You're not playing the same Skyrim I'm playing.

So many are not playing the same Skyrim we're playing...

Isn't that the same mentality behind just about every post you made in this thread?

Seriously, people don't seem to understand that opinions are opinions, and I've yet to see someone claim their opinion to be the standard to which everything should be measured. If you don't like what someone has to say, that's fine, disagree. But to consistently undermine someone's opinion on the basis that it's just an opinion is a bit hypocritical when you then go on to make your own opinions.

The "I like it so you're a complainer" responses are grating.

The only two RPG's in the fantasy universe that are worth mentioning in my opinion are Dragon Age and The Elder Scrolls simply because they are really fun games for me that dont seem to overdo it or whatever. Fable for me started out great and should have gone down the path that TES went down with their more mature story and gameplay. Instead they went down the less mature and over the top gameplay. As for several others that I have played they are all unenjoyable for me.

I must admit I feel that Dragon Age takes more planning and coordination that TES, Dragon Age takes more skill to play with the planning whereas I find TES is more a pick up and get lost in the world. I also find TES games have a better lore than other fantasy RPG's.

So your opinion is that what makes this series enjoyable is the lore? I happen to agree that the lore is quite interesting and well developed, but its not why I play. I'm a sandbox gamer, and TES is the pinnacle of sandbox gaming.

This is your counter-argument? Really? Sad.

Everything you've posted is a personal opinion. It's your personal opinion that my personal opinion is incorrect. Luckily, it's my personal opinion that you're a yes-man who lacks the experience and objective eye necessary to see the myriad of problems in this game.

For me its the closet thing to live roleplaying and living the fantasy. I can play my character anyway i want and go anywhere i want while still facing cause and effect consequences.

Seriously, Acrobatics was just another way to game the system and jump over city walls. In execution, that meant hopping everywhere to train it. Talk about an imersion-killer. I don't miss the old spellmaking at all. That was just a numbers game. I expected a more creative form of spellmaking, maybe we'll get some DLC for that. Until then, the only reason to miss it, is because I can't craft cheesy trainer spells.

Anyhow, every TES experience is different. That's the whole point really. Some enjoy it, others apparently don't.

amen

acrobatics was a skill used to get yoru acrobat who cant take a hit out of harms way, and training it meant having fun. old spellmaking allowed you to make a spell strong enough to actually use aganst enemys. i dont really see how anyone could think removing those is good but oh well, it is still a fun game

I checked into those other games mentioned and in each case, it had something or didn't have something I had to have in a game. So far, only Bethesda is making the games I really love to play. Well, Portal 2 was one but that's another story. When it comes to my RPG, I'm on the same page as Bethesda and vice versa. I couldn't be happier that they're pouring themselves into these games just the way they're doing.

In Daggerfall we had to monitor our bars, non of which regenerated, and you could even die from stamina exhaustion if you collapsed more than three times or so. These are all great mechanics that have implications if you don't play by the rules. These are then rules that I have to play by. All this is gone, probably in the name of not supporting a niche market of role players but instead focusing en masse making everything easier. So the role players are now forced to imagine, make up in their head, all these kinds of mechanics. Now, tell me, would you enjoy being forced to imagine combat and its outcome?


Why is something that is badly implemented always forgiven when it is removed? Why not improve it? I can see some technical reasoning going on behind some of the decisions (such as spell making), but most of them seems to have a single reason - dumb the game down enough to make it more accessible to more people. Like, some (even me) complained about the directions we were given in Morrowind quests, for being lacking. What happened? Look what complaining about it actually "gave us". Hell, I even used the language skills in Daggerfall from time to time. I've played RPG game systems with literally thousands of skills (dice, so a lot more are to be expected of course), and I got to pick just a few of them.

What you say about classes are also wrong. Sure, the idea was never implemented well in TES, combined with its usually quite faulty leveling system. In (what I perceive as) a good classbased system, the class defines who you are when you enter the world. It defines your background. Daggerfall let you choose positive AND negative traits (again, removed because of exploit level allowed rather than fixing it). From then on, the selected skills may make you advance faster in those skills (because you already have a background in them), but what if you could flip this around and say that skills can be forgotten if not used or you abandon one skill to take up another (at a cost - non economically - of course). After Daggerfall we also left the idea that everyone wasn't equally balanced at all, something that is a fact in real life. There are young gifted people highly skilled in just about anything they do, and there are young people who doesn't have a chance in life at all and not skilled in anything. Now, our start is this: You get x number of points no matter what, assign them as you see completely fit. There is no chance going on here at all. There is no unluckily rolled character, which the GM (game) can help keep alive. Now we have a difficulty setting (Daggerfall didn't iirc). Most (even old) games include some kind of influence on how you distribute your rolls or attempt to increase them after the fact. But in modern games, you get a fixed start.

Daggerfall had 100 features. Skyrim have 100 features (not a lot more anyways). Sure I enjoy the increased focus on combat and magic being more believable than just numbers. But it came at a cost of reducing everything else. Most of which had some serious design problems. But these many years since Daggerfall, I'd expect Skyrim to have like a 1000 feature (a lot more), where old problems were fixed rather than simply removed. They sure have grown since back then, surely they can't all be content creators? But this growth is also a catch22 situation - in order to pay for it all (content, which apart from some quest design, is very good), they also have to target a broader audience rather than a niche product for the used-to-be-small-fanbase. And in order to reach this new audience, they have to make it accessible to them by dumbing it down. Unfortunately (for me), they can't hope to satisfy both camp, so they naturally (which I agree on from a financial standpoint) choose the camp giving the most revenue. Money talks, I suffer

By and large TES games also have a very developed world in terms of lore, politics, etc. in comparision to most games.

What game has so many books and such?

I found Dragon Age a colossal bore..it's a good, relatively pretty game, but the formula really hasn't changed much since the days of Baldur's gate, only I felt those old games had a bit more spring in their step..Dragon Age also manages to take itself too seroiusly in a really irritating way for my tastes. In fact, honestly I consider Bioware projects in general to be heavily overrated these days.
So, I didn't even bother with Dragon Age 2.

The only other RPG's i've played that enjoyed as much as TES (though for different reasons) are: Gothic 1 and II, Mount And Blade (if you count it as an RPG), and the Fallout series..all of them including 1 and 2.

Some people just don't 'get' immersion in RPG's...to each his own, I don't get how people can play FPS day in and out and find that fun, so different strokes for different folks I guess.

PS Why the )(*& did someone have to turn this thread into a Skyrim whine-fest? Has nothing to do with the OP.

Yeah well ... you missed the best then ...



You can?
Well, I can't. I wanted to play a pure mage (without the need to exploit Alchemy) ... well, it isn't fun.
I'm arch-mage now and put most of my focus into destruction magic. I have the -supposely- most epic equipment (Gauldur, Archmage-robe, etc.), and I still rather svck with magic. My "pure mage" char is even almost better with a sword, even though I've never skilled it.
I also thought it would be cool to only use robes and no armor ... well, sadly it makes no sense in this game.

But sadly the mage class is just one of the many broken things in Skyrim ...

So just because you are bad at playing a pure mage you decide to call the mage class broken instead of maybe thinking "Hm, perhaps I'm doing this wrong."

I have a pure mage PC who specced in destro, is wearing Archmage robes, Gauldur amulet etcetc and I'm doing a huge amout of damage.

Additionally, in reply to another post in this thread, I don't see how having the "you can die from stamina exhaustion if you collapse three times" removed from the game limits my Roleplaying in ANY way. Am I the only one who when roleplaying actually create a backstory and then put more story on top of that, regardless of what mechanics are there?

Sheesh. Gamers are the most ungrateful fanbase....ever.

Yeah, I was wrong in thinking, Skyrim would allow people to play "what they want, how they want".
Instead they almost force you to use armor. Also they seem to think, everybody wants to play with a mixed char, using magic + weapons, because magic alone just does not cut it (yeah, it's still possible ... guess, how I got that far by only using destruction magic for damage dealing ... I think I'm doing something right here).
Also it's only stupid, that the regeneration of Magicka gets so damn slow in fights.

But hey, you can still exploit Alchemy I guess. It's probably a lot of fun to crawl wikis for getting the recipes and "where to get the ingridients" and then abuse the [censored] out of the broken system.
If that's, how people want to play today, I feel really old now.

Then what you guys want is not TES but Second Life. You do not want an RPG. You just want to Role Play. You do not need a game for this, just a sandbox.