Skyrim: is this really a RPG?!?

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:46 pm

Morrowind had a lot of flaws as a result of its openness. I actually don't think getting rid of stuff like spellmaking or medium armor was a bad thing.

I mean, am I sad that spears, halberds and crossbows are gone? Yea, those were cool. Having seperate skills for all of them was stupid though, it meant that a warrior either had to stick to just one type of weapon, or had to learn multiple weapon skills, which gave no benefit at all in a fight since you can only yield one type of weapon at a time.

Medium Armor? I really never understood that concept, even in Morrowind. I mean Ok, I get it, Medium armor is chainmail and such, stuff that isn't quite light armor, but isn't really a suit of plate either. Now that armor can be made weightless there would only ever be a point to medium armor if it had an entirely unique perk tree, and it's fairly obvious that they ran out of ideas for good perks with heavy and light already.

The spellmaker, I honestly find the spellmaker to be overrated. It gave you a bunch of ways to break the game, I'm honestly not sorry those are gone. The only thing that was really good about it was the ability to continuously improve spells you liked, or combine effects such as regen health and regen stamina into a single cast. The big problem with Skyrims magic is that some of the spell schools give you spells that do the same thing as their previous version, only slightly better, while others give you spells that work differently, while neglecting to scale the old ones. For example, if you are a master level destruction caster and you really like runes you still can't cast a rune that will do appropriate damage since it isn't a master level spell. That's something they could have overcome with more judicious design though. While the spellmaker was fun, it was more a source of gamebreaking exploits than real depth. There is damn near nothing you could make with it that wasn't game breaking that isn't in some way still around.

More factions and quests, well, that can be explained by text vs. VO, though people who say that VO doesn't allow for branching quests on a large scale have clearly never heard of a little thing called SWTOR.
But you was rewarded for its open ended style as well threw your character.

I miss the old weapons as well do not forget crossbows. You could choose to use more than one weapon and its hard to learn a new weapon type so it makes sense to have the skills separate from each other as they are different. I liked that idea it gave warriors more options. I also wish you could once again you a staff as a blunt weapon again.

Medium armor if its done right they should add it in if they can balance it if not we need more light and heavy armor choices and more diversity as far as the perks go.

Spell making was the foundation of the magic system. It is the study of the philosophy and the unraveling of Aetherius. The very core of the system was to unlock its potential and create and customize our spell users the way we want them to play. It added options and no you did not have to make everything overpowered that was an option, it was the height of what you could do with the system that is not game breaking, it allowed you to play as you wish. Spell making has always existed in the universe it makes zero sense to remove it.

It gave us options you do not have to make everything powerful I made several characters with different ranges of power.
User avatar
Becky Palmer
 
Posts: 3387
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:43 am

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 1:14 pm

What? No. That's not what roleplaying should be. Your character's personality is supposed to be distinct to your own.

It's not "supposed" to be anything.
User avatar
Jesus Duran
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:16 am

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:15 am

I find it to be an action-adventure game with some light RPG elements, but certainly not a full-blown RPG. It's rather shallow and devoid of any consequences whatsoever (come on... not even a reputation system).
User avatar
Brιonα Renae
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:10 am

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:41 pm

I would suggest that this whole Morrowind was a deeper roleplay experience is a bit of an urban myth, especially as far as cause and consequences and NPC responses to character, dialogue, etc, is concerned?
The mechanics allowed options as far as roleplaying goes, I am not refering to NPCs I never said anything about that.
User avatar
GPMG
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 10:55 am

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:28 am

Wait... so they give you a huge fantasy-land to explore, the possibility to do whatever you want to do and to be whoever you want to be... and you call it "NOT a ROLEPLAYING game"?



YOUR personality is your character's personality.

Sorry, but your wrong. I cant eliminate the thieves guild, nor the companions, and the game is full of normal human beings blessed with immortality. So no, you cant be whoever you want to be or do whatever you want to do.
User avatar
Euan
 
Posts: 3376
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 3:34 pm

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 1:33 pm

I find it to be an action-adventure game with some light RPG elements, but certainly not a full-blown RPG. It's rather shallow and devoid of any consequences whatsoever (come on... not even a reputation system).
A reputation system would most certainly add consequence to NPC interaction that is for sure, and its something I would like to see in a newer game.
User avatar
Karen anwyn Green
 
Posts: 3448
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 4:26 pm

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:16 pm

Assuming I get to create a character of my choosing and I'm not simply playing a character handed to me by a developer, then yes, they meet my criteria.
There are some cosmetic choices just like what we have here, albeit very limited. But even if they added 10 races to choose, it wouldn't make them RPGs. That's my point.
User avatar
KU Fint
 
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 4:00 pm

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:09 am

Let me start this by giving you an idea of where I come from: I started playing RPGs first with Final Fantasy on my Gameboy, then on the super-nintendo. In terms of single player games, I have played pretty much any SRPG I could land my hands on in the past 10 years. I am also an avid MMO player, starting with Lineage 2 and going through 2 dozen F2P before landing, like most people, on WoW, which I played for years but quit when they tried turning it into an E-sport.

I am not a "grinder". I love deep storyline, im passionate about character development and I adore games that lets me introduce my own RP into the game itself, having my decisions and moral takes impact the game world.

------------
Back to the subject at hand: What happened to Skyrim? I purchased this game knowing what previous TES were like, but I also purchased this game with a 2011 mindset, meaning I expected them to include RP gameplay as that is something that has been an industry standard for the past 3-4 years at least. I was excited to become the Dragonborn and change the world, but in the end I was nothing but a passerby.

- No dialogue option
- No quest branching
- No decisions to take beyond ignoring the NPC
- My character's "personality" is not kept track of, does not influence the interactions with NPCs and cannot be translated in game in any way whatsoever.
- Storyline is barebone, feels rushed and is completely un-involving.
- Nothing you do has a real impact on the world



All these are glaringly obvious when compared with a game like Fallout New vegas
User avatar
Da Missz
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:42 pm

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 4:18 am

The term "RPG" barely has to do with the freedom of choice... it stands for "Role PLAYING Game". Notice the word "playing" in there? Not crafting, not choosing, not anything - playing. It doesn't matter if you are the one that chooses the role, the one that makes the role or you simply play the one role there is available - it's technically role playing. That's why TES an RPG, just like any FF game is, not more and not less...
That being said, because the term "RPG" is extremely vague (because you have a character that plays some role in more than half the videogames out there) noone uses it anymore with it's original meaning. Today, RPG means a game that focuses on building up a character's stats through getting new skills, items, leveling up etcetcetc... That's why, by today's definition, both WOW, Skyrim and FF XII are RPGs. WOW is an MMORPG, FF a JRPG and Skyrim a sandbox RPG, but are are classified as RPGs because they make extensive use of leveling systems, skills and equipment. Games that focus solely on choosing the way your story will unfold are not even called RPGs anymore - they're called visual novels.
User avatar
Stryke Force
 
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:20 am

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:32 am

While I agree that in comparison to FONV there is little quest choice, i'm perplexed how anyone who played either Oblivion or Morrowind would think there was more in those games, or be surprised by the lack of choice in Skyrim. I was a bit dissapointed that they didn't incorporate some of the ideas from FONV in terms of branching quests and companions, but I wasn't surprised. Seems like TES formula this basically a TON of linear quests, not a bad thing necessarily.
User avatar
Natalie Harvey
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:15 pm

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 2:24 pm

Bethesda RPG's have always been pretty similar to Skyrims approach. Morrowind and Oblivion were largely the same. Rather than having complex quests with multiple paths and choices to make, you have a ton of quests and guilds you can either choose to complete or not to complete. What you are describing (choices, alignment systems) is more similar to the Bioware/Obsidian/Black Isle approach. New Vegas was a good example of a Bethesda game made by those type of guys.

I myself prefer the NV model too, but that's ultimately a matter of opinion. Skyrim is still a ton of fun, and I am able to roleplay in it just fine.
User avatar
steve brewin
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:17 am

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:43 am

We could call Skyrim a:

First
Person
Swinger

Uldred.
User avatar
Hussnein Amin
 
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 2:15 am

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:55 am

First off I'd like to say I love skyrim apart from the travesty which is the PS3 version, the actual game world is stunning. However after playing for a while I've noticed some problems that have surfaced especially through replays. I was playing Fallout New Vegas yesterday and I was talking to characters and listening to them and doing some faction quests. When I went back to Skyrim I noticed an epic loss of dialogue or perhaps quality of dialogue. In Fallout new Vegas, some random guy could give me masses of back story to himself and the universe. In skyrim I get ''do you get to the cloud district very often'' and ''I work for my mother''. Talking to parthunaax I realised he had about 5 questions that I could ask him and they weren't very in depth. When talking to Caesar I realised I could listen to about 20 min of dialogue from him and he was only 1 main faction leader of about 4 main faction leaders. I also noticed how most of the characters feel as though they have been put there to deliver the one line of speech then wander around the market for 12 hours a day. In New Vegas the people feel like they are actually there because it's their world(more about immersion). Another thing I noticed was how the factions don't interlink or conflict. How can I be the guild master of every guild in the game. It seriously doesn't make sense. I'm no hardcoe RPG fan at all and I know I've only compared it to New vegas but that is the last RPG I have been on.
User avatar
Kathryn Medows
 
Posts: 3547
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:10 pm

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:12 am

Bethesda RPG's have always been pretty similar to Skyrims approach. Morrowind and Oblivion were largely the same. Rather than having complex quests with multiple paths and choices to make, you have a ton of quests and guilds you can either choose to complete or not to complete. What you are describing (choices, alignment systems) is more similar to the Bioware/Obsidian/Black Isle approach. New Vegas was a good example of a Bethesda game made by those type of guys.

I myself prefer the NV model too, but that's ultimately a matter of opinion. Skyrim is still a ton of fun, and I am able to roleplay in it just fine.
Fallout 3 would be a little closer to the Bioware/Obsidian/Black Isle approach as to alignment since Karma mattered in that game unlike New Vegas where it was mainly Reputation that acted as your alignment with Karma being secondary.
User avatar
cosmo valerga
 
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 10:21 am

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:01 pm

The problem with game design it's an or-or situation and not and-and. Resources (time and money, simply put) are limited and a game can't have everything. BioWare games, for instance, are completely dialogue driven and therefor completely lack exploration and proper character building. New Vegas, as another example mentioned, has a way smaller and more limited world with less attention to world detail. A game developer just can't focus on everything and has to make decisions. Bethesda always weighs exploration (world beauty and detail) and freedom very heavily and doesn't put too much resources into expansive dialogue branches and such.

You can basically turn it around on almost every RPG out there and say "Why can't I go there now but have to do this certain quest before I can go to another area? It completely breaks immersion and my experience". And for me, in a lot of ways, that's true. That's why I prefer sandbox games as I don't feel like I'm in a narrow corridor constantly.

When it comes down to it, t's a matter of preference but they are all RPGs in their own right. I personally prefer Bethesda's style of RPGs, but others prefer BioWare or Obsidian's style.
User avatar
Lil'.KiiDD
 
Posts: 3566
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:41 am

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:20 pm

Could you imagon it tho!!!

Hold on a minute, Fallout 3/ NV had those elements, and it worked well. Sure it wasn't to the level of Bioware games, and definetly no where near CRPGs from the 2D era, but it was there and it was good. Fallout 3/NV had a decent amount of dialogue choices, NV's MQ also branches well for this type of game. Even Oblivion have a few dialogue choices once in a while. This is not about TES was never like this so it's ok, but that Skyrim was a step back from Bethesda's previous titles. Skyrim is a RPG, but a very poor one. It is more like a great adventure game. If Bethesda really want to make RPGs, I hope they do something about the dialogue system in their next title.
User avatar
Kayla Bee
 
Posts: 3349
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 5:34 pm

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:41 am

Skyrim is an RPG. Yes.
Skyrim has uncharacteristically few choices you are allowed to make about the alignment and morals of your character when compared to the bulk of successful other titles in this Genre that released in the last few years.
People who want to see the game acknowledge WHO you are as much as it acknowledges WHAT you are are not wrong and don't understand roleplaying.

"It ain't punk rock till the punk rockers say it's punk rock" means "It's hypocritical to act as though you get to decide what defines people as part of a group that has no clear laws of membership" You say you are a true roleplayer, and that other people are not true roleplayers, but in reality, what people define as roleplaying differs from one person to the next, a lot of people have disagreements about what it means, and because of that acting as though you can claim the lable and other people can't is just silly.

I mean, if we want to get into the really obscure depths of the roleplay debate, as it applies to pen and paper games you can get an endless debate on whether roleplaying means that you find an in character reason why your character does what is most advantageos to the game, or if you are beholden to do only what you think your character would do, even if its a detriment to the game. Let alone between those two main schools of thought you'd instantly have a huge disagreement on what roleplaying means, and that's not even accounting for all the combinations of the two, or the always much beloved "I want to be a dike to people, then claim I had no choice because it's what my character would do" player.

I do not know why you are trying to argue a different way of agreement. Whatever.
User avatar
Lou
 
Posts: 3518
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:56 pm

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 5:27 pm

Skyrim is a rpg, but the rpg elements is limited and poorly done.
User avatar
ImmaTakeYour
 
Posts: 3383
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:45 pm

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:08 pm

Ah, it's our daily "Is Skyrim an RPG?" thread.
*Read in wealthy 1800's voice* Mmmmmm, yes. Indeed it is...
User avatar
Elea Rossi
 
Posts: 3554
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 am

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:25 pm

YOUR personality is your character's personality.
No you can give them an entire personality based off of what you enjoy or hate and things or entertainment you have been exposed to, when you create somebody in the game you cannot be so one dimensional you giver everybody your personality.
User avatar
Far'ed K.G.h.m
 
Posts: 3464
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:03 pm

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 1:23 pm

Skyrim is a rpg, but the rpg elements is limited and poorly done.
Agree, Skyrim is still an RPG and a great game but it's RPG elements aren't amazing. We only have 3 attributes in comparasion to 8, although I would argue that the 3 play a more important role then the 8. I can't wait for Kingdoms Of Amalur Reckoning to come out so that I can compare it to Skyrim and see what Reckoning does better or worse in the RPG area.

*Read in wealthy 1800's voice* Mmmmmm, yes. Indeed it is...
For some reason I read that with a Sean Connery voice.
User avatar
kitten maciver
 
Posts: 3472
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 2:36 pm

Post » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:22 am

Is it that time already?

Iseriouslyhopeyouguysdontdothis
User avatar
Rudy Paint fingers
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:52 am

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm

Well, I go back to the beginning of RPGs with the original D&D and AD&D, as well as original computer games on teletype machines. I have perspective about what is and is not an RPG and how the genre has evolved (or not, as the case may be, particularly for Western games).

TES used to be an RPG. As of Oblivion, Beth shifted to more of an action-based game for TES as well as FO. What's the difference? Simple: an RPG requires you to play a role based on the abilities of a character, not on your own abilities. As soon as real time, player based outcomes are included, such a game is moving away from a role playing game and becoming an action game or some other genre. Retaining some RPG elements does not make a game an actual RPG.

Of course, there are few RPGs on the market today, including both Western and East Asian markets. That evolution has been a huge blow to the diversity of gaming and underlies what many players feel is lacking even if they cannot openly explain why they feel as they do.

None of this means that TES, FO, or other action-based games are poor or not enjoyable. It just means they are not role playing games, or at least not primarily role playing games.
User avatar
JESSE
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:55 am

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 2:39 pm

It is an RPG, a shallow one. Doesn't mean it isn't fun...but there was much potential wasted, and many poor design decisions in my opinion.
User avatar
Alisha Clarke
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:53 am

Post » Mon Jun 18, 2012 1:24 pm

Agree, Skyrim is still an RPG and a great game but it's RPG elements aren't amazing. We only have 3 attributes in comparasion to 8, although I would argue that the 3 play a more important role then the 8. I can't wait for Kingdoms Of Amalur Reckoning to come out so that I can compare it to Skyrim and see what Reckoning does better or worse in the RPG area.


For some reason I read that with a Sean Connery voice.

So if three attributes are worse than 8, would a game with 15 attributes be more of an RPG than one with 8? Hell why don't we all just play RPGs with 25 attributes, if that is the measure of quality or "RPG ness".

Seems like a ridiculous argument.

AiTenshis argument is interesting, but I feel it has a flawed premise, as you DO have to play within the confines of your character in Skyrim, it's just that part of those confines relate to the type of action-based gameplay you are doing. They were already trying to go in this direction with the previous three games IMO.

I'd like to point out that I think Morrowind for all intents and purposes was trying to be an action-driven game for the most part, and so is Daggerfall for that matter, where you actually swing your weapon, Morrowind just didn't do it very well (haven't played enough DF to say yet), and included some elements you guys miss. That doesn't make Skyrim not an RPG.
User avatar
Nitol Ahmed
 
Posts: 3321
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:35 am

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim