Well I wasn't expecting this thread to get quite this level of reaction. I haven't been on the forum much but it's good to see the latest Elder Scrolls game has just as active a community as the previous ones. Thanks for the replies everyone, a couple of points I want to respond to..
Beautiful, again another OP Troll has to insult the rest of the forum just so he can have his point taken seriously. I hate to remind the OP but Morrowind's combat isn't exactly great, it does have a good world and decent story but the combat is just terrible, hit, miss, miss, miss, hit, who wants to play under that system, not to mention that you can exploit it to hell much worse then you could in Skyrim. My last point, if Morrowind came out today guess what it would be, wait for it, it would be Skyrim because of the tech and the target audience.
This is my pet internet hate. People calling anyone they disagree with a 'troll' as though their opinion and line of thinking is the only valid one. The combat in MW left a lot to be desired I agree. I outined in my OP what I thought made MW a classic and I wasn't referring to the combat.
I'm not asking to go back to the Morrowind game itself, merely the Morrowind style - where substance was hip and flash was bonus. Skyrim's style reeks of the idea that "flash is hip and substance is so 5 years ago". I don't hate Skyrim, it's a great game. It's just not the RPG I expected from Bethesda nor is it the kind of Elder Scrolls game I expected. What I expected was a deep, rich storyline with lovable characters and branching quests, in addition to nice graphics. What I got is a game that blew my eyes away graphically, but failed to impress storyline, dialogue, and quest-wise.
I agree, style over substance is the problem here though to be fair that's true of most modern games not just Skyrim.
I can't really agree with much of the OP. Reading text is not playing a game, it is reading. Reading is not fun, playing a game is. Reading has nothing to do with role playing or story telling and has no place in an RPG except for the in game books. Any delivery of story content needs to be portrayed as realistic as possible, which means you see it with your eyes, or hear it told to you by an NPC or both. The only thing I can agree with is that Morrowind had a deeper back story but even that is a subjective opinion since that said delivery was one dimensional (text). At least in Oblivion and Skyrim the delivery of all story related content is delivered in real time with animated characters either doing the action in the story or telling you, like the real world. You can see it and hear it happen, not read it like your a mute person.
It's easy to sit back and write dialogue, since that is about all they could do back then. The game play was non existent (lame turn based combat, with horrid animations and sound effects) so all they could do was write. The characters were so unbelievable to look at and the world wasn't even remotely convincing. It was barely beyond the old zork text games that had no graphics. So since they didn't have the tools to make a decent game back then, they used what they had which was to write a bunch of text. Now they tell the story in real time with voice acting and animations and scripted events. Much better IMO.
The real problem with Skyrim is the lack of choices in the quest lines. You cannot role play at all since there isn't really a tree of dialogue, it's a branch that ends up in the same place no matter what you say with zero consequences. They made a lot of progress with Fallout 3 then threw it in the trash for some reason. Biggest flaw IMO.
Well we'll just have to disagree here. I prefer rich storylines and involving characters to a token voice over. I hate hearing the same person doing voice overs for various NPC's too nothing breaks immersion for me more than that. One of the things I miss from MW is all the background on the world you could get from key characters. It's not practical do that using voice overs particularly in a game that's made for console.
I've been playing this series since Daggerfall, bought all of the games close to when they were released (give or take a month or two). All of the games were easy, never challenging, always easy to break, etc. Nothing has ever changed imo with the TES series except that the combat has been steadily getting better and they're atleast making an attempt to remove some of the more gamebreaking features.
I finished Morrowind in about 60 hours into it, bought the game when it was released. Morrowind was probably the easiest game of the series for me. You could max almost any skill in the game without even having to be in combat, except for the offensive melee skills. It took very little time to do this, skills built up very quickly and the game was also very linear. You were essentially funneled through series of mountain ranges that all gradually scaled upwards in difficulty the further you progressed into it. Once you reached level 30 you could solo Vivec himself without even having to drink potions or heal yourself. The game was stupidly easy.
Anyone who uses the term "dumbed down" to describe Skyrim and then subsequently uses Morrowind as an example of a game that isn't dumbed down is either a Rtard or they're being intellectually dishonest or simply an abscent minded hipster.
None of the games were 100% linear but Morrowind definately felt more linear to me than any other game in the series, probably due to the static leveling and once you figured out the level ranges of certain areas you basically have very little reason to replay the game.
You say games are not about difficulty but many of the people spouting negativity about Skyrim seem to use terms like "Dumbed down", to describe Skyrim. Im not saying you're one of these people but I have been reading a lot of junk on here lately and the parrots are out in full force repeating it.
I just laugh when I hear people say this things, I've played Morrowind and its one of the easiest games ever, there is NOTHING complex about it. So, it makes you sound like an idiot when you try and suggest that Morrowind tested your "intellectual" capacity any more than Skyrim does.
I think, as has been said, you are confusing complexity with difficulty level. I didn't think MW was hard to play but it was more a cerebral form of entertainment than a world with bland NPC's that for the most part really don't have anything of interest to impart like OB and Skyrim. My idea of 'dumbing down' is doing away with all this to appease gamers who are interested only in getting conversations out of the way so they can fast travel to the next quest.
I think we are all missing the real reason for Skyrim's "dumbing down".
Beth wanted to put in new features and better graphics into this game.
But, how do you do this on an aging system like the Xbox?
You have to "shoehorn" it in and the only way you can do that is by taking out other things (stats, spell creation, even an armour piece).
Some things where taken out for stream-lining, to be sure, but most of it was simply due to the limitation of the Xbox (imho).
I think we might need a new internet rule "When in doubt, blame the Xbox".

This is true also. It's unfortunate that Skryim was developed for old consoles instead of being a key title on a new one. Bad timing really, it would have been so much better with more advanced technology at the disposal of the devs.
Thanks again to all for the replies. We may not all agree but we can at least have a civil, interesting debate about the series we all love otherwise let's face it we wouldn't be here.