@ImperiousRix said:

Anyone who is using Dark Souls as an example as a game that's supposedly better crafted than anything Bethesda has put out is about as blind as anyone who would claim that Bethesda games don't have ridiculous glitches in them.

Which, for the most part, nobody is doing. Look at the "awesome moments" thread in Skyrim and see how many of those are recognized glitches that people found extremely hilarious.

Dark Souls is a fine game. I owned it for a few months. Is it free from glitches, even ones that affect gameplay? No. No. A million times no. In fact, the glitches in Dark Souls are just as unforgivable as any ones in a Bethesda game. Blighttown alone is enough to drive any sane person to murder because of just how poorly it runs. The framerate is chugs to a sickeningly low amount of frames in that section (that LARGE section) of the game, even if the game is installed to a harddrive. And that's not the only problem. Occasional button latency, poor lock-on camera design, poor implementation of online features. All these things are in the game and, given its precise nature, make the game worse for it.

Do people overlook these flaws? Yes, as does anyone who enjoys a game in spite of its problems. And that's my problem with people who are explicitly using it as an example of everything Skyrim is not. Both games are great in their own ways, and both games are extremely flawed.

The long-winded point I am trying to make is that people should just enjoy the games they enjoy playing and not be so concerned what other games are doing. OP didn't like Skyrim. That's fine. He has legitimate quarrels with it. He has some ridiculous quarrels with it as well, but that's cool. Just everybody chill out.

dark souls has only been out for 41 days. That is not a couple months >:D And to reiterate on how you bash on dark souls, the fps problem in blighttown is not something they can easily fix as it is a problem with their engine and the limitations it has for these systems and with how much graphics are being used in the game which if you havent noticed has shadows / sunshafts Everywhere. Not saying it cant be fix, just saying that people need to get over it and play the game. Iv played through that area 5 times and have not had a problem even when the frames dip some. The online is also not entirely the companies fault as it was not atlus who is doing that but namco and they are trying to make it more suited to a mass crowd vs the mediocre sized one during demon's which if they had it the same way would probably be crashing nonstop. But skyrim is good and i dont compare the 2 as skyrim is a open world game that is an actual rpg vs Dark souls which is a Action Rpg and has a slated route needed to take to play the game.

Sounds like what you should expect from a Bethesdea game. Though I haven't played an Elder Scrolls game before, I've bought a lot of other bethesdea games on the hype (which I then really didn't enjoy at all, like every Fallout game ever). So I probably wouldn't buy this, because I know what to expect and yeah I've since realized that while I love RPGs, I don't like these games.

Just feels like you're looking for a certain experience that this game wasn't necessarily intended to convey to begin with. I totally understand the frustration though, I kept banging myself against bethesda games convinced I should like them (I often seemed to be the only person that didn't) until I came to terms with the fact that I just don't. The bugginess I find unacceptable, and I actually like really linear closed narratives with a set cast of characters in my RPGs (thus my love of JRPGs) as opposed to really open-ended affairs. It took me until probably New Vegas to realize that I just don't like Bethesda games. They aren't BAD, they just aren't for me, and that sometimes can be hard to get used to when it seems like everyone else (critic or otherwise) loves them. You just end up feeling like you're missing something that makes the experience click, and if you try again you'll find it. You won't though.

@spartanlolz92 said:

@ICryCauseImEmo said:

@ShiftyMagician said:

@RsistncE said:

OP has a point about some major fucking flaws in Bethesda games. How people can just look past all that and say that the game is the best that's come out this year is ridiculous. Are gamers that stereotypically nerdy that all it takes to get them to look past a shit game is to give it a fantasy-RPG theme?

Some of us are satisfied enough about just how large the world actually is, as well as all the things you can do. Hardly any other developer ever goes this far and knowing this, it is amazing that it actually came out without being completely broken (at least for me, had only a few hilarious issues that fixed itself out eventually and only once had to reload a save to get a dungeon puzzle to trigger). Just a subjective opinion about it but as other people said, this game isn't for everyone.

This name one other game with a world this big with so much to do and i'll bite the bullet.

actually this is game is suprislingy unbuggy ive only had one glitch that was really annoying but besides that nothing.

with what they have accomplisehd i am extremely satisfied.

Yeah absolutely, outside of the xbox 360 texture issue which so far isn't that huge of a deal for me at least. I have yet to freeze, lock up, get stuck, etc etc. Compaired to NV, and oblivion id certainly say its a much more solid release in terms of issues.

Somebody posted an analogy earlier, comparing Skyrim to an arcade where there are thousands of cabinets but none of them are very good. That analogy resonates with me on some level, but it takes a little modification to really work. In my mind, Skyrim is like an arcade where there are thousands of cabinets and some of them aren't very good, but those are the types of cabinets that I don't enjoy all that much even when they are good.

For instance, I don't find combat in games interesting at all. I get bored of it really fast, even in games that are said to have amongst the best combat systems (the recent Batman games, for instance). So when I'm looking at a purchase and I see reviews saying that the combat isn't particularly good, I don't mind. To return to the analogy, it's as though I've been to other arcades with hundreds of games but only a small number of those games are games that I like, with the rest of the space filled up by games that I recognize are extremely elegant and well-made but that I just couldn't care less about.

And the thing about the jank is that the jank is a tiny price to pay for what I get from Skyrim. It's a huge open world that I can explore at my leisure, with a variety of weather patterns, landscapes, and settlements to explore. By comparison, you can look at games like Uncharted or Modern Warfare 3 or Battlefield 3, all games that do what they do very well, all games that developers have put a lot of work into, but the feeling of being hemmed in destroys them for me. I've played games like those games before; being told exactly where to go and exactly what to do makes it so that I literally can get no enjoyment from them, period, and that's compounded by an utter lack of interest in the world being presented and the story being told. The Elder Scrolls series and other WRPGs provide explorable environments; other games provide tight linear experiences. It's just a question of preference, and comparing the two styles of game is useless once you know which you prefer.

When I buy Skyrim (probably around Christmas, when I actually have time to play it and can get it for a few bucks cheaper on Steam, though I have given in on my former determination to stay away until I can get the GotY edition), it'll be because I love exploring the environment, and because I love interacting with the characters, and because I love the lore, and because I love the questlines. The question of the combat won't even enter into my mind.