Do TES games really need large populations?

[stebbinsd]

Ok, so I recently discovered this guy, and his retrospective on the Elder Scrolls.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp4-9G47uF0

 

Although the title of the video says “Oblivion,” he discusses Morrowind and Skyrim just as much.

 

I highly encourage you to go and watch it. It's engaging and enthralling. He goes into an insane amount of detail. It's 5 hours long, so you'll probably have to watch it in chunks across multiple sittings, but if you do, I think you'll find this to be one of the most enthralling analyses about the Elder Scrolls you've ever seen!

 

But there's one issue about his 5-hour-long retrospective that really bugs me. He makes a big deal about population size. He even advocates for ditching one of Oblivion's and Skyrim's main draws – Radiant AI – in favor of increasing the population size.

 

But he never really explains WHY exactly that is so important. He says repeatedly that population size is “equally important” to the detail of each NPC. The first time he does so is at 1:14:32.

 

He never really explains what is so damn important about population size. He acts like the importance of population size just goes without saying … like anyone who plays video can attest that it's a crucial thing.

 

Keep in mind … he advocates for quality over quantity in nearly EVERY OTHER aspect of the Elder Scrolls! He argues the world size is less important than the level of interactivity! He advocates for fewer dungeons in exchange for making the dungeons better! He advocates for half as many side quests in exchange for giving those quests branching bpaths!

 

But population size is the one area where he advocates quantity over quality. And he never tells us why. He just assumes that everyone else feels that way.

 

Am I a minority? Does anyone else feel that population size is not just important, but essential? Like … does anyone else feel like it's worth getting rid of Radiant AI, one of the biggest draws of modern Bethesda games, to have?

 

If there are any others out there who agree with this, perhaps you can explain to me why exactly large populations are so damn important. Why are they an exception to the “quality over quantity” rule of thumb?

Edited April 29, 2017 by stebbinsd

[SRolls]

To me quality transcends quantity over all, though as I play Oblivion and Skyrim I can assure you that even with old games like Oblivion have a very satisfying enigma I can't seem to find in Skyrim.

 

Firstly I can create my own spells compared to Skyrim it is wise to do a simple spell but at longer lengths it became boring. I guess this is without mod spells in Skyrim is a total letdown as you progress far in the game.

Secondly every npc in oblivion is somewhat have an emotional impact on me while in Skyrim wherever I go I always met with rude behaviors only few actually recognize my worth this is quality over quantity over quantity.

Thirdly I am for quantity but as well quality. What is the use of many npc when they all have repetitive dialogues? boring? well basic dialogues like a greeting I remember talking about some npc in some pc game where I have countless discussion probably stayed at that game more. I am a mage as well. I am quite interested in the lores and story telling made me more vigorous in playing my desired mage role plays.

 

I am all for Quantity but as well as it's unique Qualities!

 

[metaforce]

Well I think it depends on what the maker of the game attempts to depict. Does the capital of Skyrim really feel like a big city with lots of activity? To me all cities in Skyrim feel like villages/towns. I dont want to sound like critisizing the makers, since I understand what you could do at that time with a PCs resources.

 

Just a bit after that Witcher 3 came out. Now here I got Novigrad and that damn sure feels and looks like a big city.

 

I guess he's trying to say that if you want a place to depict and feel like a big city then it needs a large population. In this case quantity and quality go hand in hand. Solitude is bound to always feel like a town, although its actually a large city. So the lack of quantity brings about a lack in quality, if you understand what I'm trying to say

[Boombro]

I prefer that each npc has a live of their own like what normal in a beth game, but it doesn't hurt to add some lesser clutter npcs in some places.

 

For example, let say we want to show that a city has a poverty problem. Leading beth example, there would be about 3-5 beggers and maybe 2 poor families, they will have few lines and talk with each, but they are very few it just looks odd.

 

The witcher 1, would have about 20-50 people, they will share lines however and they would be a bore and maybe have the same faces, but the city will look the part.

 

I say add to beth example, with those few people add about 20 other characters that are not in the way to add to the background that act as props and make a city feel big.

 

 

 

Keep in mind … he advocates for quality over quantity in nearly EVERY OTHER aspect of the Elder Scrolls! He argues the world size is less important than the level of interactivity!

 

Quantity can be a quality. Clutter npcs add to the atmosphere of the game and will make it immersive if it was fitting. To be fair it not the same and making a world complex, they are not hard to make and don't take long.

[debaser]

...old games like Oblivion...

 

 

As someone who still plays Daggerfall, I lolled

 

But yes, scale is something Bethesda has always struggled with. Skyrim and Oblivion were huge games with a lot of content, yet felt like very, very small worlds indeed. This isn't necessarily a problem. Bethesda could tell tighter and more compelling stories if they went with a more appropriate scale. But because they insist on telling huge epic stories in worlds that can't really be huge and epic, you end up with lame scenes like climactic battles (e.g. in Oblivion or the Skyrim civil war) where the opposing armies have like six dudes each.

[stebbinsd]

 

you end up with lame scenes like climactic battles (e.g. in Oblivion or the Skyrim civil war) where the opposing armies have like six dudes each.

To be fair ... midieval battles in the real world only had about a couple dozen fighters on each side.

 

Midieval populations were 90% surfs, not knights. Surfs served only for menial labor like farmwork and absolutely nothing else.

 

In fact, even most of the nobility weren't actually knights. The first born son (not daughter) of a Lord was the heir to the estate, the second-born son (not daughtr) was supposed to enter the clergy, and only the third-born son onward (if Lords even had that many kids before their wife dies during birth) would become knights, and they would all survive in to adulthood to be able to join the knighthood ... which wasn't guaranteed considering that this was long before the days of modern medicine and it was common for people to die from things like smallpox and influenza, not to mention wild animals.

 

Daughters, meanwhile, had one purpose in the feudal system and one purpose alone: To marry lords & knights (clergymen were supposed to stay celibate) and subsequently pop out future lords, knights, & clergymen.

 

It wasn't at all uncommon for an entire country to have less than two hundred knights at a time.

 

Think about King Arthur and his "knights of the round table." Think about how few knights there would have to be if they could all be seated comfortably at one table.

 

So sure, each battle in Skyrim only has about 15 or 20 soldiers on each side. But considering that they have to divide their men to not only attack this city, but guard the forts and cities they already have, I'd say they're doing alright for themselves.

[Shivala]

With the technical limitations at the time , I think they did alright. And mods have picked up where Beth couldnt make it. 3DNPCs, Inconsequential NPCs and Immersive citizens fill a definite gap and make the world much more alive. Together with the expanded town and mods, you get a really good result. Hopefully Beth will take this knowledge for Tes6. Have a bunch of filler NPCs, and make them less interactive. Not anyone wants to talk to you. You could make it very believable.

 

I do think Skyrim feels small *after* your first playthrough, but sometimes I notice this also comes with too much fast travelling, and certain routes are enforced. When I go into the hills and nooks there is often a surprising find of new content, even after my 5th playthrough. However, I would suggest making the map bigger for TES6, but just concentrate the action / story elements around certain places. So a nice handholding for new players, but also cater for more hardcore players who like to wander and get lost..

[steamteck]

I like both the Witcher and Skyrim's cities and both feel more real in different ways. I like that I know the NPCs and they are relatively unique in Skyrim over the huge bunch of nameless folks when it comes down to it. I have no problem with some filler NPCs but I certainly like the ones who have names, homes, lives . etc. My game is modded to increase this factor with Immersive citizens, RDO, Interesting and inconsequential NPCs etc. With these adds ons The Skyrim Cities take the definite lead for me.

 

That being said, the ambiance of Novograd is pretty great. It just sometimes feels a little hollow.

[debaser]

Skyrim's map takes around 2 hours of real time to walk across. Daggerfall's takes around 70 hours. Now of course there's much, much more to see in the Skyrim map (so you actually *want* to walk across it), but it's still a huge problem for the feeling of scale. There's no empty space in the wilderness, it's just interesting locations all crammed up together. It means the whole province of Skyrim basically feels like a large park instead of a huge region of a living world. How far could you get if you walked out your door and down the road for 2 hours? Enough to reach from one side of your state to the other? Even the capital of Solitude only has a few buildings in it, as opposed to the hundreds of buildings and streets you find in any reasonably sized town in daggerfall (and of course there are hundreds and hundreds of towns). It doesn't matter that many of these buildings weren't enterable - they all contribute to the feeling of actually being in a realistic world.

Incidentally, the "real medieval battles were only a few dozen soldiers!" argument is pretty lame. Firstly because it's not really accurate - even the small ones were a few hundred, and those weren't kingdom scale armies like you should see in Tamriel. And secondly because this is an epic fantasy setting, not a realistic medieval setting.

Edited May 4, 2017 by debaser

[stebbinsd]

Skyrim's map takes around 2 hours of real time to walk across. Daggerfall's takes around 70 hours. Now of course there's much, much more to see in the Skyrim map (so you actually *want* to walk across it), but it's still a huge problem for the feeling of scale. There's no empty space in the wilderness, it's just interesting locations all crammed up together. It means the whole province of Skyrim basically feels like a large park instead of a huge region of a living world. How far could you get if you walked out your door and down the road for 2 hours? Enough to reach from one side of your state to the other? Even the capital of Solitude only has a few buildings in it, as opposed to the hundreds of buildings and streets you find in any reasonably sized town in daggerfall (and of course there are hundreds and hundreds of towns). It doesn't matter that many of these buildings weren't enterable - they all contribute to the feeling of actually being in a realistic world.

 

Incidentally, the "real medieval battles were only a few dozen soldiers!" argument is pretty lame. Firstly because it's not really accurate - even the small ones were a few hundred, and those weren't kingdom scale armies like you should see in Tamriel. And secondly because this is an epic fantasy setting, not a realistic medieval setting.

Ok, first you criticize Skyrim's map as feeling more like a park than an actual world ... and then you argue that battles need to be larger even if it's not realistic because it's a fantasy, so realism can take a backseat?

 

Make up your mind! Do you want it realistic or not?