And people who like the game will vote 10 for the opposite reason.

All we got, really, is people voting Yay (10) or Nay (0).
The people inbetween are just readying the average so the average works with few votes.

With thousands of votes, the number of 10s and 0s match pretty much up to eachother...

BUT what we get is not the SCORE on a 0-10 scale -- but the answer to the question:

Did [GAME] live up to your expectations?

Well, that's the price you pay. My rig wasn't cheap either.

Except it is.

same for me, I have a few minor issues and one larger issue ' returning to Markath is now impossible '. As for the overall game ~ Its fantastic. Giving me the same pleasure now as it 270hrs ago.

A delighted 360 user here.

I agree that rating sites are useless, whether it be for movies or games or anything else. Game companies, however, like to brag about high reviews, as you can see on betatesda's xbox 360 commercial.

And no, Skyrim shouldn't have been released at all on the PS3 platform. Do people really believe that if the game wasn't released on the PS3, the world would suddenly go into mass civil wars, rioting in the streets, etc? Halo and Gears of War wasn't released on the PS3. PS3 fans didn't start shooting xbox fans. Sonic the Hedgehog wasn't released on the SNES. Super Mario Bros wasn't released on the master system. Keith Courage in Alpha Zones wasn't released on the Neo Geo or Atari Jaguar. Final Fantasy wasn't released on the 3DO, and Zelda wasn't released on the wonderswan. Somehow, everything was still OK. We didn't go into a magnetic pole reversal or anything either.

Next Bethesda Software meeting:
"So..... should we just skip the playstation next time"

Dev time that could have gone into better PC ui.

Metacritic isn't very trustworthy as low scores are mainly caused by technical problems, which after few patches are going to be fixed. PS3 is always the most problematic system as it was made too complex. That's Sony's fault.

Not saying it's not happening to others. I just find it funny that such a widespread problem doesn't appear to affect anyone I know who has the PS3 copy.

There hasn't been a poll or anything to see what hardware revision the majority of the issues come from, AFAIK. It could be that the problems are from a certain hardware revision of the console itself. Slim PS3 users might be getting the issue, while owners of the very first model might not, or vice versa. Console gamers are so used to not having to deal with the hardware on their rigs, that when problems do arise from the hardware itself, they blame the software. 360 has issues with some games on certain hardware revisions. Gears of War, for example, will RROD almost any of the first or second generation systems, while it doesn't affect any other hardware revision of the console.

Do you play the PS3 version? Because I have hardly any sisues and all of the people I know who play it have hardly any. Everyone seems to be loving the game. I call fan boy on you sir, because you keep posting these very, very bias posts that scream "anti-ps3" when ACTUAL PS3 users seem to have very little issues. I'm also using the generic 40GB hard drive.

you talkin PS3? cause PC version is completely playable.

Trolls will be trolls. This forum is 90% trolling, they aren't being heard so they try to hurt the game elsewhere is my synopsis.

It is meaningless it is just the Dragon Age 2 fan bois getting thier revenge for the panning Dragon Age 2 took earlier this year. After talking as much [censored] as i did on the Bioware forums about the depth of svckage that was Dragon Age 2 and how i pretty much called it then that Skyrim was going to kick ass it is just retaliation.

EA rulez the worldz.

Asai

People who give anything a score of 10 are just as fubared as the person who gives a score of 0.

10 should be very rare to ever be given as being at the top of the scale means the game is perfect. No need for patches, nothing needs to be changed, everything works like it was meant to.

0 should also be very rare as this should mean you cant even install and play the darn game.

However nothing will change, most people today lack any kind of higher brain function.

I believe scores of 1-5 are better to use as this tends to stop the whole 80 and under as bad games lol.

1 unplayable
2 playable but bug ridden and bad mechanics
3 mediocre, nothing new and nothing really bad.
4 Good game, has it problems but is fun and/or tries something new.
5 A must play for everyone, few bugs, great gameplay, nicely innovative.

and skyrim gets a 4, even tho I personally hate the path the series is going. You just dont give a bad score because you dont agree with a games direction. That just means the game isnt for you.

By your standards, no game anywhere, made at any point in time, deserves a 10.

Famitsu:

40 points out of 40, perfect score by a panel of japanese professionals who have the insight to not knock off points for bugs they know are getting fixed.

BTW the only western game to ever achieve this in basically japan's version of Gameinformer. And only the 17th game to achieve this in their twenty+ year history.

so... yeah.

I have the PS3 version and it's unplayable. Go do some research before you run your mouth, it's just as simple as going over to the ps3 forum.

I don't see a problem with this.

In the end... it doesn't matter what anyone-else "thinks" about the game... You included... (If you have an opinion.)

You purchased the game based on "Trust" or "Hope" or "Expectation" or "Hype"... Which is not based on facts... Just like opinions are not facts...

When you decide NOT to buy a game... It is usually based on the facts, once the hype has died, or when you simply never trusted, had no hopes, and expectations become realized...

However, saying that "Owners" should not have an opinion on a game they played, is like saying that your opinion is equally as worthless. (For every moron giving the game a zero, there is one guy giving it a ten, just because they want to attempt to influence the market, and like the looks, and have not run into any bugs or game killing glitches yet.) Never trust a review on a game that is less than a month old, and never from someone who has never played the game long-enough to even review it. Unless the game just isn't playable for them, which is just as valid of a review.

Never trust sites that don't let you edit your own review... Too many places let users "quickly" add a review, which can not be adjusted. Those "first impression" reviews are useless, unless you don't intend to play past the first day.

My personal review would be slightly higher than 5.5 of 10.0 but not because of the game itself. 5 of 10 is not bad... That is average. I am blind to most of this game. My review would be for this game, with the MODS... The potential, and actual use of them. I feel much of this game was too simplified, and much still does not function... not correctly. I can't even guess if someone will like this game, because I am not sure I like it that much. (Looks great, where it looks great. Looks like garbage beyond the first LOD level. Plays strange with the rules set in stone. Fails to adapt correctly to users levels. Feels rushed and incomplete. Wastes my time where it should not, and rushes through where you would assume more time would be spent.)

My review is no more invalid than the guy who says... "This game rocks! Best game ever!" 10/10 Yet fails to say why... or now sits in the forums, complaining that his game was ruined by an update, and can't go back and un-review the game. I already feel bad for convincing my friend to get this game. However, he lucked-out and purchased the x-box version... His problems have been minimal, and the game has been enjoyable for him, 10/10 on his reviews... He is oblivious to the issues he does have, so I will not spoil it for him. We respect each others opinions, and don't bicker how the other is wrong. We just disagree. (Well, he actually finds it funny, that it doesn't work for me, yet I am the one who seems to have hyped it up to him. I don't remember hyping it up, but ok...)

Me, however.. I can, and do un-review a lot of games, a lot of hardware, a lot of software, a lot of books, a lot of stores... and I never rush to a review, like these other boobs do.

Stop reading all the rushed reviews, and stop writing them... You are just as bad as the others doing the same thing.

So you honestly are saying, $1 per hour of fun (minimum) isn't a good deal?

Thats called an opinion. Yours does not override someone else's. You think its a 5, they don't. Get over it.

Exactly. No game is deserving of a perfect score, ever. Even a flawless game with no bugs and exactly the right amount of content, and makes me a cup of hot cocoa while rubbing my feet. I believe NO game deserves a perfect score. 9.9, 99, etc, at best.

Yes, lets trust the support forum as an accurate representation of the whole user base, because those without problems post threads about how few problems they are having all the time.

The game has issues yes, I am not doubting that, but your attempt at supporting your argument is... stupid...

No game I have played to date deserves a perfect score. There is a reason its called a perfect score, if just any game ppl liked got a perfect score said score would lose its meaning.

Noone and nothing is ever perfect.

One should always strive for perfection even if one knows they will never attain such perfection.

Pot meet kettle.

Whatever issue that is affecting ps3 users is not universal, thus just by having said version doesnt equal a problem.

If we are talking about the fps issue with save game size, then the game is unenjoyable, but not unplayable.

Wrong!
It will always be an insult to Bethesda and to other players to hear this mentality: it is immature to rate the game solely on the fact that it will probably be fixed by some voluntary.
The modder has a life. Some even went that far to post they almost lost their real lives doing it - and are claimed heroes for that!

When I have a bug report, with the mod to fix the game, do I go to the modder thread for support or to Bethesda support?
If the bug is from Bethesda's game, and I bought it from Bethesda, I should not be forced to accept support from a volunteer to fix the game.

I paid for good moments. I had them: exploring the world and reading some book lore in the game. Now you tell me those hours were worth my $60, because I had them.

Worth my $60? I paid to game quests and adventures. Instead I have to forget about it until January because almost all quests I played are broken. Going to uesp or the elder scrolls wiki you will find the reports on bugs that are everywhere. Don't even start to focus on game mechanics. World building is fine but if I wanted something like that I would go for Sim City and real books worth of my reading time!

Mods are just that: if it works, good for you. If it doesn't, I cannot demand support from a volunteer, can I? (edit: That is why I rather prefer to wait until January.)







Honestly, I read some of your posts, saying the same thing over and over. In case you didn't notice, I can associate your avatar to those words already. (edit: is there a real "hate campaign"? I find it useful to debate, not blindly state the same thing over and over, that was what I meant)

I wish people would instead not forget that the game is as good as its official support. Otherwise, it is just a bad game (or toy, as Mr. Todd Howard would put it) because it is unfinished. You play a bit and it breaks and takes away all the fun (even if you try very hard to imagine it did not broke, go make something else, you will think about the stories that "could have been"). It just broke and it ruined it all. Face it. The one year long announcement of the game might have had you speaking to everyone you knew about it. The game will probably get long term support in terms of patches. (edit: That is the awesome part!)

However, releasing the Creation Kit sooner instead of later is not excuse to save Bethesda the hassle. It is not an excuse to put the game on a pedestal. It is not an excuse to overlook the time the creators spent with it. (Have you ever wondered that the creators of the game might have been forced to rush it?) It is not an excuse to "hand over" design decisions and project to the hands of an unknown bunch of avatars. Do you know the modders? They can be good. I'm sorry, I paid Bethesda for my game.



Sorry! Folks who think the modder will be there for you, you are plain wrong! Official support is the only way to fix the game in its entirety!

Furthermore, the CK will only do as much as Bethesda will let you.
Not that it means disadvantage to Bethesda. Again, I paid Bethesda, not some modder I cannot call for my - and millions of other peoples - technical support!

Grow up, man up! (edit: The game is as good as the official support it gets from now on.)

Thats not what unfinished means here...

Thats interesting. I like the game besides its flaws. It is ridiculous to pretend they do not exist. It is also ridiculous to make mods to cover the bugs.

The more popular a game, the more trolls are attracted to it. It's as close to being a reality tv star these people will ever get.