mean those old fans have no right to post their criticism, but I think it is time to take a deep breath and see how Skyrim can be improved in the short term and what you want to see improved in the next title, instead of trying to convince others that Morrowind II or Oblivion II would have been much better.

It just raises an eyebrow now.

I think the simple way to look at this is with an anecdote. I have a friend who when shown oblivion said "no that looks far to complex get rid of it" and when shown skyrim said "this looks more like my thing" (my friend is not an intelligent person) that's what bethesda are doing they are selling to the slightly less intellectual average person

I think your friend is smarter than you are. He simply tells you what he likes. But he doesn't like what you like and thus you paint his taste as the result of him being "less intelligent". Sorry to bring it to you, but that is what I call elitism.

Yeah, that's the accepted standard of elitism.

It seems to me people are rationalizing criticism of Skyrim. It's always been that way with a new Elder Scrolls game, they say. These critics are overglorifying the past, they say.

ziljan- that simplistic AI was about state of the art of the time. That's like not liking Beatles because they're four track. That simplistic AI for NPCs, however, had more programmed interation with the player. the Npcs on Skyrim largely have a few lines they repeat, but you cannot talk to them.

I get you were bored with Oblivion. That 'bland magic system' allowed People to make their own spells- and there were many more spells 'storebought'. And you didn't have to scour the land for most of them. No one I've read here thinks Oblivion's magic was bland, but many agree Skyrim's is better with more impact. There just isn't very much of it. What is there I like. Too bad I can't make any spells. One person observed there were a million ingredients in Skyrim but not very many affects at all- you made the same few potions. That's the trend I'm talking about.

You are correct about the bow being 'fixed' in Skyrim- and Skyrim 'fixes' a lot of slights in Oblivion.

But it also lost a whole lot of assets and tools, and depth in interations, and guild builds. I haven't heard any criticism of Skyrim that the bows are worse. And you may like the writing- it's more sophisticated than Oblivion's. I grant you the melee was improved also. But the things you cite are not the things that allow people to play a game over and over. There is little choice in character building. Character building is everything for a rpg. Otherwise, you are only completing quests A to Z and exploring. There are lots of game that do that- finish an area and move on. Well, some of us have finished Skyrim, and are moving on. You can bet we didn't move on with Oblivion after 200 or even 400 hours. How many hours do you have in? Wait and see what happens.
For myself and many others, Skyrim is not as repeatable as previous Elder Scrolls games.

I love Fallout. I love Skyrim. I've played each a couple-three times and they are in a box sitting.

And I am repeating my point of view, and am taking my leave.

I'm not basing the intelligence on the basis of what he does like compared to me, perhaps the timing in the sentence gave that impression, the intelligence is more based on a general lowest sets for everything academically and quite slow, I do not fault him for his preferences just simply making the observation that someone who is not academic or particularly bright prefers the "streamlined" way skyrim now works.

All I gotta say is only Bethesda can boast a core group of critics who are disappointed in the game after 300+ hours of playing...

It not only gave the impression, it gave it away. Let me make another observation based on both posts. In your view intelligence has something to do with what games someone likes or not. Apparently if that game is not intellectually stimulating enough then it must be inferior. In this regard Skyrim must be inferior in your view, otherwise your friend would have made the right choice. And that's elitism.

Or, it being his friend and he has known him for a long time, is confident in saying the guy is not clever.

Meanwhile, what on Nirn is wrong with wanting something to stimulate the brain?
All I hear is elitist this and elitist that.
When did it become shameful and unwanted to actually use the faculties given to you?
When did it become acceptable to tell people to dumb up and stop being elitist?

Well I am an elitist.
And Im proud of it too.

Strive for excellence, otherwise youre content at being mediocre or sub-par.

Excluding content that is meaningless or only applies to a minority of users is a good business decision. To date none of these exclusions have impacted me at all in Skyrim. I used levitation in Morrowind because getting around was a pain after you have been everywhere a few times and there was nothing to discover on those routes any more. I started to use CoC more just before I migrated to Oblivion where they went the other way and gave up on means of travel entirely. In Oblivion i usually restricted fast travel to between cities, something they have done themselves in Skyrim. Getting rid of stupid things like acrobatics and chameleon, that few people used, makes sense when there is a whole game world to design and the effort can be used for something more relevant to the majority of users.

Pseudo elitist whining about the loss of game depth and complexity is a fallacy. Getting rid of the things there went mostly unused in previous games makes sense when game designers don't have an unlimited budget or time to make a game. Skyrim is a great attempt at a remake of Morrowind, with the best features of Oblivion and FO 3 included.

I will go back to playing a game I like, and leave you to continue to whine about how Beth is destroying the fabric of your life.

Who gives a stuff if you like the game or not. All that matters to me is that I enjoyed the game. Whining about how the game "sux" and is for "consul kiddi3s" is a waste of time and proves you have no life if you have nothing better to do than complain a game you dislike. You don't have to play it and you can go away and play something else. Have some self-respect.

CRPGS are the computerized simulation of PnP RPGS, which were turn-based and based on statistical models that used character skill instead of player skill. Any CRPG that can't be played as a PnP game without changing the rules is an RPG hybrid. Any RPG that isn't turn-based or at least psuedo turn-based (like NWN or BG) is an action-RPG, a very simple mechanics based definition that is universally accepted for every genre other RPGs for some bizzare reason. That includes Oblivion, Skyrim and really every "RPG" in recent memory other than Drakensang: River of Time and few Indie titles.

While I might enjoy the chess based pace of the older RPGs and consider Dark Sun: Shattered Lands to be the zenith of the CRPG, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy action-RPGs. However, just like with any other genre, if the gameplay isn't there I won't enjoy it regardless of how much of it there is. That's why I quit Oblivion after 40 hours, and why I prefer Skyrim. For a long time, action RPGs were not competitive interms of gameplay with the games whose gameplay-style they were emulating (e.g. compare the gameplay in Mass Effect with Gears of War, Fallout 3 with FEAR, Jade Empire with the old Double Dragon games), there were a few exceptions (Deus Ex and River City Ransom come to mind), but for the most part the gameplay suffered. It's good to see that the more recent action-RPGs are trying to remedy that situation.

Heh, pretty much sums it up.

The game is, for me, what I expected it to be. Some good steps taken, some bad steps taken. With the majority for my gaming preferences being positive. In particularly the areas of things like the leveling system, overall world look being a step up from Oblivion to me. The bugs aside, as much a Bethesda standby as knowing Blizzard is going to take forever with a game. This is the first TES game after playing Morrowind and Oblivion and being frustrated with various parts of it's character systems that I've ACTUALLY ENJOYED playing.

So safe to say I'm in the rather pleased catagory of fan currently.

The guild quests in Morrowind and Oblivion were even more mindless than Skyrims, sure you had the guild ranks and whatnot, but most of the guild quests were boring, ugly filler until near the end. At least the filler in Skyrim is enjoyable.

I'll never be able to comprehend how people can kid themselves into thinking that their enjoyment of any mainstream video game (Morrowind included) is some form of a measurement of their intelligence. There isn't anything more or less "intelligent" between, say, the attribute based stat system in Morrowind or the perk based system in Skyrim. They're just two separate ways of accomplishing the same thing exact thing. Preferring one or the other is fine, but as soon as someone pulls out the "dumbed down" argument I immediately disregard their comment. It's one of the quickest ways people show they really don't understand what they're talking about or what these systems are really doing.

Which parts frustrated you?