Jump to content

Question about skyrim to the real fans of Bethesda


Charlinho

Recommended Posts

Experimentation in Oblivion is impossible. You get effects when you skill goes up, you can't find new effects without a long time of making potions that I and others have no intention of using. I'm also not arguing about the lack of variety, all of Skyrim has less variety compared to Oblivion, I'm saying that having more use of ingredients sooner is better. The only reason I can think of having a slow level up in Oblivion was to have something to spend money on. This is true in both Oblivion and Skyrim because you have less things to spend money on and more money as you get later into the game. Edited by trob1000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I started TES games with Daggerfall (Arena, despite being the first TES game, and though i have gone back to play it, it isn't really the same... The universe wasn't established, the Daedra didn't really exist -Arena actually had Daemons- and little of the Tamriel we now know, asside from the general shape and a few names, actually existed) and it was my first real RPG. In fact, i am replaying it for the 10th or so time (the game takes FOREVER, so 10 playthroughs is quite an acheivement, i would say). I played the living hell out of Morrowind (still the best at least in terms of art, character and story), logged 300+ hours on Oblivion, and am currently sitting at 230 hous on Skyrim. On top of that, i've ingrossed myself in the lore, and while hardly a master (some of the guys on the Bethesda forums boggle my mind) i know enough to pick up on things a lot of newer gamers will miss.The signifigance of the name of the Emperors ship in Skyrim, for instance. Anyway, yes, i would consider myself something of a diehard fan.

 

All of that said, i am also a fan of progress, and i definately feel that Skyrim is progress.

 

The attribute system was obsolete, and really needed to go. Some min-max power gaming could see you max out all the stats by level 20ish in Oblivion, regardless of what type of character you played. People who cry foul about the loss of 'individuality' because there are no attributes are barking up the wrong tree, because there was no individuality IN the attributes to start with. The Perk system, on the other hand, reinforces said individuality, though i will admit it's not really ballanced. Its a stellar idea, and even as it stands there are more perks than possible levels, but over half of them are totally useless. Great idea, not the best implementation. Still, it is a step in the right direction. To see what potential the new system has, i have to recomend Skyrim Redone. Spectacular mod, shows you what type of individuality is possible with the Perk system.

 

Art wise, Oblivion was high-fantasy. Forests, castles, rolling grassland, it had it all. it was also really, really boring, especially compared to morrowind. It looked pretty, sure, but there was no character. It was just another, generic high-fantasy environment. Shivering Isles aleviated that problem somewhat, but not enough. Skyrim, on the other hand, has some character back. Despite still having some high-fantasy characteristics, it has more of a lost world / dungeon delver feel, and actually looks like its own distinct world rather than something which would just as easily fit into D&D, LotR, Conan etc.

 

And the faces... God how i love the new faces. In Oblivion, you were lucky if you could tell the races appart by skin colour, now, at a reasonable distance, you can tell a Breton from a Nord, a Dunmer from an Altmer, etc. The only ones i still have some trouble with are Bosmer and Altmer. Regardless of whether or not you like the art direction of the Elves (they are a touch more Romulan, to be honest) being rid of those unholy putty-faces is a blessing from the 9. Overall, of course, Bethesda has less than superb textures, but Oblivion and Morrowind were no different in that regard. Why people can do better in their free time than the guys at Bethesda can do when getting payed still bewilders me.

 

Story wise, Skyrim suffers from Voice Acting. I have found that VA has severely hampered video games in terms of story. Either you railroad options in favor of a single, linear conversation line, or your voice acting kinda sucks, and gets worse the more options there are. All the main questlines in Skyrim tend to be short, 5-6 missions, with the main quest only having about 10 missions. Still, in terms of volume, Skyrim has Oblivion beat. You have, roughly, the same number of minor quests in each city, but each and every dungeon has a story associated with it, and the wilds are full of extra quests. The Guilds have, admitedly, been butchered beyond recognition, but i tend to view that process as starting with Oblivion, so i don't blame Skyrim.

 

The gameplay is definately dumbed down. Everything is point and click, attacks are all generic one direction (Again, something which started with Oblivion) and while the dual-hand approach is great, it, again, seems like it hasn't been exploted to its potential. Some mechanics are clearly blroken, such as Enchanting and Sneak (Seriously, when will bethesda learn how they do Sneaking is broken...). The dissapearance of Spellcrafting is easy to understand when you consider the new Enchanting dynamic, but that doesn't nessessarily mean i agree with it. Again though, i didn't like magic in Oblivion either, so i think something there has been broken for some time.

 

All in all, i would ahve to say Skyrim is 2nd on my list of TES games. Morrowind still brings forth the fondest memories (and comes a close second for most frusterating moments) but i do feel that Skyrim is the best TES game since.

 

One thing i don't like one bit about it, however, is the Imperial vs Stormcloak issue... picking sides in something like that, which can drastically affect the world at large, is something i frown on. God forbid we have a Warp in the North to solve THAT little problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, there was nothing wrong with attributes. As long as you RPed, and didnt JOAT, you never maxed all your attributes. There was plenty of individuality in attributes. Attributes are inherent individuality. Variables that were not replaced by anything in Skyrim. Most of the perks (the grand majority) add nothing new to the series, and even to Ob game play for that matter. Perks AND attributes>just perks.

 

LOL at people that still try to parrot the same pre release, Beth PR bull about attributes.

 

 

Attributes, Beth's scapegoat for level scaling.

Edited by Enatiomorph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, there was nothing wrong with attributes. As long as you RPed, and didnt JOAT, you never maxed all your attributes. There was plenty of individuality in attributes. Attributes are inherent individuality. Variables that were not replaced by anything in Skyrim. Most of the perks (the grand majority) add nothing new to the series, and even to Ob game play for that matter. Perks AND attributes>just perks.

 

LOL at people that still try to parrot the same pre release, Beth PR bull about attributes.

 

 

Attributes, Beth's scapegoat for level scaling.

 

Well, what a mature and well thought out response, where you not only failed to address the fact that, at higher levels, regardless of how you RP, attributs became maxed, but also fail to address the expanded potential of Perks in favor of pointint out its poor implementation (which i did mention). On a pure conceptual level, Perks offer more variety than attributes. On a practical scale, assuming you make it to aproximately level 40ish, Perks offer more individuality to a character (even though a lot of the vanilla perks are useless).

 

IF attributes were linked to class, so particular classes had different attribute caps (for instance, a Warrior has a max level of 150 in Strength and Endurance, 100 -or even less- in everything else, a Wizzard has a max 150 in Willpower and Intelegence, 100 in everything else, a Battle Mage has max 150 Endurance and Willpower, etc.) then attributes could, of course, once again be a means of character individualization. As the system was, there was no benefit in doing anything but maxing out every attribute. The system, as it was, was broken and useless. That doesn't mean it couldn't be fixed, but that also does not mean that perks are inherently flawed.

 

I do agree, however, that attributes and perks offer more than either alone. If you were to choose between them as if they were mutually exclusive, rendered in their vanilla state (IE Skyrim Perks vs Oblivion Attribues, and leveling there-of) Perks is the easy win. It is impossible, bar cheating, to max out the Perks trees, regardless of whether or not 50% (or more) are totally useless. You cannot, with any degree of evidence, argue to the contrary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, there was nothing wrong with attributes. As long as you RPed, and didnt JOAT, you never maxed all your attributes. There was plenty of individuality in attributes. Attributes are inherent individuality. Variables that were not replaced by anything in Skyrim. Most of the perks (the grand majority) add nothing new to the series, and even to Ob game play for that matter. Perks AND attributes>just perks.

 

LOL at people that still try to parrot the same pre release, Beth PR bull about attributes.

 

 

Attributes, Beth's scapegoat for level scaling.

 

Well, what a mature and well thought out response, where you not only failed to address the fact that, at higher levels, regardless of how you RP, attributs became maxed, but also fail to address the expanded potential of Perks in favor of pointint out its poor implementation (which i did mention). On a pure conceptual level, Perks offer more variety than attributes. On a practical scale, assuming you make it to aproximately level 40ish, Perks offer more individuality to a character (even though a lot of the vanilla perks are useless).

 

IF attributes were linked to class, so particular classes had different attribute caps (for instance, a Warrior has a max level of 150 in Strength and Endurance, 100 -or even less- in everything else, a Wizzard has a max 150 in Willpower and Intelegence, 100 in everything else, a Battle Mage has max 150 Endurance and Willpower, etc.) then attributes could, of course, once again be a means of character individualization. As the system was, there was no benefit in doing anything but maxing out every attribute. The system, as it was, was broken and useless. That doesn't mean it couldn't be fixed, but that also does not mean that perks are inherently flawed.

 

I do agree, however, that attributes and perks offer more than either alone. If you were to choose between them as if they were mutually exclusive, rendered in their vanilla state (IE Skyrim Perks vs Oblivion Attribues, and leveling there-of) Perks is the easy win. It is impossible, bar cheating, to max out the Perks trees, regardless of whether or not 50% (or more) are totally useless. You cannot, with any degree of evidence, argue to the contrary.

No, if you stuck to your RP, you didnt max out all attributes. Doing things outside of your build=your bad. Had hundreds of RPs in every ES game, never once had maxed attributes on any of them.

Edited by Enatiomorph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ive been reading some comments and most talk a bit of negative things about skyrim im here to say my own experience in skyrim and some of my personal thoughts about the problems we all run into.

i did expect more from skyrim that it was i gotta admit i still loved it though but some things where just different for example, i played a lot of oblivion back then and i spent a lot of time mostly on runing to objective to objective in the early begining and the world just seemed huge unlike skyrim in wich i sprinted for 2 minutes and i would be quite far off than i thought so i think that if we go and mesure the size of the worlds in skyrim and oblivion i think that oblivion would be larger. i dont know if it was my childish mind but oblivion kept me at the edge of my seat being amazed by outcomes of quests or being frightened in the planes of mehrunes dagon in wich i didnt feel that much in skyrim about the quests but i gotta say the falmer scared the living... you know what out of me since i always play in expert i have to sometimes run away like if it was amnesia. ok so back to the negativeness something that really got me was that people were so amazed saying that there would be more facial expretions in skyrim, well... there were but only in first sight but in a close up conversation you couldnt see much facial expretions such as the guard that first thought you were dragon born or mercer frey after discovering carlias location, i mean the voice actors completely blew mi mind however the facial expretions dint show the feelings in that voice unlick in oblivion in wich i remember the captain salvian matius exitment when we took the castle aswell as his sorrow after finding out that the count didnt make it. sigh* i would continue if it wasnt so late in the night but im very tired so ill just leave the bad stuff there and start with the good stuff.

skyrim really amazed me with the combat system (well the vanilla sucked a little with the killmove only made to the last person and even so only had 50% chance but im pretty sure bethesda learned their lesson) the kill moves where just completly amazing it was completly realistic and at the same time hardcore the new armors really gained my respect (exept the shrouded cowl but again i think bethesda learned their lesson) the clothes the amazing world itself the conversation topics and the interaction of the ncps with the world it just made me feel so good sigh* i gotta sleep but one more thing: the nords, kahjit, orcs, argonian and redguards huge win! nords dont look like retards hercules like in oblivion (idont know why they remind me about a retarded hercules but they just do ) they look hard strong fighters and the amazing and accurate nordic accent just made me feel like this is really happening. kahjit look like freakin tigger people now i loved the huge difference, in oblivion i thought they were just plain ugly but i still liked their presence and personality but now i can actually say that they look handsome and pretty (each to their respected gender) and a lot more realistic beast race that in oblivion without counting the outstanding voice actors and voice accents that i came to love (especcially jazargo) orcs now look bad and cool at the same time again amazing voice actor and they have a way better skin color and finally dont have the downright silly smile on their faces like in oblivion (glad they fixed their smile) and the way they have clans and live in long houses make me feel like theres more in skyrim that the eye sees at first sight argonian stopped looking like scaled salamanders and more into amazing deinonychus (google it if you dint know what it is) also the great voice actors that kept amazing me and redguards now i dont know how to say it but they look way better tougher and they actually talk about where they hail from and they are the characters that actually keep their clothing like in their homeland.

ill be back soon to talk about some other stuff and falmer and also negative obsetvations but i almost forgot to say: skyrim might not be not as good as you expected but come on its a new engine i bet the next game will be better since theyll have more experience with the engine they obiously tried to stick to making it full of detail and full of "realisticness" and i know they make many glitches and errors but be thankful for the amazing modding comunity we have here ive seen verry goot work with a lot of effort sigh again* i gotta go ill be back later see ya guys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...