Skyrim feels more like Fallout than

[Grandchamp1989]

an Elder Scrolls game. And here's my reasons for saying this:

 

Note: Keep in mind that english is'nt my first language, and that these are my observations and may differ from your own ;) Now Enjoy.

 

EVERYTHING is in shambles:

Every city in the game is torn either from constant wars or neglect. The outer walls are crumpling and in decay (like found in Whiterun). And Cities are often build upon and around older extinct civilizations (like Markarth on top of the extinct Dwemer city) To further add to this observation, half of the city of Winterhold got destroyed, due to a destructive force of nature, which left half of the city in ruin. And Windhelm is a freezing hell hole where close to nothing can grow properly.

EVERY faction is struggling and a shadow of their former self:

Mages Guild: Destroyed and extict

Blades: Almost hunted into extinction

Compansions: Keep talking about the glory days with Ysgramor and live in the pass, hunted by Werewolf hunters.

Winterhold College: Haven't been the same since Winterhold got torn in half and they got blamed for it.

The Dark Brotherhood: Struggling and close to extinction, even left their morals/Teneth's to survive.

Thieves Guild: Again.... Struggling. Keep talking about the glory days but now struggle for survival.

The Mood of the game:

Beside the fact that everything is gray and freezing cold there's no uplifting/happy characters who stand out beside the clearly insane like ''Cicero'' and ''Sheogorath''. A dude in Whiterun even makes notice of this when he says that ''The problem with skyrim is that everyone is obsessed with death''

Perks Added:

Fallout feature right here, I for one welcome the addition though.

 

In closing:

Everything about Skyrim feels post apocalyptic. EVERYTHING is in shambles and the whole tone the game reeks of depression and death with very, very few exceptions. In many ways a lot similar to Fallout, but without the dark not-too-serioues humour of that franchise. Sure Skyrim is facing civil war but all of this is relatively RECENT, and the full scale of that war only really shows when YOU proceed with the story.

The war with The Thalmor never directly happened IN skyrim although Nords fought in Cyradiil for the empire to re-take the Imperial City. This is another reason as to why Skyrim shouldn't look so bleak and destroyed. The last Dragon War is also thousand of years in the past. While the scenery of ruins and decay certaintly adds to the serious tone of the game it can also be a bit too much at times, especially when we just played two post-apocalyptic games prior to Skryim (Fallout 3 and New Vegas).

 

I Digress for now - What do you guys think about Elder Scrolls taking a page out of Fallout Univserse: Is it for the better or not?

Edited December 10, 2011 by Grandchamp1989

[elvinkun]

You have just offended both Fallout and TES series. Good job.

 

But yes, they made a hybrid between TES and Beth Fallouts placed in TES universe. Fallout 4 will be just like this but in Fallout universe. Which means there is not much to look forward to, unless the CK will be a real blast :biggrin:

 

But most of the things have logical explanations, lore-wise. You could tell that there is a constant war last 30 years , and even before it wasn't the ideal state...so... people just don't spend their time by repairing roofs.

 

Everything else goes along with that too.

 

EDIT: Or to put it in oter words, civil war combined with the fact the strongest nation of men is closer to annihilation than ever before and the Thalmor might wipe everyone any time won't make people all so happy.

Edited December 10, 2011 by elvinkun

[Grandchamp1989]

You have just offended both Fallout and TES series. Good job.

 

But yes, they made a hybrid between TES and Beth Fallouts placed in TES universe. Fallout 4 will be just like this but in Fallout universe. Which means there is not much to look forward to, unless the CK will be a real blast :biggrin:

 

But most of the things have logical explanations, lore-wise. You could tell that there is a constant war last 30 years , and even before it wasn't the ideal state...so... people just don't spend their time by repairing roofs.

 

Everything else goes along with that too.

 

My intentions are not to offend anyone. I simply made some observation that the two franchises are becoming amazingly similar in many way. All backed by fair arguments I would say. Now that I think of it, you could draw a lot of similarities to the Mass Effect - Dragon Age franchises and how they ended up. (Last sentence very controversial, I know ;) )

 

I'm a fan of both The Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises so when I say the feel of the games remind me of each other that not necesarily just a bad thing, I very much welcome the Perk addition. I just don't get why they went that rout when we just played two post-apocalyptic inspired games and Fallout 4 being next. And as I pointed out they didn't NEED to make everything look so ruined. But all aside it's still a great game I've sunked 100s of hour into ;)

[elvinkun]

 

My intentions are not to offend anyone. I simply made some observation that the two franchises are becoming amazingly similar in many way. All backed by fair arguments I would say. Now that I think of it, you could draw a lot of similarities to the Mass Effect - Dragon Age franchises and how they ended up. (Last sentence very controversial, I know ;) )

 

I'm a fan of both The Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises so when I say the feel of the games remind me of each other that not necesarily just a bad thing, I very much welcome the Perk addition. I just don't get why they went that rout when we just played two post-apocalyptic inspired games and Fallout 4 being next. And as I pointed out they didn't NEED to make everything look so ruined. But all aside it's still a great game I've sunked 100s of hour into ;)

And are you a fan of Fallout, or Beth Fallout? Yes, also controversial. It alwas falls to me to brag about the good old days, weird :biggrin:

 

At least for ME and DA you can't really blame them... for those who are owned by EA are but a nameless slaves controlled by their evil masters... *cough* At least they still have decent story writters. Or actually, great story writers.

 

I, personally, still can't decide whether I really love or hate Skyrim. It has so much coolness combined with so terrible feats. Jewel there is the UI. Why? Because it would take their team like a one day to come up with decent UI, but they didn't. Then the super-short and skipping storylines... Bah. Perks would be nice, if they haven't removed everything else related to character development.

 

What I prolly mind the most, and is very un-fallout-ish is the absolute illusion of choice when there is none. All dialogue options lead to one answer and no mater what action you take, the conclusion will always be the same at the end.

 

Truth tho, most of the walls, roads... looks like noone really tryied to repair them ever since they were build.

Edited December 10, 2011 by elvinkun

[Guy97]

Well the thing is, the apocalypse is happening. It is the end of the world (or was supposed to be). When Alduin comes back, he is supposed to destroy the world. Skyrim is a war torn, dragon filled country.

[Grandchamp1989]

 

My intentions are not to offend anyone. I simply made some observation that the two franchises are becoming amazingly similar in many way. All backed by fair arguments I would say. Now that I think of it, you could draw a lot of similarities to the Mass Effect - Dragon Age franchises and how they ended up. (Last sentence very controversial, I know ;) )

 

I'm a fan of both The Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises so when I say the feel of the games remind me of each other that not necesarily just a bad thing, I very much welcome the Perk addition. I just don't get why they went that rout when we just played two post-apocalyptic inspired games and Fallout 4 being next. And as I pointed out they didn't NEED to make everything look so ruined. But all aside it's still a great game I've sunked 100s of hour into ;)

And are you a fan of Fallout, or Beth Fallout? Yes, also controversial. It alwas falls to me to brag about the good old days, weird :biggrin:

 

At least for ME and DA you can't really blame them... for those who are owned by EA are but a nameless slaves controlled by their evil masters... *cough* At least they still have decent story writters. Or actually, great story writers.

 

I, personally, still can't decide whether I really love or hate Skyrim. It has so much coolness combined with so terrible feats. Jewel there is the UI. Why? Because it would take their team like a one day to come up with decent UI, but they didn't. Then the super-short and skipping storylines... Bah. Perks would be nice, if they haven't removed everything else related to character development.

 

What I prolly mind the most, and is very un-fallout-ish is the absolute illusion of choice when there is none. All dialogue options lead to one answer and no mater what action you take, the conclusion will always be the same at the end.

 

Truth tho, most of the walls, roads... looks like noone really tryied to repair them ever since they were build.

 

LOL! I'm on the edge too. I got a love-hate relationship with Skyrim. Like with Dragon Age 2 they certaintly polished the combat system to near perfection but with Skyrim, it seems to be at the cost of a cliché monotone storyline. Character development in none existent, UI is a mess on PC, bugs and glitches messed my game up for a good month and the storyline(s) left a lot to be desired. It wouldn't be so bad if they at SOME point differed from the whole ''everything is depressing and everything is in ruin I miss the glorydays buhuuu''.

 

I may be weird in this regard but personly I don't care about choices in my Elder Scrolls game. Freedom to do what I will, sure but storyline choices I don't care for. What I desire in an Elder Scroll game is epicness. Being taken through an epic story and the world around me recognizing my deeds and valor. Elder Scrolls is like this fairytale game I can realize, yes. But Skyrim was more of an horror story.

[Shantih]

I don't think the term "post-apocalyptic" applies to Skyrim.

 

It's not the centre of the Empire so you have large inhospitable areas where life is difficult. It doesn't mean that the Skyrim tundra is anything like the Mojave desert or the capital wasteland.

 

At the moment I can't think of any fantasy CRPG that doesn't have some big conflict or war going on (at least in the background). There's been a trend towards dark and grim worlds in games and you can find similarities between Skyrim, Dragon Age or The Witcher. Truth is this is not new:

 

Remember Diablo back in 1997? Sanctuary was certainly no place for a picnic.

 

But you can't call any of these game worlds "post-apocalyptic" because what this word entails is the end of civilization as we know it (literally with the action taking place after the end of the world). This applies to the Fallout series but can't really apply to The Elder Scrolls.

 

If you want an example of a fantasy world that could be labelled as post-apocalyptic then you should look at the Dying Earth by Jack Vance.

 

Skyrim is a bleak and grim place and you're right to point out that many factions are not as powerful as they used to be but that doesn't make the game post-apocalyptic.

 

I am glad Bethesda learned a few things from making Fallout 3. At least they've learned to make dialogues with skill checks instead of having stupid minigames like the speech wheel in Oblivion.

 

What I don't get is why some people can't see the good things because of some flaws. I remember people complaining that Fallout 3 was Oblivion with guns (and yes it was but it wasn't just that) and I've read someone saying that Skyrim is Fallout with swords (nonsense, there are swords in Fallout).

 

I'm an old fan of the original Fallout and I was annoyed by the fact that Fallout 3 couldn't discriminate between damage types or had to rely on Oblivion's limited Damage Resistance -I can tell you I was happy to see Damage Threshold come back in FNV. But that never prevented me from enjoying Fallout 3 for what it was, i.e. a nice looking game that looked like a Fallout game with an Oblivionesque music and a ghastly main quest.

 

Without Fallout 3 there would have been no Fallout New Vegas but I digress.

 

So I don't think the comparison between Skyrim and Fallout 3 brings much to the discussion. The lockpicking system is the same (so what?) and there are perks (I can't see the problem). IMO the writing and dialogues are roughly on the same level (it won't keep you up at night) and vastly inferior to FNV. Sure we can compare these games but in the end it's pointless.

 

Skyrim has its flaws but I don't think they have anything to do with what Skyrim owes to Fallout (on the contrary).

 

Elder Scrolls is like this fairytale game I can realize, yes. But Skyrim was more of an horror story.

 

There is no arguing about tastes but I'd like to point out that fairy tales are not just about good things and that originally fairy tales weren't meant for children. There are horrific elements in many fairy tales.

Edited December 10, 2011 by Shantih

[Grandchamp1989]

Well the thing is, the apocalypse is happening. It is the end of the world (or was supposed to be). When Alduin comes back, he is supposed to destroy the world. Skyrim is a war torn, dragon filled country.

 

The dragon threat happens JUST as you start the game and the civil war never broke out into a full scale war with cities being besigned and attacked (It does later as you proceed with the story though). Now add to that the fact that the Great War with the thalmor never happened IN skyrim and the last dragon threat happened thousands of years ago. All of this together point to the fact that there's NO REASON for the Jarls not having maintained the roads, rebuild the cities and re-construct the walls in what looks like centuries!

 

Also, EVERY faction is in RUIN! close to extinction. You mean to tell me that not a single faction have found a way to benefit from the war? ESPECIALLY the thieves guild, lol. It just becomes monotone, really.

 

Sure you can make a case for the people of skyrim living a hard life and that's why they're depressed and angry but that's no excuse to not give them a personality and add character development.

 

Beth went for that post-apocalyptic feel and ran with it. Everything is in ruin everyone is suffering, people re-build civilizations on-top of extinct ones (Dwemer - Markarth) but fail to maintain it throughout. I just think it's at times is a tad bit risky with Fallout 4 coming up next. (Opinion)

Edited December 10, 2011 by Grandchamp1989

[Grandchamp1989]

I don't think the term "post-apocalyptic" applies to Skyrim.

 

It's not the centre of the Empire so you have large inhospitable areas where life is difficult. It doesn't mean that the Skyrim tundra is anything like the Mojave desert or the capital wasteland.

 

At the moment I can't think of any fantasy CRPG that doesn't have some big conflict or war going on (at least in the background). There's been a trend towards dark and grim worlds in games and you can find similarities between Skyrim, Dragon Age or The Witcher. Truth is this is not new:

 

Remember Diablo back in 1997? Sanctuary was certainly no place for a picnic.

 

But you can't call any of these game worlds "post-apocalyptic" because what this word entails is the end of civilization as we know it (literally with the action taking place after the end of the world). This applies to the Fallout series but can't really apply to The Elder Scrolls.

 

If you want an example of a fantasy world that could be labelled as post-apocalyptic then you should look at the Dying Earth by Jack Vance.

 

Skyrim is a bleak and grim place and you're right to point out that many factions are not as powerful as they used to be but that doesn't make the game post-apocalyptic.

 

I am glad Bethesda learned a few things from making Fallout 3. At least they've learned to make dialogues with skill checks instead of having stupid minigames like the speech wheel in Oblivion.

 

What I don't get is why some people can't see the good things because of some flaws. I remember people complaining that Fallout 3 was Oblivion with guns (and yes it was but it wasn't just that) and I've read someone saying that Skyrim is Fallout with swords (nonsense, there are swords in Fallout).

 

I'm an old fan of the original Fallout and I was annoyed by the fact that Fallout 3 couldn't discriminate between damage types or had to rely on Oblivion's limited Damage Resistance -I can tell you I was happy to see Damage Threshold come back in FNV. But that never prevented me from enjoying Fallout 3 for what it was, i.e. a nice looking game that looked like a Fallout game with an Oblivionesque music and a ghastly main quest.

 

Without Fallout 3 there would have been no Fallout New Vegas but I digress.

 

So I don't think the comparison between Skyrim and Fallout 3 brings much to the discussion. The lockpicking system is the same (so what?) and there are perks (I can't see the problem). IMO the writing and dialogues are roughly on the same level (it won't keep you up at night) and vastly inferior to FNV. Sure we can compare these games but in the end it's pointless.

 

Skyrim has its flaws but I don't think they have anything to do with what Skyrim owes to Fallout (on the contrary).

 

Elder Scrolls is like this fairytale game I can realize, yes. But Skyrim was more of an horror story.

 

There is no arguing about tastes but I'd like to point out that fairy tales are not just about good things and that originally fairy tales weren't meant for children. There are horrific elements in many fairy tales.

 

All good points.

 

The thing is, I'm not saying that it looks like someone dropped a nuke on Skyrim, I'm saying that the feel of the place is like if someone HAD done it. You could make the point that it doesn't feel post-apocalypic, it feels like a country at war. But then I would make the counter-argument and say that none of the wars ever really touched Skyrim before you arrive.

 

Great War never happened in Skyrim

The Dragon threat only happens as you begin the game

The Civil war - there was minor conflicts, sure but the full scale war happens LATER as you proceed with the story - If you so chooses, otherwise it remains at a stand still.

 

Everything is in shambles and it's not because of war, then why is it everything feels so post-apocalyptic? I think they went for the Fallout feel because that's what Beth is becoming good at, but there's no real reason to do it to such an extent with Skyrim - IMO ;)

Edited December 10, 2011 by Grandchamp1989

[elvinkun]

Oh, haters gonna hate, but I have to say it. It's Bethesda following the current way of making games. Generalisation and simplification, focus purely on combat.

 

Everything is always ruined and dying so the player may step in to save it.

 

Instead of making every new title better, overcomming themselves... it just degenerates... wait, no, wrong word, more like devolves. RPG nowdays means (or goes this way) action game where you can get bonus ability after you clear each map...err, pardon me, after you attain new level.

 

Technical side (don't mean graphic) gets better, a lot better than it was, but that doesn't mean you have to throw away story, diversion, complexion, progress, development... With what is availiable today, you could do incredible things... Or is it truth what the rumors say? That people today don't like to read and to think?

 

Owww.

*sigh*

It's one of those days when I feel a lot older than I am. Like when you pull out a book in the metro and everyone gives you a weird stare before they turn sights back to Ultra-iPad-mini 7.2.9 and Farmville.

Edited December 10, 2011 by elvinkun