By that definition, every game ever made is a roleplaying game. I play the role of Mario in Super Mario Bros, but that doesn't make it an RPG.

I disagree about Skyrim's MQ. It's very subjective, obviously, but dragons don't interest me much and they never have. I didn't much care for the main quest, there were a few good quests (Diplomatic Immunity), but it was just OK. As for the Thieves Guild... I think this explains it pretty well. http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=14422

I really hate to argue with this, but that isn't what an RPG is, not really. Just like commanding forces doesn't make you an RTS, you wouldn't call Baldur's Gate an RTS because you command soldiers in an isometric camera angle would you? Playing a role does not make an RPG, Computer RPGs are based on the pen and paper roleplaying game Dungeons and Dragons, and like it or not Attributes are an integral part of that game and thus RPGs, even action rpgs. You can't take out a core gameplay element like that and not be called dumbed down.
Now TES has always been more action then RP, but that doesn't stop it from being an RPG, Rogue is an RPG even though it has no dialog quests or much of a story.

I LOVE Skyrim and think it's a great great game, but skills don't feel like they do anything anymore, all my effectiveness is from perks and all skills are for is unlocking new perks, all leveling does is make me a better mage fighter or thief, where before you had to actually think when you leveled. It is my opinion that RPGs have some form of mental component to playing them well, making the right choices in Planescape Torment could mean you never had to fight any battle, ANY; not just some, In Morrowind the choices were more about what guilds to join, because in Morrowind joining some guilds would block others, in Morrowind you couldn't be a jack of all trades unless you planned VERY well.
I set out to be a battlemage in Skyrim but ended up being really good at smithing and lockpicking and archery and sneaking ect ect ect, Skyrim is not a step backwards, it's a step sideways, into not being an RPG as I see it, you can disagree but this isn't what I think of when I think Role Playing Game.

I couldn't say it better.

I don't believe the OP realizes that every minor dungeon in oblivion was almost exactly the same as the others.

There are still lakes and rolling landscapes in skyrim.

I recommend the OP check out The rift for his beautiful forests and whiterun hold for his rolling landscapes, anything up north is just mountains and snow.

Daggerfall is my most hated game actually.

This person knows what they're talking about.

50% bigger? Where are you getting this number?

SteamTeck, Daggerfall is an amazing game. Maybe that style of RPG just isn't for you... just like the Skyrim-style RPG isn't really for me. Opinions.

Yes I would call it an RTS, and an RPG together. Its called a mixed genre. Skyrim is an Action RPG.



Attributes were a way of describing a characters skill. Now with computers, we can actually show that skill WITHOUT attributes. This is no longer a time of "how strong are you", but rather, "Show me how strong you are".


Perks are just respresentations of skills you learn trhough repeadely doing something.

If I swung a sword every day for a year, I'm going to get better at swinging it and controlling it. Now if i spend some time learning how to do some fancy move, then BAM, we just explained skill progression and perks.

If I cook an omelet every day, after a while I will be able to make one damn good omelet. Then if I take some new ingratiation and make a pizza using my knowledge of cooking, there's a new skill i know, AKA, a perk.

Morrowind and oblivion turned into a "play backwards, and plan early for your grind" game. Skyrim doesn't mess with that and say "Just play and let your skills level naturally, as was the original idea. But because of how leveling worked, people turned it into a numbers game, which is another way of saying "meta gaming". Your "planning very well" is meta gaming. Fact. How can you plan if you, from a character point of view, have no concept of the leveling system and no clue about joining guilds would block out others? This is exactly what Bethesda wanted to get away from.


You didnt become a battlemage because you didn't play like one. If a battlemage would do something, then do it. If they wouldn't do something, then dont do it. Why did you use archery? why did you pick locks?

You wanted to play a specific way, then you strayed from that. That is YOUR fault, not Bethesda's

And Daggerfall is my favorite game of all time.

Just goes to show you that there are many opposing opinions about everything related to TES.

The only thing I don't understand is the constant complaining that the same people do about the same subjects.

Skyrim is a step backwards, but not for the reasons the OP is suggesting.

In most ways, I consider the gameworld design to be a step forward. The big exception being in terms of size/scale, where it hasn't stepped forward at all. In fact, there's an argument that Skyrim's hand-craftedness and diversity makes the small size of the gameworld a much more noticable problem than it was in Oblivion. In Oblivion, everything was blended in well. You'd walk through a sea of green and seemingly endless forests as the environment around you changed subtly. Whereas in Skyrim, one minute you're in a colourful forest, the next you're in an icy wasteland.

Shucks. Another thread where we learn that whether you love or hate this game or that, it's just your opinion after all (100 posts later). T - 20 seconds and counting til the next "Skyrim is weak" post.

I don't hate Skyrim. In my view, it has a ton of problems, but I have fixed those with mods. For the most part, I'm a satisfied customer. The problem is though, after spending 400 hours with the game there isn't much for me to see or do. Right now, I'm sitting on these forums as I await DLC, to see if it will improve the game for me.

For my tastes it does a lot more steps forwards than backwards.

People like to say this, but I fail to see how Skyrim actually does it.

Attributes do not describe a character's skill. The describe the character him/herself. When I want to get a sense for how physically powerful my character is, I can look at... carry weight? Skills don't do it. Those are what my character knows. Perks don't do it, either, because they're tied to skills. My character's physical appearance doesn't do it, either, because that would mean everyone in Skyrim is pretty much equally buff.

I'm sorry, bu no. There is just a void there. There is nothing in this game that really describes the character's physical/mental self.

I think Skyrim is a step backwards, but good lord.... not because of anything said in the OP.

You took the one thing Skyrim advanced the series in, and called it the step backwards.

Yep your right, Skyrim has more and varied dungeons +1 over Oblivion which had 1 dungeon designer copy and pasting over and over again.

Skyrim has better vista's and amazing sights, incredible night vistas and Aurora's anyone +1

Deeper and more meaningful Storyline +1

MUCH improved charachter Models from beasts to NPC's to charachter models, honestly go back to Oblivion and look again,... +1

Much improved combat and Magic effects +1

The list go's on, and on the PS3 the UI isn't that bad, you can still hotkey etc. Your right its a HUGE step backwards .....

Physically powerful? 1handed/2handed skills if anything, or, you can revert back to the origional method of RPing and use your imagination. You made your character with some specific look and feel in mind, and if you cant see that in your own character, then something is wrong.

Not sure if serious. Oblivious had the laziest, most generic landscape ever, and you can tell half the reason they added fast travel was because they couldn't be bothered to touch up the vast majority of it after just heightmapping and using the automatic object placer. Skyrim's is a lot better, and has a good amount of hand-crafted elements (which Oblivious had almost none of), but Morrowind's beats them both hands down. I'd also consider its UI to be even worse than Skyrim's god-awful one were it not for the fact that the Skyrim one has the additional problem of being buggy.

So basically you're saying that having mountains and snow in Skyrim isn't true to The Elder Scrolls? Oh boy...

right, and what other environments were there in Oblivion that didn't include trees?

seriously, if you can name me one location in Oblivion off the top of your head (as in, don't look it up) besides the area surrounding Bruma that didn't include anything but lots of grass and trees, I'll gladly digress.

edit: and some members on this board seem to be either intentionally or unintentionally avoiding the issue everyone has with the OP's statements. Oblivion was not only geographically the most uninteresting and non-diverse (the latter isn't up for debate, it's fact) entry in the series, it also had the HORRID level-scaling system (which, while still present in Skyrim and some degree in Morrowind, wasn't anywhere near as grating), the generic NPCs that all looked the same, the complete lack of variation in dungeons, unbelievable repetition in it's quest design (go close this Oblivion gate. next quest? go close another Oblivion gate) and even complete disregard of already established lore (remember Nu-Cyrod?).

and if anyone needs clarification on what Nu-Cyrod exactly entailed, here's a minor example:

Morrowind Imperial Legion armor:
http://images.uesp.net/thumb/7/72/MW-npc-Joncis_Dalomax.jpg/600px-MW-npc-Joncis_Dalomax.jpg

Oblivion "Imperial Legion" armor:
http://images.uesp.net/thumb/f/f1/OB-npc-Anvil_Jailor.jpg/600px-OB-npc-Anvil_Jailor.jpg

Skyrim Imperial Legion armor:
http://images.uesp.net/f/fb/SR-npc-Legate_Quentin_Cipius.jpg

notice how Oblivion's is the only one that looks ripped straight from a LOTR movie, yet Morrowind and Skyrim's both fit and match (appropriately) with PGE statements (Roman-inspired appearances)?

I really was in a rant mood last night! Forgot to say though, PC ui is the one big negative for me. Almost only the keybinding. If that was improved for PC then I would have no problems at all with this title. Also, no quick save on console is a bit lame, watching my gf play on PS3, I'm constantly telling her to quick save before I remember she cant, guess you can wait an hour and use the auto save but still.

So to keep to the thread subject this time. I agree that the ui was a step backwards, but I do not agree anything else was. Especially landscape, if Valenwood is involved in a future title, will someone complain they cant see the terrain through the forest?

there's multiple issues in Oblivion, unfortunately, just as Morrowind was forced to endure after it's release, nostalgia/10 will always be a constant plague with the gaming community (remember, "WHY IS MORROWIND SO SLOW COMPARED TO DAGGERFALL") yet now it's somehow completely fine?

Trolling is a bannable offence, just so you know.

Create a new mod then, put RTS into Skyrim. You the player can conquer the Keeps etc out there across Skyrim, and purchase soldiers, use the tactical map seen in Windhelm, Solitude and the camps (with the red and blue folags) to tell you general to attack and take over another keep. Also make sure to keep some soldiers behind to defend if necessary.

That'll keep you busy if you allow up to 8 'Lords', a 'Lord' ofcourse is a NPC who also owns Keeps and instructs their own general. It would probably be the most epic mod of Skyrim, but nobody seemed up to the task when I wrote out the full idea... and I believe this idea was muted before I even had my post put up.