So, say the new guy in Skyrim wants more of a challenge in TES 6. He/she wants to get more in depth into the lore of the game and more RPG like and maybe instead of crosshairs, he/she wants clues in each quest. Making it more immersive. But all they get is the same dumb crosshairs they got in Skyrim. Then what? He/she should just be happy and realize the new guy shouldn't have a challenge and shouldn't have to think a little when questing out in the world of Nirn?

That's the nature of the beast man!!! I realized this right when when Playstation came out( I'm sure there was something earlier) , long gone where the days of punching the TV screen cause this such&such game made me rack my brain to figure it out. By this point and one can argue it happened after Sega, the game maker's where trying to draw in bigger markets and thus the games gradually became easier to accommodate to a wider audience. That's why there is a difficulty setting in the option menu, I remember when games came with one setting, soooo hard that by the age of 12 you had grey hair, then normal+hard came out, then it was easy+normal+hard, and now a days we got easy+normal+hard+hard core mode and the hard core mode is close to as hard as older games were. I'm not saying that the game shouldn't be harder but you get what you get and unless " today's generation" as it's so oftenly put gets over instant gratification we are gonna continue to get games that to some are easy or not as hard as it should be. I never played Daggerfall but I'm sure if it was released today then the only market that game would have would be the gamers who are all about "hard core" "true" RPGing. I myself am a convert from pure FPS gamer but the only RPG game I will play is TES other then that it's a FPS and IMO there are some short comings in this installment of TES but I don't find it to be that much different then Morrowind/Oblivion just a couple of thing missing/added.

I agree with most points; Detailed instructions, optional markers on the compass, option icons on the compass etc. are all fine by me. I have no problem with the map markers as it makes sense I'd mark the places I found, also, markers that I place turning up on the compass is fine, I can assume my character has placed a mark in the correct direction or something.

Fast Travel is pretty much fine as it is -- I rarely use it and only do if I'm in a hurry to get something very bland done, like walk back from a dungeon the third time in a row, or because the game crashed and walking again is pointless.

Essential NPCs should be killable, but the most important only by the player - I do not want to hear that Esbern got cooked whilst I was out hunting so MQ over.

I play on PC so I have a mod to set the compass to my liking - quest markers only on map if on at all, locations on map, compass shows my markers if I have one but otherwise just North/East/South/West. For most quests this is fine - I just know which location they said/gave me a note saying/objective says, find it on the map and head off to it. Sometimes the markers are necessary, but I can think of only one example: Finding a moving courier, it would be nice if they told me which road he was on or something.

YES! That's a very good term to use, props on coining it (or props to whoever did). Everyone can use a helping hand at times, and the phrase implies that it's just a nudge or a boost in the right direction. As I said, hand holding is something you do for small children so they don't run out into the road.

Also, you're absolutely right about villages, caves etc. showing up on the compass - I'd completely forgotten about that as I never seem to notice them. Absolutely they should be optional as yes they do stifle one's explorational experience. Dear me, this thread has hit five pages and is still going....and it hasn't even devolved into a flame war. The Mayans really were right!

Quick response to sheogorath88 coming up, that guy does have some funny ideas...

I LOVE open world games. You're characterization of what a "true lover of open world games" is subjective. Heading for the arrow and exploration ARE NOT mutually exclusive. Nor does discovering something, while heading toward the arrow, prevent the feeling of wonder at discovery. You explore the area between where you are and the arrow.

Again, Louis & Clark had an arrow to follow on their map. The west coast. They didn't know where it was exactly, or what was between their starting point and that arrow...but they knew it was the west coast. And you go west to get to it. No explorer just picks a direction and set's off. They all have a specific direction to explore for a specific thing they are looking for.

Your anolology works when you are a long way from your objective, but it breaks down the closer you get. You are in Rifton and you want to go to Windhelm. The quest arrow only points you in a general direction and you can explore on the way. But the closer you get to your objective the more the quest arrow detracts from exploration.

For instance, having an arrow point to the exact location of the door you need to go through is different than having a goal of heading generally west like Lewis and Clark, and those guys certainly did not have an arrow pointing over the top of Sacajawea's head so they would know to talk with her along the way for some good advice and directions. Seems like you would at least have to turn the quest arrow off when you got in the vicinity of your goal if you wanted to keep up the spirit of exploration.

But it is easy enough to turn off quest arrows, thank goodness. That's my main complaint about the compass icons cause you cannot turn those off and they tell you what is there before you get there.

Oh Sheo, I just can't leave you alone. Here goes:

1,2,3) I've probably confused quest markers with compass icons. I actually flat out forgot that the compass does indeed display nearby villages and so forth - that should be optional. Yes, if you insisted on talking down to people (don't worry, I just like repeating that same sarcastic joke) then you could call that 'hand holding'. Number 3!!!
4) You're right that they shouldn't have the name pop up for caves/dungeons, but I honestly don't think the devs did it to help us out in case we missed the entrance. I think they did it to add a little drama to entering towns and cities - this feature first popped up in the 3D Fallout games, and they didn't contain hidden 'dungeons', it was just a little extra sizzle that's obviously left a bad taste in the mouths of a few. I must also say that I've yet to have a name pop up over a location I couldn't already see, but I don't doubt you when you say that it can happen. I really don't think it's likely to cause the problem of giving away many entrances that aren't already visible, but in those rare situations, you could describe it as hand holding.

...if you were a d- okay, I'll drop that joke. Number 4 (kinduv) - am I not merciful? Actually, I'm not - you're being silly talking about players running around til they find the place; if they want to play the game that way then let them, it's only a problem when it changes the way WE play.

5, 6) We're good here

7) You cheeky scamp, you know I hate both terms. This aspect of the game's been diluted; dumbed down should be used when the developers think players won't understand something and hence they make it less confusing. Everyone can understand "your gear's worn out - fix it with a hammer". That's what I get for playing devil's advocate (which is overrated and disappointing)

8) Eight. WHERE'S EIGHT? Bigger mystery than the Dwemer, that. Oops.

9) No Sheo, this is why I feel you're a finicky fusspot. If it's optional then there's no reason for you to be troubled by it. It's the default option, well (I'm going to enjoy this) what's the problem, too difficult for you to select 'Off' is it? Would you like me to hold your hand while you navigate the menu? Do you want me to call a waambulance? Oh I done you like a kipper there, boy.

10) Okay fair enough, I was just focusing on your Alduin example. I like the existence of creatures/enemies who will eat you for breakfast until you hit the later levels. In Skyrim, they ceased being walking death knells once you hit level 15 or so. Think about it though, it DOESN'T protect you from them in the early going, and isn't that where the game would want to hold someone's hand the most? Exactly. It's a programming issue - they didn't do it to deliberately protect new players from death otherwise they wouldn't have made the sabres, bears, and snow trolls so deadly to low level players.

11) Oh lay off the skooma will you? In Morrowind you're told to go to Caeus Cosades (sp?) who lives in Balmora. You're told where to find Balmora, and it's suggested that you (gasp) fast travel via the silt strider to get there. You're told to ask around at the cornerclub as to his whereabouts (yes, this is better than the current system but we're talking main quest introductions here) and since you stepped off the boat it's made perfectly clear that this is your destination. In Oblivion it's even more direct in its instructions (pass the news on to a specific person who can be found in a specific location, here's how to get there). In Skyrim, you escape execution and are then instructed to inform the Jarl of Whiterun of the attack. This is NO different to being told "Report to Caeus Cosades as the Emperor has decreed" or "Report the news to [person x]". You're not railroaded into the main quest any more than TES III and IV, and you're NOT railroaded into the civil war quests! You simply choose who to follow, and then are invited to visit a relative of theirs. You don't have to take them up on the invitation! Come on, you're practically making things up now - you were utterly ridiculous on this point.

Anyway, yes I did take offence to the term 'hand holding' because, despite anybody's lack of offensive intent, it is an inherently insulting term. 'Dumbing down', 'hand holding', 'baby sitting', they're all very condescending terms and when I enjoy something that I'm told is made for idiots and infants, yeah I resent that. There's no reason to boost your own ego while airing your criticism, it's just the method of choice of critics not just in the gaming community, but throughout society. No need for it at all.

It's honestly very good to hear that you DO like the game and that you're not as miserable as you come across. You seem far more likeable here than you have in your previous posts, and I'm just being straight up with you. When I've seen your other posts they've always came across as snarky and disdainful. You and the guy with the really attractive looking man with the beard as his avatar were always the two big meanies (I'm having fun here), so I'm more than happy to whittle it down to one giant doodoo head instead of two.

Love, Peace, and Ice-wraith Teeth

Ah King's Quest! Haven't thought of that in years. Great game.

But I disagree with your characterization "being led around like a mule with a carrot on a string". I'm being led by nothing...I'm choosing to follow. I'm not a robot. Robots don't have choice to do what they are doing. I do. It's my choice to follow the helpful arrow. I like knowing where I'm going. The things I discover between the start point and the destination arrow inspire wonder

Cool name, BTW, I loved the Elric series. The White Wolf lives! For Tanelorn! I was always more Moonglum than Elric. A beta wolf. Doesn't mean I'm not having fun...714 hours worth!

ViolentRiC - I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on certain points, otherwise we're just going to go around in circles.

I stand by my criticism of Skyrim having far too much hand-holding. It's completely detrimental to an immersive, open-world experience, and is clearly aimed at casual gamers who just want to wiz through everything in under 100 hours... without ever really using their brain or experiencing failure.

You may object to the term 'hand-holding', but you cannot deny that a number of features have been added + design choices made with the obvious goal of making everything mind-numbingly simple for the player. Even the developers would probably admit this. I still recall all the pre-release buildup and the amount of times the word 'accessibility' came up in their interviews. Noone can deny that that's been one of their biggest goals throughout Skyrim's development cycle.

Thanks. Yeah, great series. He was so much more interesting than the typical hero type. Very flawed sort of anti-hero but always had a sense of morality and tried to do the right thing, but did not always (or even often) succeed. I guess I've always liked the human tragedies like Hamlet that had a great story. You knew the end was going to svck, but it was more about the journey.

Well, I guess I can understand why some people like the quest compass in this age of ubiquitous GPS everywhere. But that makes me wonder, besides the fact that Skyrim gives no description on how to find stuff "like it's in a cave just North of Lake Isen or whatever." Even if Skyrim did give pretty good directions but had no quest compass - just a regular compass and map. Could the average player of today find stuff?

Could it be that the average player these days has no idea how to use a compass and map to find something with some general directions and landscape features? Or maybe they just don't find it 'fun'? Trying not to sound 'condescending' or 'elitist' here, just wondering if people rely on these features because they have to or because they are given the 'easier' route and see no reason to make it harder on themselves (because of time constraints, casual play, etc.)

I guess I see it as brain exercise. If you are a person who uses a GPS all the time to drive, do an experiment and try turning it off and then try to find your way around an unfamiliar part of town... (Disclamer: Don't actually do this. I don't want to be responsible for someone getting mugged or carjacked. ) if you rely on the GPS all the time, then it stands to reason, you will have a harder time finding your way without it. The point? Well, just for the brain exercise, I guess. Use it or lose it. If you use a calculator exclusively for math, you probably wont be great at doing math in your head.

Maybe you're thinking, "but this is stuff I don't really need"... well, sure, you've got a GPS and everything most of the time. But answer this: how will you find your way around when the "Zombie Apacalypse" hits?

And it seemed for a few moments that we'd made progress. I'll agree to not try to assess the *specific examples* of your complaints, and just try to ignore your posts. This is why I requested that people give specific examples rather than just throwing around adjectives - when they do, it becomes clear that there are far fewer instances of that which they decry than they believe and would have others believe. I readily admitted that four of your examples were accurate to varying degrees - you wouldn't even budge and insisted that all were perfect examples.

Your complaints included things that could be switched off, things that wouldn't affect you but annoyed you still because other players might choose to play in that style, and things that were straight up untrue (such as your belief that this game 'railroads' you into the main quest more than Morrowind, which I started a new file on mere weeks ago and KNOW is not the case). See, it's so much easier to just repeat 'there's far too much hand holding' than defend your examples of hand holding. I get that you think there's too much, but when you whittle away that which can be disabled there's not nearly as much as your tone, language, and persistent criticism suggests.

My conclusion - you have some valid points but you exaggerate and inflate them and then finally present them in the most patronising way.

I try too hard with some people, and man do I regret it this time.

Interesting questions. Makes me think that maybe part of the reason I despise the GPS compass so much in Skyrim is because I refuse to use those fancy contraptions in real life. I have a map and compass (albeit an electronic one) in my car for navigating through town and when I go into the woods I take an old fashioned compass and a topo map. Don't have to worry about batteries running down or not getting a good sattelite signal because of trees or which button to press, plus for me its just more rewarding to navigate the old fashioned way. Of course I listen to vinyl and don't own an Ipod either. I am just not much for technological gizmos, other than my PS3/Xbox, surround sound system and HDTV, of course. But those are necessities.

EDIT: Bring on the zombie apocalypse!

It doesn't bother me in the slightest that some are disappointed with the game and choose to express that disappointment - I also don't care for some (many) features. What I don't like is the patronizing language that you've brought up, OP. Being referred to as a:

Console kiddie
COD devoted fan
12 year old Halo fan
Illiterate in need of hand holding
Dumbed-down casual
Attention-span-the-size-of-a-gnat FPS player

and seeing people say things like "Oh em gee, I didn't realize that a console player wanted depth in their games", simply because I play on the Xbox 360, is insulting. I have a lot of qualms with Skyrim, many that are shared by the players who cry "hand holding" and "dumbed down", but I generally can't support them due to the language they insist on using. If only people could give their criticism of the game without being so condescending. I'm 25 years old, I game on both my console and PC, and I don't need to be belittled because of my main platform.

Anyway, I think a problem here is not that gamers are becoming dumber each generation, but that gaming companies' perceptions of gamers are off. I mean, just because Call of Duty has major sales doesn't mean that a game not likened after it won't do well. It's the developers' problem. TES is a popular series- I'm sure that Bethesda could put in the features that many players want here without compromising sales. They've just decided not to as a design choice. Doesn't meant that we have to like it, but it also doesn't mean that certain types of players in the fanbase should be blamed.

For the thousandth time, it's not as straightforward as simply switching things like markers off. How many times do people need to say this? Sure, you can make the HUD invisible, but once you start doing quests it becomes blatantly obvious that the developers expect you to be following markers and using fast-travel. Anyone who has honestly played both Morrowind and Skyrim from start to finish can see the difference in the way quests are designed.

What the developers should have done is designed the whole game under the assumption that nobody would be using markers or fast-travel at all. They then should have added both features as options that can be enabled in the game settings. They should also have included more options, like having an ordinary compass and map with no markers at all.


Oh please. You're not kidding anyone here. In Morrowind, you step off a boat, create your character, then receive a parcel to give to someone. That's it. There's no cinematic, no tutorial period, and no implication that a big story is about to unfold. You're just asked to deliver a package - nothing more. It didn't even occur to me that there was a main questline when I first played Morrowind. In fact, i've heard a lot of people over the years describe Morrowind's start as confusing, because it doesn't really seem like there's anything happening or much to do until the player exerts themselves. You're not the centre of everything right from the start, or thrown into some big plot. You're just a common stranger in an unfamiliar world.

Oblivion and Skyrim are completely different in their approach. Within the first 30 minutes of gameplay in both games, it becomes very apparent that you're being thrown into a storyline. Sure, you can walk away at any point and simply ignore it... but it's still very obvious that the game trying a lot harder than Morrowind to guide the player into questlines.

Not to be patronising but it is patronizing.

Did you just refer to the 2000 year old sorceror Lo Pan as a "really attractive looking man with a beard"?

If you're gonna call out people for using patronizing language, you need to shore up both sides, since people seem to be all to quick to call a person a whiner or something along those lines the moment you say something "negative" about Skyrim. its come to a point where people have to put disclaimers that they (generic I like Skyrim statement) and then go with the crux of their post.

and much of the time that doesn't work.

Here's a thought, stop mixing your views vs the views of others so readily, and if that fails don't take it personally...

This is a pretty good list. All of these things help us, and they are granted to us automatically just for playing. We don't earn them. We might have gotten along fine without them.

You've made a very good point here (and other good points as well). I think the game developers are as much to blame for making less sophisticated games as Hollywood is more making crappy un-original movies. I would reference the dumbing down of TV, but that could be a mixed bag, and since I don't really watch TV anymore, I can't really speak from recent experience.

I think as a whole, the entertainment industry seems to be catering to the lowest common demominator or consistently insulting the consumer with less sophisticated fare. There are signs that it could be improving. I do enjoy Skyrim; I just wish the RPG experience was a little deeper and there was more focus on story elements and less focus on "Achievement Get!" At least for some things like the quest compass and elements of the HUD, I can turn off, but I feel bad for the console players who enjoy an immersive or deeper RPG experience and have limited options for changing their gameplay.

I can't help but consider that Skyrim has an "M" rating, but isn't as graphic as many other games that have the rating and almost seems to be targeted (partially) at a "Teen" audience. I think it could have truly been a more 'mature' game in story and gameplay elements, but I suspect it was made this way to be accessible to a younger than 'advlt' audience.

Everything you listed is optional. You can easily turn everything you mentioned by turning of the hud opacity. problem solved.

EDIT: oh and the hole npc's not telling where to go... yeah they mark where to go on your map you can just go to your map and there you go. this is not exactly the same as them giving directions, but it's a lot a like.

Yes, but when you turn down HUD opacity it turns down everything, including your health/magicka/stamina bars and status updates, etc. Problem not solved. It would be fine if there was more customization with the HUD, but as it is now there isn't (Unless you're playing on PC)

This would have made Skyrim a much better game that would have appealed to broader audience.

Adding optional features like quest markers, GPS compass, fast travel = Good for everyone.

Designing a game under the assumption that all players will make abundant use of such features = Bad for some without any offsetting benefit to others.

At my age you start to take insults like that as a compliment! Seriously though good points and its good to meet another console player who enjoys a deeper experience in games like Skyrim. There are more of us than most folks (who don't play on console) realize.

Sheo, I restarted Morrowind about two months ago - let me compare its introduction to Skyrim and prove my point beyond contention:

Skyrim: En route to Helgen for execution. Dragon attacks, causes chaos. Player escapes amidst choas with assistance from either an Imperial or a Stormcloak. Player is instructed to inform the Jarl of Whiterun of the attack and invited to visit the Stormcloak/Imperial's relative in Riverwood. If the player visits the relative, they're told that the Stormcloaks/Imperials could use them on their side and its suggested that they enlist.

Yes, there's a cinematic intro and yes it implies that a big story is going to unfold - what is your point? That this 'railroads' you into the main quest by creating interest and intrigue? Are you really arguing that? Because that's just ridiculous, not because it's incorrect but because it would be like complaining that a movie trailer was so well put together that it made you want to watch the film. If YOU personally don't want to play the main quest then don't, the introduction doesn't in ANY way force you to play it. In fact, it's PRECISELY the same as with Morrowind, as I'll explain now:

Morrowind: Introduction - Words on screen as music plays read "Each Event is preceded by Prophecy. But without the hero, there is no Event" it then says "In the waning years of the Third Era of Tamriel, a prison born on a certain day to uncertain parents was sent, under guard, without explanation to Morrowind, ignorant to the role he was to play in that nation's history..." - we then see some still images while the music playes. Skyrim had no text or explanation of the Dragonborn prophecies, just dropped you into your role as prisoner. Now the player takes control of the prisoner on a ship en route to Seyda Neen.

Ship arrives at destination and you give the Imperial officer your details. You're instructed to report to Caius Cosades who lives in Balmora, and you've given a letter to deliver to him. The letter is a decree from the Emporor, passing you over to Caius to carry out orders - this is the main quest.

So let's recap:

Morrowind starts by speaking of the main quest's storyline (The Nerevarine) and your first mission is to go to a town and talk to a person, which initiates the main quest.

Skryim starts with no mention of any story, but has the appearance of a dragon whom you later find out to be the antagonist of the main quest, and your first mission is to go to a town and talk to a person, which initiates the main quest.

Your claim was that Skyrim "railroad"ed you into the main quest whereas Morrowind didn't. Please admit that this is untrue. Your second claim was that Skyrim "railroad"ed you into the civil war quest - it does nothing of the sort. You are invited to a relative's house, which is entirely optional, and they suggest that you enlist, which is entirely optional. OF COURSE people speak about the quest - why would game makers NOT mention one of the big quests? You don't have to do them, but yes they're going to offer them to you! You talk about there being "no implication that a big story was going to unfold" in Morrowind - 1) There was, in fact there was more than Skyrim because Skyrim doesn't talk about the Dragonborn or The World Eater AT ALL - it just has a dragon attack a city and tell you to inform the local Jarl! Morrowind talks of a prophecy for a chosen one of sorts who will initiate a huge event and TELLS YOU THAT YOUR ARE THIS PERSON AND THAT YOU **WILL** INITIATE THE EVENT BY SAYING YOU ARE UNAWARE OF THE ROLE YOU ***WILL*** PLAY IN MORROWIND'S HISTORY.

You mention Skyrim having a "tutorial section" - firstly, it is 100% organic. There's no "Press A to fire", it's all "Give your sword a few swings", secondly what is the problem with this? Hundreds, maybe thousands of players will be new to the series and it's not even really a tutorial because all the guy does is suggest that you search around for potions and says "you should either try to sneak past this bear, othersise take this bow and shoot it". It's a VERY short and VERY naturally scripted introduction that lets the player choose their character's play style based on their choices.

So are you going to take back what you said and apologise for the "you're not kidding anyone here" insulting, patronising crap?

I'll get on to your points about the quest markers , compass, and fast travel once you've replied. Do you see why I call people out on details now? Because often they're flat out wrong on the details because they're remembering past games inaccurately. I'll wait to hear from you.

That was an excellent summary of the two beginnings, ViolentRiC.

In addition to what you mentioned we could also point out that Hadvar and Ralof explicitly tells us we'd better split up. Now I can't speak for anybody else but my first character followed his instructions. He went directly to Riften, spending the next 60 hours blissfully unaware of both the main quest and the civil war quests.

::EDIT:: I'd also like to point out to sheogorath88 that Morrowind did have a tutorial. Morrowind gives us instructions in the Census Office("pick up this dagger"), just as Oblivion or Skyrim did.