I see an interesting trend : V - Skyrim

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 12:32 am

Sensible people realise that the writing is atrocious in Skyrim. I've put 150 hours in and I really enjoyed my time with the game, but the quests really are awful for the most part.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:10 pm

There are many 100+ hour players in this forum who do nothing but complain about the game as if they hate it. Contradiction, maybe? Usually, I can tell if I'm going to hate a game after investing only 5 hours. If I've invested 100+ hours (some of the complainers have even declared they've played for over 300 hours) in a game, it's a safe bet that I actually like it. Seriously, folks.

BTW, I played the hell out of MW and Oblivion (though I didn't like Oblivion as much because of the damn Oblivion gates and how I felt pressured to complete the main quest... still I got at least 100+ hours out of it). So, I'm not one of the n00bs that many of the complainers whine about for liking Skyrim too much because they simply never played the "better" earlier titles.

I like Skyrim. I like what they did with the perk system (it effectively removed the ability to make a god of all trades that the earlier levelling algorithm exposed). I like the fact that I don't even have to pursue the dragonborn quest if I don't want to from the very beginning without feeling like it's trust upon me. The world seems a lot closer to MW to me than Oblivion, and that's a good thing in my opinion.

Who cares about not being able to find weapons or armor that aren't as powerful as what you can craft. Simple solution: Start a new build and don't use the crafting perks. Spend your perks on other things. Then, you'll be happy to find Daedric armor that's been enchanted... guaranteed. If you want to make it feel like Morrowind, don't smith and don't fast travel (aside from using the horse and cart).

Man, and the complaints about the writing? Yeah, maybe the lore was better written in Morrowind, but the voice acting is 100x better in Skyrim... along with character movements, NPC interpersonal interactions, etc. That combined with the graphics should make this game the most immersive yet! They even brought back some old Morrowind tunes. And, what exactly is wrong with the story-telling? I don't get it. I've played MW and OB, and this sequel is clearly a sequel. It's lore is derived from the lore of the others. Unless you have an issue realizing continuity and have difficulty thinking systematically, I have no idea how it is so difficult to connect all of it into one mass. I think the story-telling is great.

HI there The Plebeian! Hope you're having a great weekend.

And just what would that contradiction be? In a game like SKyrim it all takes a while to sink in. I mean, the qualities are glaringly obvious from the get go - great music, great visuals, immersive gameworld - while the flaws only become apparent after you've played for a while. This is even more so because such shortcomings are woven in patterns: Sure, Bleack Falls Barrow is great, untill you realzie it has many near identical siblings. Black Reach is amazing too, at first, but eventually it reveals its uneventfullness. The Mages guild quest might pull you in but it is uninspired and unsatisfying. Markarth looks stunning, it really does, but is just too small of a city, like every other major one in SKyrim. Dragon encounters are fun for the first dozen occurances. After that they quickly fade into the background, no more relevant or chalenging than a bush waving in the wind. Skyrm is a good game with lots going for it. By all means, let us commend the devs and do them the service of pointing out the flaws. No real contradiction there.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:48 pm

Ahem...

Sorry.... "MOST of us aren't...."

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 5:51 am

Sensible people realise that the writing is atrocious in Skyrim. I've put 150 hours in and I really enjoyed my time with the game, but the quests really are awful for the most part.

Okay, I am interested in your post, and I'm not criticizing you or it in any way. I'd like to know why you "really enjoyed your time in the game", but you thought the writing was "atrocious". Were there other aspects that made playing so enjoyable that they completely overshadowed the bad writing? Or you thought the writing was really bad but you personally don't care about writing? I'd like to better understand what you mean.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:05 am

Funny thing is, I've never played Morrowind. I'm comparing it strictly to Oblivion, and possibly a bit of FallOut 3 and New Vegas.

As well as other RPGs.

I wasn't going to do this, but I must. QA? And you're an expert on the "industry"? Dude, I'm a systems anolyst/software developer. By the time QA gets their hands on a software product, it had been long ago designed and that design had long ago been finalized. QA does a few things: their managers write them test scripts that they run through for several weeks, then there is a period of ad hoc testing where they get to "go off the rails". QA has absolutely no input in what goes into the finished product. They are NOT developers. When a QA person starts to pretend he's a developer and says he has a better way to build the software product, he is instantly slapped down by the Business, PMs, Tech Leads, and Developers who actually spent years in design sessions and in development creating the final product.. the product that is to be tested for defects by the QA tester... his only job. Test for defects, report the defects, retest the defects when a fix has been put in place... over and over til all testing cycles are complete and the PMs make the call to release the product.

This is why QA is increasingly being offshored to countries like India.

Self-aggrandizement is not always a bad thing... but, when you pretend that you're "in the industry" then reveal that you were a QA tester and, thus, you know everything about how games are and should be made, you have become delusional... and an armchair developer. Nothing irritates developers more than a QA person pretending to be them.

Now, if you're going to school to learn software development. Good for you. I hope you succeed. But, for God's sake, stop misleading everyone into believing you're an expert because you had a job in QA. Sheesh.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:17 pm

I havent seen any posts by anyone whos played 100+ hours saying that they hate the game where are these mythical posts ?.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 5:28 am

Funny thing is, I've never played Morrowind. I'm comparing it strictly to Oblivion, and possibly a bit of FallOut 3 and New Vegas.

As well as other RPGs.

Never accused you of anything, I was just pointing out the status of where this thread may potentially be 'heading'.

Personally, I hated Morrowind. I hated Oblivion as well. Doesn't mean I have to compare them. If I hated them both, then I hated them, there's no comparison needed.

As for the Fallout series, New Vegas disappointed me. Fallout 3 had a PLETHORA of more content than New Vegas did, especially in DLC's, and overall, a better storyline.

The idea of being shot in the head, surviving, and hunting down your killer is a LOT less interesting to me than being forcefully trapped in a high-tech vault, and finding your way out, after aging ingame. It was a much better experience for an introduction to the game in my opinion.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:06 pm

I havent seen any posts by anyone whos played 100+ hours saying that they hate the game where are these mythical posts ?.

lol! exactly.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 12:04 am

Okay, I am interested in your post, and I'm not criticizing you or it in any way. I'd like to know why you "really enjoyed your time in the game", but you thought the writing was "atrocious". Were there other aspects that made playing so enjoyable that they completely overshadowed the bad writing? Or you thought the writing was really bad but you personally don't care about writing? I'd like to better understand what you mean.

I overlooked the writing. I thought the game world and game design were first class. I loved the exploration and sense of freedom in the game. I thought the Levelling system, perks and combat were great compared to Oblivion. What I thought was much worse than Oblivion was NPC interaction and the quests and writing.

There were far too many fetch quests and far too many "Go to point B, speak to Person A, the come back." Rinse repeat. Some of the Daedric quests were really good, but the majority were just forgettable. I think that sums it up actually. I haven't played Skyrim in over a month and bar a couple, I can't even remember any quests that I did. Whereas I can still remember quests from Oblivion.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:30 am

I havent seen any posts by anyone whos played 100+ hours saying that they hate the game where are these mythical posts ?.

I'm one of them. I didn't "hate" the game, far from it. But I was disappointed by a lot of it.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 2:17 am

I wasn't going to do this, but I must. QA? And you're an expert on the "industry"? Dude, I'm a systems anolyst/software developer. By the time QA gets their hands on a software product, it had been long ago designed and that design had long ago been finalized. QA does a few things: their managers write them test scripts that they run through for several weeks, then there is a period of ad hoc testing where they get to "go off the rails". QA has absolutely no input in what goes into the finished product. They are NOT developers. When a QA person starts to pretend he's a developer and says he has a better way to build the software product, he is instantly slapped down by the Business, PMs, Tech Leads, and Developers who actually spent years in design sessions and in development creating the final product.. the product that is to be tested for defects by the QA tester... his only job. Test for defects, report the defects, retest the defects when a fix has been put in place... over and over til all testing cycles are complete and the PMs make the call to release the product.

This is why QA is increasingly being offshored to countries like India.

Self-aggrandizement is not always a bad thing... but, when you pretend that you're "in the industry" then reveal that you were a QA tester and, thus, you know everything about how games are and should be made, you have become delusional... and an armchair developer. Nothing irritates developers more than a QA person pretending to be them.

Now, if you're going to school to learn software development. Good for you. I hope you succeed. But, for God's sake, stop misleading everyone into believing you're an expert because you had a job in QA. Sheesh.

Thank you for assuming that my only job was in QA.

But, if you must know (if it makes you feel better), I'm currently working for a company that is producing their initial mobile apps as their Design Lead.

Again, thank you for the assumption though.

Moral of the story:

Started in QA, learned in QA, transferred from art and QA to school for game design, currently in school while being a designer.

Not an armchair developer.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:34 pm

Thank you for assuming that my only job was in QA.

But, if you must know (if it makes you feel better), I'm currently working for a company that is producing their initial mobile apps as their Design Lead.

Again, thank you for the assumption though.

Moral of the story:

Started in QA, learned in QA, transferred from art and QA to school for game design, currently in school while being a designer.

Not an armchair developer.

Good for you. Like I said, I hope you succeed. You stated more than once in this thread that you knew the industry because you were an insider... and you only mentioned your QA creds.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:09 pm

I'm one of them. I didn't "hate" the game, far from it. But I was disappointed by a lot of it.

Being disappointed and making suggestions for improvements is a long way from hate.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 12:11 am

Good for you. Like I said, I hope you succeed. You stated more than once in this thread that you knew the industry because you were an insider... and you only mentioned your QA creds.

I use only my QA "creds" because that is where I have actually learned the most, aside from creating my own mechanics and having hands on tests. As a tester I learned a lot of "what works and what doesn't" outside the realm of just bugs, because in my department (at least) we also tested for balancing as well. Thus I learned a lot about balancing, continuing in school has strengthened that enough where I chose to actually drop 2D/3D art and focus on design.

I also only use my QA "creds" because, for right now, I can't really say anything about current projects other than "I'm working on current projects."

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:11 pm

Mentioning your "creds" has nothing to do with the validity of Complaints/observations/Criticisms going for "What do you do in life" is a cheap tactic of which the answer to such doesn't even matter, its a discrediting attempt for incredulous peeps and those derp enough to see "hey yeah where is your Software Development Company!"

its the internet, no one cares about your life.

Which is why I don't waste time with those kinds of confrontations, because no one cares and the person directing the question definitely doesn't when it gets to that point.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 4:26 am

Skyrim is Beth's Dragon Age II.

Except one was a huge success that most fans enjoyed, and the other was basically a flop that was almost universally hated by the original DA fanbase.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 2:04 am

When a QA person starts to pretend he's a developer and says he has a better way to build the software product, he is instantly slapped down by the Business, PMs, Tech Leads, and Developers who actually spent years in design sessions and in development creating the final product.. the product that is to be tested for defects by the QA tester... his only job. Test for defects, report the defects, retest the defects when a fix has been put in place... over and over til all testing cycles are complete and the PMs make the call to release the product.

Nothing irritates developers more than a QA person pretending to be them.

And I'm sure nothing irritates QA people more than all the many times they have to test for defects in a game element that was obviously poorly planned and designed in the first place... and having no ability whatsoever to suggest to those designers (who are just as flawed and fallable and capable of making bad decisions as anybody else) sensible ways in which something could be improved. And they should know, since they are the ones stuck having to 'QA' that bad idea for 'defects' over and over through test gameplay- when sometimes the whole element was quite probably a poor design idea in the first place. I surely wouldn't want such a brainless and frustrating job. Never underestimate the ability of other people to come up with improvements to your grand ideas... even 'lowly' people. Even if most of those ideas may not be worth a second look, by institutionally stomping on any input from 'below', you're also tossing away the ideas that could quite possibly revolutionize your game.

But hey, only devs have good, original, workable ideas, right?

I think if I was a developer/designer, I would take a little time out from my busy duties, just to go hang out with some of the QA people and ask them what they think of what they have been working on- gut feelings... is this good stuff? is it going to be fun for the average player? Is it making sense to you guys? Or are you guys having real problems with any aspects of it? Smart business people go down onto the manufacturing floor sometimes, and take the pulse of their projects from the people in the trenches, ask for honest critique from the people who really know how the sausage tastes, after it's been designed up in the ivory towers. If the designers and bright lights did a little more of that kind of thing, maybe we wouldn't end up with so many craptastic, head-scratching game elements in our games. The designers may think up all the bright ideas, but the QA people probably have a way better idea of whether it's going to actually be fun or work well.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:17 pm

No matter how much you dislike Skyrim, over a hundred hours played in a $60 video-game is money well spent, atleast in my book.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:59 pm

Except one was a huge success that most fans enjoyed, and the other was basically a flop that was almost universally hated by the original DA fanbase.

Because popularity = quality and thus, because it was popular, it cannot have the same principles as something less popular.

Principle is what matters here, not dollar signs or amount of Likes you have on Facebook.

And I'm sure nothing irritates QA people more than all the many times they have to test for defects in a game element that was obviously poorly planned and designed in the first place... and having no ability whatsoever to tell those designers (who are just as flawed and fallable and capable of making bad decisions as anybody else) what a dumb idea it was. And they should know, since they are the ones stuck having to 'QA' that bad idea for 'defects' over and over through test gameplay- when sometimes the whole element was simply a poor design idea in the first place. I surely wouldn't want such a brainless and frustrating job.

This is exactly what helped me learn a lot and fueled my desire to leave art and become an actual designer. Because I would look at the flaws (that I was paid to look for) and anolyze them, even putting forth suggestions (if the dev team was still taking them).

Something like Shield Bash and Power Attacks only requiring 1 Stamina would have been caught, by me, and anolyzed as a bad design.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:45 pm

Except one was a huge success that most fans enjoyed, and the other was basically a flop that was almost universally hated by the original DA fanbase.

Agreed. If Bethesda EVER sided with EA, I would have to demand a refund from any game I purchased from them.

To be fair, Bioware did good with the series, and EA just took a giant [censored] on it.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:39 am

No matter how much you dislike Skyrim, over a hundred hours played in a $60 video-game is money well spent, atleast in my book.

Aye, $60 for 100 hours worth of entertainment sounds like value to me. I am astounded at how much gamers expect for their dollar. It is even crazier in subscription MMOs. With 'gaming' becoming more and more mainstream and casual I would hope the world of computer or online gaming eventually diversifies and expands into niche markets. And not just for content but for a range of consumers and budgets as well.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 2:24 am

Agreed. If Bethesda EVER sided with EA, I would have to demand a refund from any game I purchased from them.

To be fair, Bioware did good with the series, and EA just took a giant [censored] on it.

Principle =/= Popularity.

Dragon Age II changed a lot of things and streamlined a lot.

Skyrim does the same.

Aye, $60 for 100 hours worth of entertainment sounds like value to me. I am astounded at how much gamers expect for their dollar. It is even crazier in subscription MMOs. With 'gaming' becoming more and more mainstream and casual I would hope the world of computer or online gaming eventually diversifies and expands into niche markets. And not just for content but for a range of consumers and budgets as well.

You are correct, Skyrim offers a lot of play time for the cost of the game.

Unfortunately, Skyrim is also a game that is "not supposed to end," which many of us (me included) look at it as, and so burning out, or finding faults that keep us from playing, at 100 hours or so does not fit that "not supposed to end" category.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:53 am

Principle =/= Popularity.

Dragon Age II changed a lot of things and streamlined a lot.

Skyrim does the same.

DA2 was a cheap attempt at cashing in on the popularity of the brilliant DA:Origins. You can't argue against Beth's devotion to Skyrim. Love it or hate, they put the effort in over 5 years and that shows in the world and design.

I don't think it's fair to compare such a pile of crap to a brilliant game like Skyrim, that has a lot of flaws, but is still special.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:38 pm

Well seeing as it would usually TAKE 100+ hours in a game to make a decent review from it, I'd say it's questionable to determine whether it was worth the 60$.

For console users:

Non-killable children. (Oh no! We can't put that in a video game, even though we can put half-naked chicks and brutal gore in it!)

----------------

For everyone:

Stale Dialogue (Basically the same chat options over and over. Nothing new, nothing interesting, just boring.)

Poor animation (Not first-person of course, MAINLY just third-person.)

Repetitive Killcams (After 4 or 5 killcams, it looses it's originality.)

Overall, from my time determining how this game worked, I'd say it's worth more like 40$. Still good storyline, gameplay, cutscenes.

Nowadays, EVERY new game is 60$. My question is, when will gaming companies ever realize that their game is worth what it's good at, and not for the bugs that people loathe. Wait, they don't care, they're just GREEDY.

» Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:57 am

DA2 was a cheap attempt at cashing in on the popularity of the brilliant DA:Origins. You can't argue against Beth's devotion to Skyrim. Love it or hate, they put the effort in over 5 years and that shows in the world and design.

I don't think it's fair to compare such a pile of crap to a brilliant game like Skyrim, that has a lot of flaws, but is still special.

We're not arguing devotion. Because I would argue that nearly every single artist, nearly every single designer, nearly every single programmer, nearly every single musician and nearly every single producer is devoted to every project they do, no matter if it's an indie title like Angry Birds or the next Legend of Zelda.

We're arguing principle.

Skyrim took a lot of previous content and removed it. They "streamlined" things that they probably didn't need to streamline. They created a world where the narrative, in both writing and mechanics of the game, don't fit with how the game actually plays.

Things like making the races be nothing more than, mostly, cosmetically different shallows out the RPG choice and consequence principle.

Continuing these trends, in their fifth game and second game on current consoles, rather than changing them shallows it as well.