i agree with the consequences part, not the rest though

I was ready to say this was so far so standard, none of the critiques were different than ones I had heard a million times before... but then I got to the Leveling and Combat points.

See Below


I do not understand how a human being with a perfectly functional brain, could have a problem with the leveling in Skyrim. It's so simplistic, it's useless, how is this difficult? Also, his arguement doesn't seem to be terribly related to the Leveling system, and more a complaint about experience points... which seems inconsistent with his statements about how the player can't effect things, in that Experience points are rather integral to most RPGs I have ever seen, and you can earn them doing anything. How can someone be impotent, while also getting a reward for your actions is bad.

Honestly it looks like someone told this guy: Write an article about why this game is bad.

At least that is how it seems to me.

KOTOR 2 is Obsidian, though you do have a point, for ever HK-47 and Verric there's an annoying Twi'lek kid or a Fenris.

I honestly don't like these articles. They're destructive criticism, being all negative is about as useful as being 100% positive, they're both uselss for improving the game.

For Choices and Consequnces, the games that do that right (well sort of) are no where near the scale of Skyrim and they don't try to be. I really don't think it is possible with limited resources to do the C & Cs right with this technology and [censored]ing about it just feels like people going: why do you make those elderscrolls games, you should clone Planescape Torment and Witcher 2, how dare Pepsi not taste like Coke!

Probably because those older members are more likely to have played the classic entries (especially Morrowind) that had much more value as an RPG, but lacked the action and "streamlined" elements that Skyrim has. Personally, Oblivion was my first TES which I didn't like very much. I tried Morrowind which I loved, and now I'm at Skyrim.

If they can't handle the choice and consequence at this scale (which I think they very well could were they interested), perhaps they should consider different stories. There's no reason to always push for the most epic, world changing events they can think of if they can't also follow through with epic and world changing consequences after those events have run their course.

I'm not a big fan of IGN but I think the author of that article makes some decent points.

This thread is really moving, I will just say I agree with the article. People shouldn’t get ruffled about it, if it points out things that could be improved thats good. I guess some people take criticism to personal but criticism can come from people who really like the game too.

For stuff like updating dialog, it would be nice, even if it costs money for more voice recording. But say I go to the Thieves' Guild as guildmaster and the bartender says "So, you're Brynjolf's new protege eh? Don't look like much to me", I kind of go meh, whatever. But when I can't complete a quest because somehow I didn't get the order right, I am like $#@^%$!&*$#. Get all the QA right, and then go onto such dialog stuff. But preferably do both.

When it gets more serious, trying to work out exactly every quest you have done and how they interact, that is when I say OK it is just a game, that is impossible. But within one quest line it would be nice to have everything updated.

That's because the older generation were motivated to join by games they loved so much they wanted nothing more than a place to talk about how great they are (seeing as I joined up for Morrowind and Daggerfall I guess I was a little late).

I agree

I adore Skyrim and TES. It is the only series I compulsively buy other than Total War because it is just a massive value for 60 bucks. TES is a magnificent achievement, but nothing is ever perfect. The more flaws the devs are mindful of going in to their next project, the better they can improve their game. Combat needs an overhaul. Character/story needs work. The leveling system still needs tweaks so that I'm not hurt by leveling speechcraft, restoration, and lockpicking. And AI is never finished.

I love Skyrim and Bethesda, but I can't dispute anything this writer says. Does Skyrim handle consequence well? No. He's totally spot on there! What our character does has almost no impact on the game world. Almost any quest or guild that I played as a saintly do-gooder would also be available to me as my blood-thirsty assassin. Don't give me a line about "that's freedom" cause it isn't, it's a lack of consequence. Oh, you just robbed my store blind and paid 25g to get off, now I have no problem with you! Oh, you stole a piece of bread in front of me, now I'm going to pull out a weapon and fight you to the death. Or better yet, you killed my wife in front of me, but paid the bounty now I act like I've never met you. I'm the leader of the thieves' guild, yet the bartender acts like he has just met me. My wife still has the same speech options she had when I met her. FO:NV did a much better job with consequence, even though I like Skyrim better as a game. Skyrim's strengths far outweigh its flaws, but let's be serious here, the game is not perfect.

I still think Skyrim > Oblivion

I just happen to think Morrowind > Skyrim

So if Skyrim is such a broken, meaningless, incomplete, lacking in almost all departments, developed by chimps, presented by blantent lies, nothing-but-eye-candy with the depth of a mud puddle, piece of hacked together to appease fan's and rushed for 11-11-11 crap...why the hell is anyone playing it? Why is anyone even complaining on these forums? Why bother even hoping it get's "fixed"? Bethesda couldn't get it right to begin with, screwed up on a few patchs, and generally made a horrendous pile of crap with the TES name on it...what makes anyone think they'd get it "right" by everyone's standards down the line?

Seriously, I'd like an intelligent, meaningful, reponse to that.

I wouldn't care who wrote that article,it has some very good points in it.

In this day and age i think bethesda could do more in terms of consequences and the game choices you make,...here's an excerpt

For instance, let's say you've become the leader of the Dark Brotherhood. You've got enough blood on your hands to paint a city made entirely of farmhouses and filled with fire trucks. But you can merrily skip over to the comparatively saintly Companions, assume a position of ultimate power, and nobody so much as bats an eyelash. That's like watching the Justice League roll out the red carpet for Lex Luthor.

So you hate ign,ok,but is that above statement wrong?I think that's a very fair criticism.

No-one said that, and the article certainly didn't.

Constructive criticism and hoping issues get fixed =\= SKYRIM IS TERRIBLE RARARARA

In oblivion you did get recognized as a guildmaster, or Hero of Kvatch, or Champion of Cyrdil, that help keep it real. In skyrim the word dont seem to get around as good.

I read through this thread, but I intentionally did not click through to the article.

I have my own opinions, just like the ign writer must have, so I have no interest/reason to read paid opinions about a game I'm currently enjoying.
This is a game, and I don't expect video games to mirror real-life experience in all aspects for every individual who slides the disk in and starts it up, for chrissake.

I'm on my 2nd character, to level 50, and I find I like the game even better on the 2nd playthrough.

What scale? If it wasn't for ridiculous radiant fetch quests there wouldn't be much more quests than many games. FO:NV handled it well and it has far more dialog. Scale is relative.

Actually, the problem is that it does and it doesn't. You can be hailed as the Harbringer one moment, only be asked about fetching mead the next. It's simply a lack of consistency. They add new phrases to the list, but never take old ones out.

I bet I could use almost anything in this article on many other "great" RPGs out there.

Consequences wasn't that big of a deal, I felt bad for doing some things on that game, because even if it blocked more content I'd rather have an NPC live.

The leveling is probably the best I've ever seen? Everyone likes to claim their game has a very intuitive "Play it your way," type system where what you do is how you progress, but most of it is crap. Hell even Oblivion svcked with that. But on Skyrim, what you do is what you get better at, things aren't clumped together carelessly. It's nice.

Combat is meh, I always make stealthy characters because trying to be all sneaky and kill everyone without the others noticing is more interesting to me than running in and slashing continuously until whatever it is dies.

Please don't pidgeonhole fellow TES fans into the "hater" stereotype. Nobody in this thread has made Skyrim out to be the worst game ever, because it's actually pretty great in spite of its flaws.

Why? Because you're obviously not reading any of the criticism. Most people who have criticized weaknesses of the game have also pointed out that it's a great game. It's not a binary question here. You can like or dislike the game in different degrees. I've put in 400 hours in Skyrim, I think it's the GOTY, but I agree with every criticism that reviewer made. Ever hear of constructive criticism?

I have no problem with IGN and it's obvious that Bethesda fans will discredit them rather than agree with what they're saying, You discredit the source so the content is irrelevant & that's not really a fair way to answer the points that they posted.
That's blatant one sided fanboyism.

i agree with a lot of what the article says without involving politics or hating on IGN but i still adore playing Skyrim.