• 163 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#151 Posted by VooDooPC (335 posts) -

I remember the Witcher characters just as well as I do the Skyrim characters, which isn't saying much. There was Triss, who I definitely remember because you see her naked in the first 5 minutes. There was the guy interrogating you. The Kingslayer. Some witch lady? Geralt's two pals who spend the entire game sitting in that bar? Am I at 5 yet?

Skyrim had Lydia, who could forget Lydia? The guy who leads the Stormcloaks who's name I don't remember. The grey beards. I remember some of the Jarls. The Empire commander guy. The dragon on top of the mountain, does he count?

The biggest problem with comparing The Witcher 2 and Skyrim is that the Witcher 2 is a completely linear game. There was probably about 1/100th the amount of NPCs in The Witcher 2. I could probably name every important NPC in Diablo 3, does that mean it has amazing characters that left an impact on me? No, it just means there was a hell of a lot less than other games.

#152 Edited by GERALTITUDE (3511 posts) -

Part of the reason Skyrim can be so huge and played for so many hours is that it is somewhat generic. Same goes for Fallout 3, which I think only succeeds a little better than Skyrim because the writing for individual quests and characters had more personality. Bethesda tried so hard to keep Skyrim open to the player's interpretation that you did ultimately end up with some bland, repeating scenarios.

Again though, you can't really make big open games that aren't at least somewhat modular and generic. We'll see how Witcha 3 fairs when it lands.

Online
#153 Posted by Simplexity (1382 posts) -

Never understood the hype around Skyrim, combat was beyond terrible, world was bland and boring and didn't offer a single quest line or character worth remembering.

#154 Posted by LotusKing (14 posts) -

@humanity said:

I think it's somewhat telling and horrifying how a lot of people, including game critics, will acknowledge that Skyrim had boring combat, mundane quests and lackluster dungeons - then continue to state how they still played 200hrs in total. I guess most people have just decided to settle for less as long as there's a fresh coat of paint applied.

RIGHT! Like, dude, how did you make it that far if the game sucked. When I get the cash I'm gonna hit up Diablo 3 and see what all the fuss was about. I've heard the exact same sentiment about that game as well.

#155 Edited by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

@humanity said:

I think it's somewhat telling and horrifying how a lot of people, including game critics, will acknowledge that Skyrim had boring combat, mundane quests and lackluster dungeons - then continue to state how they still played 200hrs in total. I guess most people have just decided to settle for less as long as there's a fresh coat of paint applied.

This. I can't say shit because I've put about 213 hours into the game, but it's so true. I think what Skyrim really excels at is exploration, and all the other mechanics surrounding that are just barely competent enough to make players want to walk around some more.

#156 Posted by Beforet (2931 posts) -

Skyrim is generic as fuck. I mean, I am totally okay with that, and I actually like it for it because it's a well executed generic fantasy. But it is fairly generic.

#157 Posted by PokeIkzai (385 posts) -

I don't see any real controversy here. Skyrim is a bit generic. In the end of the day, sure, it's Elder Scrolls which means go in hundreds of dungeons, do a few quests and get out. I seem to recall Todd Howard mentioning how he wished the Elder Scrolls had an identity as strong as the Fallout series. (Can't find the link at the minute maybe I'm just crazy) At least the world was more interesting in aesthetics than Oblivion.

#159 Posted by MikeJFlick (443 posts) -

I love Skyrim I really do, but I agree there was very little making this a "elder-scrolls" game, remove a few races, remove all content directly related to elder-scrolls(the gods, books, dwemer etc) and you still have the same exact game. Change the Imperials to the Romans and the Nords to Barbarians and you have yourself a fantasy RPG set in the 450ad.

#160 Posted by Abendlaender (2867 posts) -

I just realized...I spent 100 hours in Skyrim but can't remember a single character besides the Dragon.........

That's kinda depressing

#161 Posted by Fattony12000 (7596 posts) -

@brighty:

  • Molag Bal
  • Sheogorath
  • Clavicus Vile
  • Paarthurnax
  • Me, and my placement inside of the near-constant active simulation of the world, populated with it's multitude of flora and fauna and shit. I inscribed a pretty funny/badass story into the stone of the cold, unforgiving bedrock of the land of Skyrim.
#162 Posted by Brodehouse (10106 posts) -

I wouldn't say he's wrong. It's a pretty generic fantasy universe in general, and yeah, it totally doesn't care about big characterization.

Here are the things that I find interesting about Skyrim from a narrative level;

Nazi Thalmor High Elves.

Visigoth-style rebellion against Rome.

Cultists behind every bush.

That's about it.

#163 Edited by Clonedzero (4200 posts) -

i hate this "lets hate on shit" attitude people have.

if you don't like it, so be it. don't bash other peoples work to give yourself an ego boost.

and this "vs" attitude of gamers is gross as well "i liked the witcher 2 more than skyrim, im better! i have better taste!" no....you have different taste.

btw way to buy into a cheap PR move guys. cus now everyone here is talking about the witcher. hype train. gross.

#164 Posted by MachoFantastico (4862 posts) -

Not sure if to agree or disagree with his comments. To be frank Skyrim is very generic is areas, many of which are in desperate need of reinventing (I mean seriously... can we finally get better animations. I know people go on about it, but the animations in those games are bizarrely awful for reasons I've never quite understood). However, Skyrim isn't so generic in regards to being a huge open world RPG and until we see Witcher 3 and see if they can pull something similar off, they should really keep their mouths shut until they have something to back up with statements.

I think Brad put it best in the Bombcast, no one as does open world as well as Bethesda (for all the many flaws those games have had).

#165 Edited by Oldirtybearon (4867 posts) -

I wouldn't say he's wrong. It's a pretty generic fantasy universe in general, and yeah, it totally doesn't care about big characterization.

Here are the things that I find interesting about Skyrim from a narrative level;

Nazi Thalmor High Elves.

Visigoth-style rebellion against Rome.

Cultists behind every bush.

That's about it.

this saddens me because the lore of the Elder Scrolls is rich in metaphysics and existentialism. It's actually really involved and possesses a depth of thought that most fantasy settings (even the progenitor Dungeons and Dragons) just don't have. When I get some time today I'll PM you a link to some of the books in Skyrim that deal with the truly fascinating aspects of the lore. I think you'll come around to appreciate it.

#166 Posted by mikey87144 (1811 posts) -

He is right but, a lot of people still felt that the game was interesting enough to put 60 hours into on the low end.

#167 Posted by Brodehouse (10106 posts) -

@Oldirtybearon

If metaphysical basically means it explains the nature of magic or divine power, or supernatural whatsits, then that's not what really gets my gears going. That's the hard-sci technical manual stuff which doesn't really get me going; the parts of Skyrim, and most fantasy RPGs that gets me going is the anthropology, geopolitics, sociopolitics... The peoples of the setting and the hows and whys of their culture. My favorite parts of Skyrim is talking about the practice of religion rather than the fundamental supernatural elements of the Aedra and Talos. I like the cultural domination of the Thalmor, the crumbling expansion of the Empire, and how it plays out.

I like Dragon Age more for the anthropology than the magic or heroics of the stories; their elves are not immortal fey creatures, they reflect diaspora Jews and migrant Roma. Their dwarves have base elements of their Germanic influences, but they have Hindu caste systems, oriental ancestor worship, and American accents. The Qun is a pretty direct reference for the Qu'ran, Orlais for Valois-era France, Rivain for Moorish Spain... These are the parts I dig about fantasy writing, I'm more interested in how the worship of some god directs the structure of a people's culture rather than the actual powers and domains of that god.

Also is there no way to quote or at-reply to people on the new phone site? This proposition is getting worse with every discovery.

#168 Posted by voltronadactylsaurusrex (69 posts) -

STALKER has most of the same systems that are in TES (and uses them better imo) and the same amount of jank but TES is praised and STALKER is considered niche and middle of the road.