Why Skyrim just isn't that good…….

  • 92 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by TrafalgarLaw (1022 posts) -

It's an RPG for casuals. Mainly people who never have played Dark/Demon's Souls. You don't even need to apoligize for PS3, we got the superior Ni No Kuni.

#52 Posted by p00rdevil (158 posts) -

I am not a big fan of the game either. I wish I did love it because I enjoy a wide open combat intensive RPG. There is little in specifics that I can point to and say "this flaw is a game breaker for me". But when I add up the sum of its parts Skyrim leaves me uninspired. I enjoyed Gothic 3 way more and it has far more problems with performance and gameplay quirks than Skyrim. When I play Skyrim I tend to be bored. I hardly ever get a feeling of excitement or challenge that a game like this is intended to deliver. I have tried to get into the swing of things several times, built probably ten different characters, but after level 20 or so I loose interest. I've tried following the main story quest, tried different faction quest lines, tried striking out on my own and doing whatever seems interesting in the world to do. I dunno, Skyrim is just not my kind of RPG I guess, although I can see it is a well crafted beautiful game. I play on my gaming PC with all the mods available and maxed out visuals. I give it every chance I can, trying hard to find the fun, but so far, by and large, that key gameplay element has eluded me.

#53 Edited by Fire_Of_The_Wind (170 posts) -

@xyzygy said:

It's a pretty shallow game, IMO. I completed it and did all the quests because of the completionist in me, but that's not saying much because I did the same with Two Worlds. There is nothing to the character development and it's way too shallow for my liking. That, and there is NO DAMN LOOT. Everything you pick up is a variant of some basic weapon/armor type, the only good weapons are recieved by quests and even then you can make better ones.

Yes I completely agree. I've put a little over 60 hours into Skyrim, and the more I played it the less interesting it got and I liked it less and less. At the start it felt like there's a huge world to discover full of mystery and wonder. The first 10 hours when I was still getting the grips of the combat discovering new items and equipment, going to new locations, meeting new people, it was magical 5/5, but then it started getting worse. Once I started looking at the game and world mechanics and how most things worked the magic disappeared. It didn't matter if I was the leader of everything worth a damn in Skyrim it never changed how you interact with people or how people see you, you're still a fetch boy and people will still ask for your help for the most menial tasks, you don't get a posse or people to command, your titles mean almost nothing.

One of the first times this hit me is when I was in the city with the thieves' guild, a dragon attacked the city, he got on the roofs and started breathing fire down and burning houses, people running around in terror, guards trying to kill the dragon pelting him with arrows, of course you would think that this is amazing. It was a hard fight but I slayed the dragon and his soul was mine, what happened not 5 seconds after he died? Everyone just suddenly turned back to normal as if nothing had happened and one of people said to me "you better put those away before the guards find you" talking about my weapons, I just stood there thinking "Did you not see that, I just killed a DRAGON and ate his soul, I just saved your asses from getting burned and the only reaction I got is please put away your weapons?" Another time was in the city carved on the side of a mountain, I got imprisoned and there was a political? prisoner there who was the leader of the prisoners, you basically plan to break out of prison and the guy was leading a coup, once we broke out of prison a massive fight started, no one noticed me and I didn't want to have a bounty on my head or anything so I hid and slipped out of the city, I came back later for another quest and nothing seemed to have changed, everyone was acting the same as they used to, it felt as if a massive coup did not happen just last week.

Around the 15 hour mark I made an ebony mace and I did not find anything better till I made a daedric mace around the 45 hour mark, when I actually bothered to make one. The lack of unique loot was extremely disappointing, and when I did find something unique it was horribly weak. The equipment selection was extremely limited and all the weapons worked the same and were straight upgrades. I found the combat completely dull, the AI is very simplistic, either run away and use ranged combat, archers and mages, or run straight at you and hit you repeatedly, melee enemies, they lacked any real tactics and they didn't react to what you did. I did create a few different characters to see how other playstyles were like, the most fun I had is was with a stealth focused character, but once you get your stealth skill tree high enough it became broken, even standing infront of people they could barely detect you. Magic was fun but lacked variety, offensive spells work the same, the unique ones though were interesting where you could summon minions or make people fight each other but most of the unique ones were too situational to be of any real use beyond a laugh.

The most impressive thing about the game are some of the locations you go through in the main quest lines, some places really made me say wow, the huge cavern that you have to go through in the main quest felt like another world underground, the Nord heaven where you fight Alduin, the deadric locations that you get teleported to. On the other hand the side quest locations all looked the same, the map layout may have been different but they all felt very similar and hard to distinguish between locations.

Man I did not think that I would write this much, anyway I enjoyed my time in Skyrim, but one day I just stopped playing it and never felt the need to go back, I don't think it was the best game of 2011.

#54 Posted by HerbieBug (4193 posts) -

Skyrim is the ultimate in unapologetically bloated western RPG design. I love it for that even if I don't always enjoy actually playing it.

#55 Posted by JasonR86 (9583 posts) -

You're a little late dude.

Online
#56 Posted by zyn (2591 posts) -

@Bell_End said:

i liked it

#57 Posted by TehJedicake (874 posts) -

The first time I got Skyrim (for PC thank fuck) I thought it was incredible, I have probably racked up 300 hours into JUST the original Skyrim, then I started getting into mods... (skyre, frostfall, that lighting effect mod, convenient horses, etc.). The original Skyrim still remains a well made game, it's just it's extremely difficult to go back to it after trying all of the mods since it seems dull. Also I feel so damn bad for console owners, no keybinds, no respec, no extremely easy quick save/quick load (I know with kinect you can do a quick save I think?) and probably most importantly, no mods. I am still playing Skyrim to this day (hurry up Dragonborn) and not even going to attempt to count up the total hours I've put into it.

#58 Edited by Klei (1768 posts) -

@SlashDance said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Klei

I don't agree with your points, but you're damn right to have an opinion. I don't think Skyrim is that good either; it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards. People who enjoy AC, CoD and Halo usually love Skyrim. I don't mean to generalize, nor to take the merit of these (great) games, what I mean is that it's such a mainstream experience that everything about this game is very plain, dull or colorless. Plain combat, plain soceries, plain storyline. And also, Bethesda can't figure out how to make third person animations work properly.

You know, I don't know if you've figured this out yet. It's pretty difficult, but you can not like a game without straight-up insulting the people who do like it. It's pretty easy, you just don't include stupid generalizations like "it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards." The game is pretty universally liked. It has faults, as all games do, but saying that the people who do like it are "simple" is just stupid and completely undermines your argument.

It's also completely false since many fans of more complex RPGs like the Infinity Engine games also happen to love Skyrim. Myself included.

To all of you. I said I didn't generalize. If YOU don't seem affected, it doesn't mean it's false. Skyrim is still a very mainstream and pretty basic experience. There's not a lot of bells and whistles to that game. There's very little that actually take attention and care and energy to get through unlike, say, Dark Souls ( and no, i'm not saying DS is better ). Skyrim isn't a deep, engrossing experience. It is a rather leveled experience that won't ask you to commit more than any of the games I mentioned. It's a streamlined experience. What I meant is that a shitload of gamers don't deviate from those high-caliber triple A titles like those I mentioned. To the point that they don't even know that other great games exist. And that, my friend, is a fact.

Also, I never called anybody stupid and I didn't insult anyone. If you dudes feel insulted, then i'm sorry.

#59 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7039 posts) -
@Klei

@SlashDance said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Klei

I don't agree with your points, but you're damn right to have an opinion. I don't think Skyrim is that good either; it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards. People who enjoy AC, CoD and Halo usually love Skyrim. I don't mean to generalize, nor to take the merit of these (great) games, what I mean is that it's such a mainstream experience that everything about this game is very plain, dull or colorless. Plain combat, plain soceries, plain storyline. And also, Bethesda can't figure out how to make third person animations work properly.

You know, I don't know if you've figured this out yet. It's pretty difficult, but you can not like a game without straight-up insulting the people who do like it. It's pretty easy, you just don't include stupid generalizations like "it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards." The game is pretty universally liked. It has faults, as all games do, but saying that the people who do like it are "simple" is just stupid and completely undermines your argument.

It's also completely false since many fans of more complex RPGs like the Infinity Engine games also happen to love Skyrim. Myself included.

To all of you. I said I didn't generalize. If YOU don't seem affected, it doesn't mean it's false. Skyrim is still a very mainstream and pretty basic experience. There's not a lot of bells and whistles to that game. There's very little that actually take attention and care and energy to get through unlike, say, Dark Souls ( and no, i'm not saying DS is better ). Skyrim isn't a deep, engrossing experience. It is a rather leveled experience that won't ask you to commit more than any of the games I mentioned. It's a streamlined experience. What I meant is that a shitload of gamers don't deviate from those high-caliber triple A titles like those I mentioned. To the point that they don't even know that other great games exist. And that, my friend, is a fact.

Also, I never called anybody stupid and I didn't insult anyone. If you dudes feel insulted, then i'm sorry.

In what universe is "simple gamers with very little standards" not an insult? Don't be naive.
#60 Posted by EveretteScott (1442 posts) -

@picko19:Why I think your opinion isn't that good.

#61 Edited by believer258 (11562 posts) -

@Klei said:

@SlashDance said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Klei

I don't agree with your points, but you're damn right to have an opinion. I don't think Skyrim is that good either; it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards. People who enjoy AC, CoD and Halo usually love Skyrim. I don't mean to generalize, nor to take the merit of these (great) games, what I mean is that it's such a mainstream experience that everything about this game is very plain, dull or colorless. Plain combat, plain soceries, plain storyline. And also, Bethesda can't figure out how to make third person animations work properly.

You know, I don't know if you've figured this out yet. It's pretty difficult, but you can not like a game without straight-up insulting the people who do like it. It's pretty easy, you just don't include stupid generalizations like "it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards." The game is pretty universally liked. It has faults, as all games do, but saying that the people who do like it are "simple" is just stupid and completely undermines your argument.

It's also completely false since many fans of more complex RPGs like the Infinity Engine games also happen to love Skyrim. Myself included.

To all of you. I said I didn't generalize. If YOU don't seem affected, it doesn't mean it's false. Skyrim is still a very mainstream and pretty basic experience. There's not a lot of bells and whistles to that game. There's very little that actually take attention and care and energy to get through unlike, say, Dark Souls ( and no, i'm not saying DS is better ). Skyrim isn't a deep, engrossing experience. It is a rather leveled experience that won't ask you to commit more than any of the games I mentioned. It's a streamlined experience. What I meant is that a shitload of gamers don't deviate from those high-caliber triple A titles like those I mentioned. To the point that they don't even know that other great games exist. And that, my friend, is a fact.

Also, I never called anybody stupid and I didn't insult anyone. If you dudes feel insulted, then i'm sorry.

Yes, Skyrim is streamlined and nowhere near as complex as those Infinity Engine games. I wish people would stop bringing that shit up when discussing "complexity" in RPG's.

What Skyrim isn't is simple and basic. If it were simple and basic then anyone could play it on the highest difficulty, and by "anyone" I include your grandmother and anyone else who has never touched a video game more complex than Solitaire (which, in itself, has some depth to it). My point is that there's far more to the game than mashing the right trigger or left mouse button. Spells, buffs, debuffs, poisons, balancing those three all-important bars on the bottom, planning a certain character archetype and sticking to that for potentially a hundred or more hours, etc.

Yes, people who enjoy AC, CoD, and Halo and nothing else also love Skyrim, but like those games, that's because Skyrim has a very low barrier of entry (meaning it's easy to get into) but a decent amount of depth. Same way that AC and CoD and Halo are, especially that latter one. You know what doesn't have that advantage? Old Infinity Engine games - those aren't very accessible, which does not make them complex, deep, or even well-designed.

I recommend viewing this, it's short.

Online
#62 Posted by haggis (1677 posts) -

@Seppli said:

That's definitely what Bethesda has to figure out and get right in their games, how to build character and gameplay progression to keep the game challenging and interesting, whilst avoiding ludicrous difficulty spikes. I hope they'll nail it one of these days.

This is the problem facing all RPGs. No one has come up with a solution for it yet, and I'm not sure many are trying. It's near impossible to pull off. The easiest solution (and the one I'd prefer) would be to have permanently high-level areas and no difficulty scaling at all--but that works against the open-world aesthetic, and it's difficult to communicate to the player where they should and should not go. The current solution--moderate difficulty scaling--results in extremes at the high end, where the game becomes ludicrously easy, and a muddled middle where a badly-rolled character suddenly starts getting his ass whipped. But if the game tried to hold your hand too much in character creation, everyone would complain about the game being dumbed down.

Basically, there's no solution. Everything is a compromise. It's just a matter of whether you can live with Bethesda's compromises or not.

#63 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

It's a pretty world with clunky, anti-fun gameplay.

#64 Posted by wewantsthering (1547 posts) -

Skyrim > Fallout 3.

#65 Posted by Klei (1768 posts) -

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Klei

@SlashDance said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Klei

I don't agree with your points, but you're damn right to have an opinion. I don't think Skyrim is that good either; it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards. People who enjoy AC, CoD and Halo usually love Skyrim. I don't mean to generalize, nor to take the merit of these (great) games, what I mean is that it's such a mainstream experience that everything about this game is very plain, dull or colorless. Plain combat, plain soceries, plain storyline. And also, Bethesda can't figure out how to make third person animations work properly.

You know, I don't know if you've figured this out yet. It's pretty difficult, but you can not like a game without straight-up insulting the people who do like it. It's pretty easy, you just don't include stupid generalizations like "it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards." The game is pretty universally liked. It has faults, as all games do, but saying that the people who do like it are "simple" is just stupid and completely undermines your argument.

It's also completely false since many fans of more complex RPGs like the Infinity Engine games also happen to love Skyrim. Myself included.

To all of you. I said I didn't generalize. If YOU don't seem affected, it doesn't mean it's false. Skyrim is still a very mainstream and pretty basic experience. There's not a lot of bells and whistles to that game. There's very little that actually take attention and care and energy to get through unlike, say, Dark Souls ( and no, i'm not saying DS is better ). Skyrim isn't a deep, engrossing experience. It is a rather leveled experience that won't ask you to commit more than any of the games I mentioned. It's a streamlined experience. What I meant is that a shitload of gamers don't deviate from those high-caliber triple A titles like those I mentioned. To the point that they don't even know that other great games exist. And that, my friend, is a fact.

Also, I never called anybody stupid and I didn't insult anyone. If you dudes feel insulted, then i'm sorry.

In what universe is "simple gamers with very little standards" not an insult? Don't be naive.

It's not an insult. A lot of gamers are pretty simple. A lot of people I know, actually. They like Call of Duty, NHL and Skyrim. That's it. It doesn't make them stupid or dim-witted. They just like simple, streamlined experiences. They have no idea that gems like Enslaved or Witcher exist, because they won't dig past the icing of the cake. I never insulted anyone.

#66 Posted by TheHBK (5458 posts) -

This post is weak, I thought you were gonna really back up your argument but man, you fell flat on your face.

The story/world being convoluted? I thought it was pretty damn simple. Dragons are coming back, you have to stop them, and there are things you have to do on the way to get there. That is it.

The world being convoluted? Name dropping? This is one thing I have always loved about the Elder Scrolls games. It feels like a real world with its own fucked up history that people remember differently. Name drop here and there. The best way to put it then is imagine if you didn't know a thing about Earth and just started a quest here. People would mention Abraham Lincoln and Hitler and the Roman Empire but you would be like what the fuck? You could ask someone to explain it or go read about it, just like in the ES games. I would feel like the game was taking me out of it if every time I spoke to someone, they took time to remind me who they are talking about or what event they are referring to.

"Can I have a few septims??? Oh by the way, Septim is the name of the Emperors that ruled this place 200 years ago. And Talos worship is outlawed. Oh yeah, he is the first emperor of this Empire and became of a god but his name was Tiber Septim."

See. Doesn't work. The world feels real because just like here on earth, history is remembered by some, not by all and it confuses many.

As far as the gameplay, what the hell does "you hit a brick wall" mean? Did you get too good and it was boring or was the game getting too hard? Going two handed you should have been a good killing machine 20 hours in. And start up in a new set of disciplines when the world has progressed in difficulty, that makes things hard and is a challenge, in any RPG, that you have to accept.

#67 Posted by TheCreamFilling (1223 posts) -

I enjoyed it, but I was very disappointed by how simplified it was compared to Oblivion and even more so to Morrowind. I understand the desire to appeal to "casual gamers" and a more minimalist direction they were going for, but I feel they're getting too close to crossing the line between RPG and action game with RPG elements.

#68 Posted by gogosox82 (424 posts) -

I found Skyrim to be lacking the rpg aspects of things. I never really felt a reason to loot anything after I got something really good. I was an archer and after I got the bow from Karilah after that one thieves guild quest, I really never got a better one besides the one I crafted. And the game's a little too easy, its pretty sad when you start one shoting things on master at level 25. I think they maybe need to rethink the whole critical hits calculation for the next game. Its just too easy to sneak up behind someone and one shot them with a bow or a dagger. The questing structure was a little too formulaic for my tastes. The talk to quest giver, go to place/dungeon on map, kill daugers/or whatever thing i have to kill, go back to quest giver and get reward thing just got really boring and repetitive after a while. Would have liked a little more variety in the quests hell, maybe even allow for me to fuck up the quest so that i'll have to do it again in another playthrough. That's how i ended up putting 300 hours into oblivion. Stuff like that just didn't happen in skryim. I wouldn't say skyrim is bad though that's just silly. The exploration is still great in that game, but it could improve in other areas like the ones i mentioned.

#69 Posted by gogosox82 (424 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@Klei said:

@SlashDance said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Klei

I don't agree with your points, but you're damn right to have an opinion. I don't think Skyrim is that good either; it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards. People who enjoy AC, CoD and Halo usually love Skyrim. I don't mean to generalize, nor to take the merit of these (great) games, what I mean is that it's such a mainstream experience that everything about this game is very plain, dull or colorless. Plain combat, plain soceries, plain storyline. And also, Bethesda can't figure out how to make third person animations work properly.

You know, I don't know if you've figured this out yet. It's pretty difficult, but you can not like a game without straight-up insulting the people who do like it. It's pretty easy, you just don't include stupid generalizations like "it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards." The game is pretty universally liked. It has faults, as all games do, but saying that the people who do like it are "simple" is just stupid and completely undermines your argument.

It's also completely false since many fans of more complex RPGs like the Infinity Engine games also happen to love Skyrim. Myself included.

To all of you. I said I didn't generalize. If YOU don't seem affected, it doesn't mean it's false. Skyrim is still a very mainstream and pretty basic experience. There's not a lot of bells and whistles to that game. There's very little that actually take attention and care and energy to get through unlike, say, Dark Souls ( and no, i'm not saying DS is better ). Skyrim isn't a deep, engrossing experience. It is a rather leveled experience that won't ask you to commit more than any of the games I mentioned. It's a streamlined experience. What I meant is that a shitload of gamers don't deviate from those high-caliber triple A titles like those I mentioned. To the point that they don't even know that other great games exist. And that, my friend, is a fact.

Also, I never called anybody stupid and I didn't insult anyone. If you dudes feel insulted, then i'm sorry.

Yes, Skyrim is streamlined and nowhere near as complex as those Infinity Engine games. I wish people would stop bringing that shit up when discussing "complexity" in RPG's.

What Skyrim isn't is simple and basic. If it were simple and basic then anyone could play it on the highest difficulty, and by "anyone" I include your grandmother and anyone else who has never touched a video game more complex than Solitaire (which, in itself, has some depth to it). My point is that there's far more to the game than mashing the right trigger or left mouse button. Spells, buffs, debuffs, poisons, balancing those three all-important bars on the bottom, planning a certain character archetype and sticking to that for potentially a hundred or more hours, etc.

Yes, people who enjoy AC, CoD, and Halo and nothing else also love Skyrim, but like those games, that's because Skyrim has a very low barrier of entry (meaning it's easy to get into) but a decent amount of depth. Same way that AC and CoD and Halo are, especially that latter one. You know what doesn't have that advantage? Old Infinity Engine games - those aren't very accessible, which does not make them complex, deep, or even well-designed.

I recommend viewing this, it's short.

Aren't you saying the same thing he is? He's saying its simple game to get into to and your basically saying the same thing. Your both saying that Skyrim succeeds because it is easy to get into. You don't have to learn all the gameplay mechanics like you do in a more complex game, you can just pick it up and play and you'll be fine for the most part. Maybe he shouldn't have said its a game for people with low standards, but your both saying the same thing so i'm not sure what the big fuss is all about.

#70 Posted by ShadowConqueror (3048 posts) -

I still think it was 2011's GOTY, and one of the best games released in the past few years.

#71 Posted by believer258 (11562 posts) -

@gogosox82 said:

@believer258 said:

@Klei said:

@SlashDance said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Klei

I don't agree with your points, but you're damn right to have an opinion. I don't think Skyrim is that good either; it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards. People who enjoy AC, CoD and Halo usually love Skyrim. I don't mean to generalize, nor to take the merit of these (great) games, what I mean is that it's such a mainstream experience that everything about this game is very plain, dull or colorless. Plain combat, plain soceries, plain storyline. And also, Bethesda can't figure out how to make third person animations work properly.

You know, I don't know if you've figured this out yet. It's pretty difficult, but you can not like a game without straight-up insulting the people who do like it. It's pretty easy, you just don't include stupid generalizations like "it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards." The game is pretty universally liked. It has faults, as all games do, but saying that the people who do like it are "simple" is just stupid and completely undermines your argument.

It's also completely false since many fans of more complex RPGs like the Infinity Engine games also happen to love Skyrim. Myself included.

To all of you. I said I didn't generalize. If YOU don't seem affected, it doesn't mean it's false. Skyrim is still a very mainstream and pretty basic experience. There's not a lot of bells and whistles to that game. There's very little that actually take attention and care and energy to get through unlike, say, Dark Souls ( and no, i'm not saying DS is better ). Skyrim isn't a deep, engrossing experience. It is a rather leveled experience that won't ask you to commit more than any of the games I mentioned. It's a streamlined experience. What I meant is that a shitload of gamers don't deviate from those high-caliber triple A titles like those I mentioned. To the point that they don't even know that other great games exist. And that, my friend, is a fact.

Also, I never called anybody stupid and I didn't insult anyone. If you dudes feel insulted, then i'm sorry.

Yes, Skyrim is streamlined and nowhere near as complex as those Infinity Engine games. I wish people would stop bringing that shit up when discussing "complexity" in RPG's.

What Skyrim isn't is simple and basic. If it were simple and basic then anyone could play it on the highest difficulty, and by "anyone" I include your grandmother and anyone else who has never touched a video game more complex than Solitaire (which, in itself, has some depth to it). My point is that there's far more to the game than mashing the right trigger or left mouse button. Spells, buffs, debuffs, poisons, balancing those three all-important bars on the bottom, planning a certain character archetype and sticking to that for potentially a hundred or more hours, etc.

Yes, people who enjoy AC, CoD, and Halo and nothing else also love Skyrim, but like those games, that's because Skyrim has a very low barrier of entry (meaning it's easy to get into) but a decent amount of depth. Same way that AC and CoD and Halo are, especially that latter one. You know what doesn't have that advantage? Old Infinity Engine games - those aren't very accessible, which does not make them complex, deep, or even well-designed.

I recommend viewing this, it's short.

Aren't you saying the same thing he is? He's saying its simple game to get into to and your basically saying the same thing. Your both saying that Skyrim succeeds because it is easy to get into. You don't have to learn all the gameplay mechanics like you do in a more complex game, you can just pick it up and play and you'll be fine for the most part. Maybe he shouldn't have said its a game for people with low standards, but your both saying the same thing so i'm not sure what the big fuss is all about.

From what I understood, he's saying that the game is all-around simple, meaning the capacity for depth and complexity isn't there. I'm saying that it is simple to get into (it isn't hard to figure out how to move, aim, swing a sword, level up, sell stuff, etc.) but there is some measure of depth and complexity in terms of how you build your character, how you're going to approach combat situations, what you're going to use, etc. Klei completely wrote any measure of that off and his wording made it sound somewhat insulting to those of us that do like the game and do recognize its strength.

See the difference?

Online
#72 Posted by gogosox82 (424 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@gogosox82 said:

@believer258 said:

@Klei said:

@SlashDance said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@Klei

I don't agree with your points, but you're damn right to have an opinion. I don't think Skyrim is that good either; it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards. People who enjoy AC, CoD and Halo usually love Skyrim. I don't mean to generalize, nor to take the merit of these (great) games, what I mean is that it's such a mainstream experience that everything about this game is very plain, dull or colorless. Plain combat, plain soceries, plain storyline. And also, Bethesda can't figure out how to make third person animations work properly.

You know, I don't know if you've figured this out yet. It's pretty difficult, but you can not like a game without straight-up insulting the people who do like it. It's pretty easy, you just don't include stupid generalizations like "it's a game for simple gamers with very little standards." The game is pretty universally liked. It has faults, as all games do, but saying that the people who do like it are "simple" is just stupid and completely undermines your argument.

It's also completely false since many fans of more complex RPGs like the Infinity Engine games also happen to love Skyrim. Myself included.

To all of you. I said I didn't generalize. If YOU don't seem affected, it doesn't mean it's false. Skyrim is still a very mainstream and pretty basic experience. There's not a lot of bells and whistles to that game. There's very little that actually take attention and care and energy to get through unlike, say, Dark Souls ( and no, i'm not saying DS is better ). Skyrim isn't a deep, engrossing experience. It is a rather leveled experience that won't ask you to commit more than any of the games I mentioned. It's a streamlined experience. What I meant is that a shitload of gamers don't deviate from those high-caliber triple A titles like those I mentioned. To the point that they don't even know that other great games exist. And that, my friend, is a fact.

Also, I never called anybody stupid and I didn't insult anyone. If you dudes feel insulted, then i'm sorry.

Yes, Skyrim is streamlined and nowhere near as complex as those Infinity Engine games. I wish people would stop bringing that shit up when discussing "complexity" in RPG's.

What Skyrim isn't is simple and basic. If it were simple and basic then anyone could play it on the highest difficulty, and by "anyone" I include your grandmother and anyone else who has never touched a video game more complex than Solitaire (which, in itself, has some depth to it). My point is that there's far more to the game than mashing the right trigger or left mouse button. Spells, buffs, debuffs, poisons, balancing those three all-important bars on the bottom, planning a certain character archetype and sticking to that for potentially a hundred or more hours, etc.

Yes, people who enjoy AC, CoD, and Halo and nothing else also love Skyrim, but like those games, that's because Skyrim has a very low barrier of entry (meaning it's easy to get into) but a decent amount of depth. Same way that AC and CoD and Halo are, especially that latter one. You know what doesn't have that advantage? Old Infinity Engine games - those aren't very accessible, which does not make them complex, deep, or even well-designed.

I recommend viewing this, it's short.

Aren't you saying the same thing he is? He's saying its simple game to get into to and your basically saying the same thing. Your both saying that Skyrim succeeds because it is easy to get into. You don't have to learn all the gameplay mechanics like you do in a more complex game, you can just pick it up and play and you'll be fine for the most part. Maybe he shouldn't have said its a game for people with low standards, but your both saying the same thing so i'm not sure what the big fuss is all about.

From what I understood, he's saying that the game is all-around simple, meaning the capacity for depth and complexity isn't there. I'm saying that it is simple to get into (it isn't hard to figure out how to move, aim, swing a sword, level up, sell stuff, etc.) but there is some measure of depth and complexity in terms of how you build your character, how you're going to approach combat situations, what you're going to use, etc. Klei completely wrote any measure of that off and his wording made it sound somewhat insulting to those of us that do like the game and do recognize its strength.

See the difference?

Well that was probably a poor choice of words on his part but i think you and him were basically echoing the same sentiments. That Skyrim has been streamlined to appeal to a wider audience. BTW, i don't think there's anything wrong with that, and I think ultimately its probably for the better in the long run but no one can deny that something like the way you level in skyrim is far more steamlined and accessible than in Oblivion. So i think besides implying that anyone who liked skyrim is a simpleton, i think you guys were saying the same thing.

#73 Posted by EuanDewar (4686 posts) -

its not like mister shook to get shy when they ask himmm who is onnn top

#74 Posted by Levio (1782 posts) -

I had many problems with Skyrim: Level scaling screwed my thief over in hard mode, tons of game-breaking bugs long after release, too many crypts, crafting was pretty boring for me, good crafted equipment made quest/found equipment useless, dragons kept trying to kill my towns' NPCs when I wanted to do all the quests, thieves guild should have had a real fast travel point, transform spells made my character weaker, and the cutscenes were incredibly low quality.

But I still had fun with it.

#75 Posted by Dethfish (3618 posts) -

I really like Skyrim. I've played a lot of it and now have 3 different characters over level 50, but I may be starting to come around to the side of "Skyrim isn't that good", mainly because of its bugs though. I played for about 5 hours yesterday and in that time alone I had it lockup twice, 3 quests got broken (one seems permanently busted too) and I had to reload a bunch of auto-saves because of just other bad gameplay things, like being stuck in the floor.

I guess jank comes with the territory of making a huge open-world game, but lately its just been incredibly irritating. It's a good thing I have it set to auto-save every 5 minutes or I'd have lost tons of time.

#76 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@haggis said:

@Seppli said:

That's definitely what Bethesda has to figure out and get right in their games, how to build character and gameplay progression to keep the game challenging and interesting, whilst avoiding ludicrous difficulty spikes. I hope they'll nail it one of these days.

This is the problem facing all RPGs. No one has come up with a solution for it yet, and I'm not sure many are trying. It's near impossible to pull off. The easiest solution (and the one I'd prefer) would be to have permanently high-level areas and no difficulty scaling at all--but that works against the open-world aesthetic, and it's difficult to communicate to the player where they should and should not go. The current solution--moderate difficulty scaling--results in extremes at the high end, where the game becomes ludicrously easy, and a muddled middle where a badly-rolled character suddenly starts getting his ass whipped. But if the game tried to hold your hand too much in character creation, everyone would complain about the game being dumbed down.

Basically, there's no solution. Everything is a compromise. It's just a matter of whether you can live with Bethesda's compromises or not.

A little tweak to classic Elder Scrolls progression could make things a lot more open, and easier to balance. The seperation of combat-relevant progression and tradeskill progression - at least make them draw from seperate currency pools. I guess only hardcore roleplayers might be miffed at such a thing a little, but this way it's much easier to predict a character's relative strength by his level and finetune balancing/scaling much more tightly.

#77 Posted by Bass (692 posts) -

I came to Skyrim just after playing Dark Souls. They aren't very similar games, but the excellent combat in Dark Souls compared directly to the combat in Skyrim was pretty hard to reconcile. I still played Skyrim for a pretty long time but I don't remember finishing any major sidequests besides the Mage's guild, and I definitely didn't finish the game's main story. Game just got boring real quick for me.

#78 Posted by Evilsbane (4519 posts) -

100+ hours on my desktop 20+ on my laptop I liked it, plan to finish my mage playthrough at some point.

#79 Posted by spartanlolz92 (511 posts) -

@JackG100 said:

I liked it as well, but anyone saying the gameplay in Skyrim is good is a liar and a cheat. For a game focusing on alot of melee-combat it does it incredibly poorly. Just check Chivalry or Mount and Blades combat, it requires actual playerskill both when it comes to timing and twitch-play. Dunno what skyrim requires, depth perception and high smithing? :D

Exploring is what makes the game for me.

^^^^ this if the game had chivalry's combat it would be perfect

sadly combat sucks but the other parts are so good it doesnt impact the experience. just standing and looking at the worl left me in amazement very few games have ever managed to do that. to me.

#80 Posted by Soulreaverm (62 posts) -

It's pretty cool but it's no Morrowind.

#81 Edited by Aetheldod (3495 posts) -

I loved Skyrim .... but rather than the combat it was the world itself (Im a sucker for nordic like landscapes) also I think the nords are the coolest , but that just me ^^ but yeah the combat isnt great and in all honesty very very lackluster , they need to work on the combat (heck just try the demo for Dark Messiah of Might and Magic to see what could be done to the combat). Also they made huge improvements over the dungeons side of things but still made the same mistakes as in Oblivion ... too many lookalike dungeons (not that they have the same layout but rather they feel too sameney) , they improved it , yes , but still too much quantity not quality :( About the story well I thought it ws ok , not great but really that is not Bethesda´s best department but it was much better than the one in Oblivion. Also they need to include character development , as there is hardly any memorable NPC , unlike in Mass Effect games or Witcher or many other rpgs.

#82 Posted by haggis (1677 posts) -

@Seppli said:

@haggis said:

@Seppli said:

That's definitely what Bethesda has to figure out and get right in their games, how to build character and gameplay progression to keep the game challenging and interesting, whilst avoiding ludicrous difficulty spikes. I hope they'll nail it one of these days.

This is the problem facing all RPGs. No one has come up with a solution for it yet, and I'm not sure many are trying. It's near impossible to pull off. The easiest solution (and the one I'd prefer) would be to have permanently high-level areas and no difficulty scaling at all--but that works against the open-world aesthetic, and it's difficult to communicate to the player where they should and should not go. The current solution--moderate difficulty scaling--results in extremes at the high end, where the game becomes ludicrously easy, and a muddled middle where a badly-rolled character suddenly starts getting his ass whipped. But if the game tried to hold your hand too much in character creation, everyone would complain about the game being dumbed down.

Basically, there's no solution. Everything is a compromise. It's just a matter of whether you can live with Bethesda's compromises or not.

A little tweak to classic Elder Scrolls progression could make things a lot more open, and easier to balance. The seperation of combat-relevant progression and tradeskill progression - at least make them draw from seperate currency pools. I guess only hardcore roleplayers might be miffed at such a thing a little, but this way it's much easier to predict a character's relative strength by his level and finetune balancing/scaling much more tightly.

That's an interesting approach. Some of the trade skills have combat-relevant aspects along side non-combat aspects. It might mean splitting smithing (the most obvious example) into two different categories. But yeah, I think that would generally make prediction easier. As for hardcore roleplayers, I think they've been miffed with the direction of Elder Scrolls for awhile now, so what's one more change?

#83 Posted by Example1013 (4833 posts) -

@picko19: I got to the first run-on sentence and stopped reading. Try using some commas next time.

#84 Posted by Veektarius (4540 posts) -

Let me propose a rule:

If you enjoyed a game for 20 hours, it is good. Doesn't matter whether the ending sucked, doesn't matter whether you could even finish it. The value proposition exceeded that from seeing a movie in theaters at the 10-15 hour mark.

#85 Posted by MikkaQ (10263 posts) -

I feel like I'm really in the minority when I say I really enjoy the conbat in Skyrim. It feels heavy and real, and arrows feel impactful.

#86 Posted by Marcsman (3094 posts) -

I thought it was great.

#87 Edited by ExplodeMode (852 posts) -

I think Oblivion and FO3 suffer from the same problems as Skyrim, the initial expectations vs scratching the surface and realizing the game is more shallow than you hoped. The feeling that you've seen it all after the first few days of playing. BUT I think people also forget the good times they have with those games. You let the first 40 hours or so you really enjoyed get colored by the next 40 you spend chasing that initial feeling.

Oblivion is a dumbed down Morrowind, and Skyrim is a dumbed down oblivion. And Fallout 3 gameplay is just VATS headshot headshot headshot fire. But the games still have a lot to offer and are pretty cool, I played each one for well over 100 hours. I think both sides are guilty (me included) of sitting on the different extremes of best game ever/worst game ever when the truth is probably closer to the middle than anyone wants to admit.

NV is exempt though. It's amazing and if you don't think so, you are a bad person.

#88 Edited by sdharrison (476 posts) -

@ExplodeMode said:

I think Oblivion and FO3 suffer from the same problems as Skyrim, the initial expectations vs scratching the surface and realizing the game is more shallow than you hoped. The feeling that you've seen it all after the first few days of playing. BUT I think people also forget the good times they have with those games. You let the first 40 hours or so you really enjoyed get colored by the next 40 you spend chasing that initial feeling.

Oblivion is a dumbed down Morrowind, and Skyrim is a dumbed down oblivion. And Fallout 3 gameplay is just VATS headshot headshot headshot fire. But the games still have a lot to offer and are pretty cool, I played each one for well over 100 hours. I think both sides are guilty (me included) of sitting on the different extremes of best game ever/worst game ever when the truth is probably closer to the middle than anyone wants to admit.

NV is exempt though. It's amazing and if you don't think so, you are a bad person.

This is accurate.

My personal feeling was that I enjoyed Skyrim and got my money out of it. But looking at it critically, things break own VERY quickly. It makes some improvements over Oblivion, but ultimately ends up being one step forward and two steps back.

There's one gripe I have about Skyrim, that gets defended when it shouldn't be:

The writing is terrible, and it doesn't have to be.

People always counter this by saying "Look we all know that narratives aren't Bethesda's strong suit ok? It's all about the world they build." No. It's about the script and questlines being the ONE thing that can be controlled, honed and polished WITHOUT a gigantic budget. There's no reason why a top flight studio like Bethesda can't spend some time making interesting stories for their quests. And here's part two to this gripe:

Oblivion had a better story with more cohesion, and richer sidequests through guilds and the Brotherhood.

The critics almost unanimously towed the Todd Howard line of "We know the storyline in Oblivion sucked, now we improved it in Skyrim". Of course Brad did, along with most of the mainstream. The reality is that Oblivion had fabulously deep guild quest lines with twists and turns so well realized that each of them could have been their own "main story" for a game. Skyrim has the same premise for each guild, a short handful of quests, and ends with you being the new supreme ruler. They are lazy. The main quest does not have nearly the thrust and importance of Oblivion, and has huge pacing issues.

Finally, a common complaint was that "Oblivion was just SO generic fantasy, but Skyrim is different!"

Oblivion had different types of caves, ruins and dungeons, alternate dimensions, gorgeous vistas and different climates to see and explore.

Skyrim was one dreary grey mush of a gameworld. Again, a marketing line from Howard that got imbedded into common thinking, and towed by a lot people with paid opinions.

TLDR:

Skyrim was a poorly written, lazy mess in terms of the main story, and side content. It holds the game back from being a solid all around improvement on Oblivion. And it's a bummer, because I wanted to love Skyrim. I only merely liked it, before realizing the shortcomings.

*One exception: The Daedric artifact quests were pitch perfect.

#89 Posted by TheHT (10804 posts) -

my best time with the game has been:

1. when stuff breaks

2. sneaking around baskstabbing/sniping

3. fus-ro-dah-ing anything and everything.

the moment i start paying attention to the story or getting invested in playing a character i rapidly lose interest. it really is a sandbox game in the sense that i enjoy it best when i'm just dicking around.

#90 Posted by fetchfox (1217 posts) -

To bad you didn't like it. I've clocked over 450 hours, and still playing. I guess I like it.

#91 Posted by HistoryInRust (6268 posts) -

@MikkaQ said:

I feel like I'm really in the minority when I say I really enjoy the conbat in Skyrim. It feels heavy and real, and arrows feel impactful.

I'm with you. The inclusion of the executions did a lot to keep me excited to fight as well.

Online
#92 Posted by HistoryInRust (6268 posts) -

@sdharrison said:

People always counter this by saying "Look we all know that narratives aren't Bethesda's strong suit ok? It's all about the world they build." No. It's about the script and questlines being the ONE thing that can be controlled, honed and polished WITHOUT a gigantic budget. There's no reason why a top flight studio like Bethesda can't spend some time making interesting stories for their quests.

The writing isn't terrible, it just leaves something to be desired. In a word, it's serviceable. But it's nothing more or less than that.

I don't think anyone openly discounts the fact that Skyrim's narrative is flaccid, but they recognize that that's not the entirety of the package. It just happens to be the fact the world is so vividly realized and captures such sense of place that the narratological issues get overshadowed dramatically.

You're right that the questlines haven't ever been particularly riveting, but that's been a throughline of all the Elder Scrolls games. This is just conjecture, but the only Oblivion questline I remember being at all invested in was the Dark Brotherhood. And even then, I just remember the one key twist. Neither of the current-gen Elder Scrolls' main quests are nearly as interesting or intimately tied to the lore as Morrowind's.

@sdharrison said:

Oblivion had different types of caves, ruins and dungeons

Haha. That's just a kneeslapper.

Online
#93 Posted by ShadowMoses900 (190 posts) -

My only complaint on the game was the short length of the guilds, but everything else was great. Though I don't like the soundtrack as much as I did Oblivions.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.