would you be satisfied if skyrim had no dlc? : V

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:38 pm

this is probably a bad idea, but go ahead, shout your oppinions.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:19 pm

Over all the game is "meh".

I don't really care one way or the other, I doubt there is going to be any mind blowing DLC anyway.

» Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:31 pm

No.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:18 am

No, I would have sold the game a month or two ago if there was no confirmed DLC. Mainly because I play on the Xbox 360 and have no access to mods.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:14 pm

nope.jpg

THis game needs it to keep it engrossing. No DLC, no TES for five more years.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:57 am

nope.jpg

THis game needs it to keep it engrossing. No DLC, no TES for five more years.

If this was it for TES, for another 5yrs. I can pretty much guarantee I wouldn't buy the next.
Skyrim is so lacklustre in terms of story and meaningful content I might as well play GTA, as that's essentially what its boiled down to. GTA with swords.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:52 am

Incidentally, it's not DLC I'm interested in but a full blown expansion.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:14 am

Would you be satisfied if skyrim had no DLC? ...You Blaspheme!

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 6:37 am

No,

Spoiler

it ends on a cliffhanger of sorts... rather two cliffhangers. The main quest is open ended. We don't really know what is to become of the Blades or Paarth yet, no matter who you choose. And the second cliffhanger is the Civil War. No matter who you side with or who is gone, there hasn't been a moot. And just because, say, Ulfric or Elisif might have advantages in winning control of Skyrim, depending on the Civil War, you have to consider that there's been a freaking dragonborn running around skyrim who made it all possible. And the last dragonborns were all rulers themselves. At the very least, this needs to be addressed. If they pull some stupid cowboy cliche where you ride off into the sunset and everyone forgets you, then it would be beyond lame.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:29 pm

Thanks to the creation kit, yes. As is, it can be made into so much more. If Bethesda do not release the stuff they made or planned to make and take my monies then they surely have missed a trick.

Of course, there will be, but it's a fair hypothetical!

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:43 pm

well this got depressing.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:32 am

No.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:19 am

I'm actually using Skyrim as a place holder until some games come out on my radar. I might even give DLC a miss if they hit after the game I'm waiting for come out.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:46 pm

nah. just because they left a little too many features out from previous games that lots of people are crying about and you know they will put back. spellcrafting. ill bet my right nut they will add that back in

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:13 pm

Actually yes. I have vanilla xbox but I would be satisfied if we didn't get any dlc.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:13 pm

No. I want DLC.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:27 am

I feel like they'll release a decent trailer, and at the end throw in a quick shot of spell making. Instant success. And yes I would be satisfied. But DLC is by far the most exciting thing for me. I'd only be satisfied because I remember being a wee lad playing oblivion, new to the series. But I knew it was a series that should be continued and would google "TES V" each and every day, hoping that my dream would come true. It did<3 thanks Bethesda

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:55 am

Uh... TBH yes. It's already consumed twice as much time as any game out there (outside of fallout 3). The amount of content here is more than worth the money.

I think people need to lower expectations, because this game is already amazing.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:16 am

its fun as hell but it could really use some dlc so no i would be ticked.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:21 am

Yep. Never liked dlc as they are either too short or completely pointless. Expansions on the other hand are totally worth it, especially if as good as the ones for Morrowind and Oblivion. So I'd rather wait for that. Besides, if the game becomes boring there's always awesome mods that can be installed.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:04 am

No.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:43 am

Yes. Because I don't usually purchase DLC.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:51 am

I love the game the way it is so I wouldn't be to upset if their wasn't a DLC or expansion. Am looking forward to the fact that their probably will be YES!

When I find something I like I tend to stick with it. First game I played "on my own" was Red Dead Redemption, and that was after helping my husband finish the game completely. I wouldn't let him trade it in til I found another game I liked, which happend to be Oblivion. Which I played until Skyrim came out, with hop's over to Fable III.

RDR kept me busy, even if I was doing the same type quests over and over again....along with the gambling, which I found fun!

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:26 pm

Sure. I tend to skip DLC alot of the time.

Heck, I only have two DLC between Fallout 3 and NV (and it only would have been one - Pitt - if I could have gotten a $10 MS points card. And I don't bother installing either DLC anymore.... Pitt's not worth repeating again, and BS just screws up the game).

Oblivion? Didn't bother getting any of the extras until I picked up the GotY disk, that included KotN and SI. And that was years after I got Oblivion originally.

Based on my experience with previous Beth games, odds are I won't bother with Skyrim's DLC. :shrug:

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:38 am

I`d be satisfied if we had no DLC as long as we had a full expansion pack fleshing out factions like Stendarr and adding extra improvements.

But if they were no DLCs and Skyrim was left as it is I would be very annoyed. however, we will have DLCs, at least 2, so don`t worry.