I've had a really great time playing the remastered version over the last few weeks and it got me wondering. Now, I played the first few titles way back when and remember enjoying them as well, but I sorta fell off the series at some point in the middle there. While I know Elder Scrolls has always had this fervent fan base I've gotten this impression that Skyrim sorta took it to another level. I can't imagine the games hold up too well over time though, but compared to the other games at their time was Skyrim the Fallout 3 of the Elder Scrolls series ? or were they all this great, and I missed out on some really awesome games ?
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Game » consists of 30 releases. Released Nov 11, 2011
- Xbox 360
- PC
- PlayStation 3
- Xbox 360 Games Store
- + 5 more
- PlayStation 4
- Xbox One
- Nintendo Switch
- PlayStation 5
- Xbox Series X|S
The fifth installment in Bethesda's Elder Scrolls franchise is set in the eponymous province of Skyrim, where the ancient threat of dragons, led by the sinister Alduin, is rising again to threaten all mortal races. Only the player, as the prophesied hero the Dovahkiin, can save the world from destruction.
Was Skyrim an outstanding Elder Scrolls game?
Everything Bethesda does is super divisive. There's fervent fans for each one of their games based on opinions that are basically the entire opposite of each other. This goes for TES and Fallout games and for that reason I would say expect a bunch of eyebrows raised at that "was Skyrim the Fallout 3 of the Elder Scrolls series ?" statement. For me personally Skyrim is the best over all product but I could pick and choose what the previous games of the franchise have done better quite easily. Still here waiting for SK[SE] to release and hopefully someone to carry the mantle of SkyUI into SE too.
I don't think Skyrim took it to another level at all. Mods carried this game to new heights. It was an OK game. The melee combat system was boring, the native UI was terrible, interaction with NPCs were awkward, it had game-breaking bugs and the usual Bethesda "Radiant AI" / Stupid AI, bad voice acting, limited variation of gear and equipment (in my opinon), optimization and level/difficulty scaling issues etc. Draugr (I believe they were called?) caves all look the same, and really have you visited one, you've pretty much seen them all. That sense, variety of the actual dungeon crawling was shallow at best. The compass letting you know of all the POIs kind of killed the sense of exploration, too. People's opinions differ on this, but to me it was an OK game back then; the story wasn't special, it wasn't especially good or long. The meat of these games were about the side-quests, which often weren't that cool, but had a few interesting scenarios going on; The Draugr stuff and finding voices was interesting at first but very quickly became repetitive, mainly because of the boring interiors. That applies to pretty much all of their themed caves, like the Dwarven stuff, too.
I'm fully expecting a new Elder Scrolls in the future will address these issues, and dressed in a brand new engine, hopefully paired up with better animations (animations often look horrible in both Fallout as well as Elder Scrolls) it'll hopefully take these games to a new level where Skyrim really didn't - even though developers promised a lot of things - many of them weren't true or didn't play out as they intended.
Music was really good though, as it often speaks to the soundtrack's quality when they live on through YouTube with plenty of views.
Oblivion was the Fallout 3 of the Elder Scrolls games, in that it's the game that broke out in massive wide appeal from a niche but fervent fanbase while also alienating some older fans and arguably messing up the lore in the process.
The first few games are mostly for hardcore retro PC RPG enthusiasts at this point, but Morrowind is something special. Like Planescape: Torment or Xenogears, there is some god-tier world building and fairly good story if you can get past how it's aged and how it controls.
The games were all well received, given they were products of their time, relative to gaming at the time and where gaming was at when those games came out. In many ways its 'unfair' of me to compare the quality of AI and graphics, and even with regards to how UI and mechanics have evolved in gaming in general - but I'd say there's something wrong if an old game beats a new one in many of these areas; as really; as gamers and I'm sure as developers as well we want to move forward.
@viking_funeral: So, my favorite parts of Skyrim is by far the Daedra quests. Do the old games also have whacky stuff like that, or do they play it more straight ?
I really enjoyed it, and It's easily their most outstanding game from a technical sense, but I think it's the least outstanding from a "world" sense. I think it's story is the weakest out of the 3 "modern" ones, and I personally don't enjoy exploring heavily mountain land bases in games. I also don't like the direction they took the "RPG" elements of Skyrim, compared to previous Elder Scrolls, but that taste is all personal and plenty of people rightfully enjoy how Skyrim works.
@viking_funeral: So, my favorite parts of Skyrim is by far the Daedra quests. Do the old games also have whacky stuff like that, or do they play it more straight ?
Skyrim is the most generic game imaganable when you compire it to Morrowind.
I still think Bethesda made Bethesda games are special works. I get that, around Skyrim, momentum started slowing and by Fallout 4, seems to have halted all together...but, i still find its a difficult experience to find else where, for each entry. I personally never found the Witcher to have the same tangible feeling and bioware has gone further and further to stagnant environments with limited actaul exploration, focusing much more on relations and the stories within those.
Mechanics and such in those games just don't afront me, like some. Morrowind plays like utter junk, but Jesus, there really isn't anything like it in terms of the world. People bagger about the writing, and in the past two, thats probably the most accurate of criticism. However, i still believe each entry has genuinely interesting worlds and odd quests here and there.
The stitching of these games are starting to show more and more though, and i feel that has started to wear out a bit for some. I still think, even going back, they do incredible things. Unfortunately, i dont think that is a mechanics based opinion, so that sentiment probably isn't wildly shared as of late.
@ares42: So Daedra quests are a thing in every (?) Elder Scrolls game. If you liked the fact that they're kind of self-contained jumps into some interesting lore with unique rewards at the end, Morrowind has a ton of that stuff. If you liked how crazy and weird some of them got, Oblivion's expansion is 110% that.
"The stitching of these games are starting to show more and more though, and i feel that has started to wear out a bit for some."
Yes, and that Open World games often get a pass for many negative things about them just because they're Open World. Lower standards, as if the developers didn't choose to make it Open World and it is something they can use as an excuse for whatever flaws the game has. I'm tired of that, and I think that standards of quality needs to be higher, even though there's more to test and more to tweak about a bigger game - doesn't excuse that the work hasn't been put into it before people buy the game.
I don't argue the difficulty and complexity of developing a game like this with many moving parts; although most interiors like caves/ruins load in like a separate missions area comparable to more linear game level designs. Its going to be the best thing to see a game like this finally transition over to a better engine. That they've decided to re-release Skyrim makes me think its a few years off at least.
i mean, the answer to your question depends entirely on who you ask. in terms of sales and widening the base? it was stupid successful. critical response? ps3 version being the exception, most outlets gave it very high marks. die-hard elder scrolls fans? probably liked other games more. but like nintendo franchises (mario, smash, mariokart) every Elder Scrolls release is someone's first, and they're consequently blown away.
taking all that in, i'd say skyrim was fairly outstanding.
Oblivion was my first elder scrolls and i still think it's great, but the actual oblivion gate stuff was some of the weakest content in the game. Skyrim pretty much improved on everything i liked about Oblivion , took out the oblivion gates, and added random events involving dragons that i liked a lot. I think both have kinda weak main plots but the side quests and lore surrounding them are the big highlights for me.
I hopped aboard the Bethesda train with Oblivion, so my views are different. From my perspective, Oblivion was great, Fallout 3 was like Oblivion with guns (but also great), and Skyrim was like Fallout 3 inside Elder Scrolls (but still great). The leg up Skyrim had over the previous games was it felt like it had a greater sense of exploration. The vistas were more visually appealing, the music was just right, and the world felt more alive. On top of that, I remember the great sense of wonder when I stumbled upon a series of ruins (I forget what they were called) that had nothing to do with anything. Skyrim had more stuff like that, which is a big plus for a game that I and a lot of other people play by just walking around and finding stuff to do, instead of charging through the main quest line.
That said, I think overall the world, narrative, and what you were doing holds up better in the previous games. The Dark Brotherhood quest is the easiest comparison, but it goes along with the other quest lines too. Fallout 3 has a better set up and conflict than pretty much all of Skyrim, and it does more interesting things like going to the Declaration of Independence, going to other vaults. I'm having a hard time remember what happens in Skyrim, despite playing that game more recently than Oblivion or Fallout 4.
The Daedric artifact quests are probably the standout for Skyrim, but they are pretty scattered. On one hand, that's kinda great. (Walking through the forest only to randomly run into a talking dog is one highlight that comes to mind.) But it got to the point where you either need to spend a lot of time playing the game or need a guide if you want to see more quests like that.
The art, sense of place, music, combat, performance, and so on are all better in Skyrim, but I can't get over the fact that it also feels like the most lifeless game I've played out of the three.
Of 3, 4, and 5, Skyrim is the game I go back to the least. Morrowind always feels like a new experience, and every few years I'll get the itch to try something new in Oblivion. But Skyrim.... I feel like the one playthrough I did is enough. I bought the Dragonborn DLC a few years ago, and I can't feel bothered to finish it.
I know most people feel strongly about the past games and most probably disagree, but I really think Skyrim in terms of pacing got it right.
There's no "go kill 3 mountain lion" tied to guild story quests like in Oblivion. They're still there... but they're not necessary to progress through a story you would rather see unfold continuously. It's also nice to have a marker to have some idea where you're supposed to go, but I also feel that it gives a little too much away and makes side quests feel more like a checklist rather than a story. So I'm kinda conflicted on that. I also think that in general Skyrim is just a more easy game to get into.
It's a comfey game to play without having to worry too much about... anything really. There's not deep character building where every little stat increase or boost has to be this calculated thought on how it's going to make your character better. In Skyrim, you just have to whack people with whatever you want to increase your stats. Not to mention that the setting is just really comfey to look at and play in. It's just one of those games for whatever reason where there isn't any big push to get everything done as fast as possible. It's better to just take your time and explore. That's something that I can't really say about any other Bethesda game, except maybe Shivering Isles, but that's different.
This isn't a perfect game... the main story is pretty weak and it does get repetitive, but I think there's enough good in this game that it is definitely up there as one of my favorite games of all time. Now where was all that magic when they made Fallout 4...?
It was in fact identical to every other Morrowind onward Elder Scrolls game, with somewhat better controls and a fun set of console commands. If you want to praise one of these games then praise Morrowind.
@viking_funeral: No it very wasn't. I don't know why people on these forums hold Oblivion in such high regard, but in the active community Oblivion was considered pretty shit, mostly due to the broken leveling mechanics. Overall Skyrim is undeniably the most popular game in the franchise and it's also hard to say it doesn't have the best gameplay (though that's not saying much). I also think it easily has the best created world. It's the most diverse for sure.
I'd say that both Morrowind and Oblivion are better games if you actually liked the genre pre-Skyrim
@tanookisuit: Has to be mentioned. They ruined Bethesda for me.
It was in fact identical to every other Morrowind onward Elder Scrolls game, with somewhat better controls and a fun set of console commands. If you want to praise one of these games then praise Morrowind.
This is weird. I played MW, Oblivion, & Skyrim for a total combined time of roughly 25 hours. I love that style of RPG's but for some reason or another each time I tried to play them, I just never got into them. I forget what it was with MW, but with Oblivion, I was deep into Dead Rising 1. When Skyrim came out, I had just picked up Mass Effect 1 & 2( w/DLC) and was deep into that. I have Skyrim on Steam and need to actually play it.
It was my favorite ES game for sure. It had a world I enjoyed exploring more than any other, and a world that felt more alive and lived in. Mods certainly helped the game for me but I played hundreds of hours before diving into anything other than a few texture mods.
Yes, you can easily criticize the game, but a lot of people really really enjoyed it despite the kinda boring and clunky combat. Other points of criticism are far more subjective so I won't get more specific on those. More so than any other ES game before it, people played the hell out of Skyrim, and that's probably for a reason.
I'd say that both Morrowind and Oblivion are better games if you actually liked the genre pre-Skyrim
Maybe WERE better games, as in for their time, but have you actually gone back to them? If you thought Skyrim had lackluster combat, awful AI, etc, those games blow Skyrim out of the water. Oblivion maybe has some more creative quests if you only look at the big lines like the guilds, but beyond that I think they just all have something different to offer. Skyrim is probably the best game but the others have plenty to offer.
Morrowind is really hard to get into now as well. Oblivion a little bit less so.
A lot of good points. Let me try add an observation that seems minor but describes how I feel about it personally as I've played these games.
Morrowind: You can levitate and they built parts of the game with that in mind.
Oblivion: You can make some cool boots or potion and jump on rooftops. Can't levitate anymore though.
Skyrim: You jump normally. You can't levitate, but can be glitched into outer space.
It was my favorite ES game for sure. It had a world I enjoyed exploring more than any other, and a world that felt more alive and lived in. Mods certainly helped the game for me but I played hundreds of hours before diving into anything other than a few texture mods.
Yes, you can easily criticize the game, but a lot of people really really enjoyed it despite the kinda boring and clunky combat. Other points of criticism are far more subjective so I won't get more specific on those. More so than any other ES game before it, people played the hell out of Skyrim, and that's probably for a reason.
I'd say that both Morrowind and Oblivion are better games if you actually liked the genre pre-Skyrim
Maybe WERE better games, as in for their time, but have you actually gone back to them? If you thought Skyrim had lackluster combat, awful AI, etc, those games blow Skyrim out of the water. Oblivion maybe has some more creative quests if you only look at the big lines like the guilds, but beyond that I think they just all have something different to offer. Skyrim is probably the best game but the others have plenty to offer.
Morrowind is really hard to get into now as well. Oblivion a little bit less so.
Yeah, I have. Different people play games for different reasons; I already thought the combat in Skyrim was aggressively bad, so having equally bad combat in the two previous games wasn't going to change my opinion. The huge steps down and changes to the systems of character customization from Morrowind and Oblivion to Skyrim are what made me like it a whole lot less.
I would make the same argument for something like Diablo III. Yeah, it's the smoothest-playing game in the genre, but the fundamental game design and character customization choices mean that Diablo II, Path of Exile, Titan Quest, and even Torchlight/Torchlight II are better games if you were already a huge fan of the genre pre-Diablo III. Other people who were introduced to the genre with Diablo III or were just casual fans who are never going to care about the depth of character builds or even reaching the endgame grinds only care about how smooth the gameplay is so they like Diablo III the most, and that's totally fine. Different games for different people.
Skyrim to me is very much how MW 2 was to MW. It is a great game that clearly made improvements to the first. But none of the improvements happen to be straight up game changers. Combat feels a little better, the systems for crafting, spellcasting, etc are all better. But I don't know, for me Oblivion was more "magical." As in, the world Oblivion created felt better, discovering everything it had to offer had more mystery to it. It's why I make this comparison, because so much of MW2 MP despite having new features and extending that system as far as they could (now they just reskin it) it still felt like you were playing an enhanced version of MW. In the same way running around Skyrim discovering things felt less interesting than it did in Oblivion.
Morrowind: You can levitate and they built parts of the game with that in mind.
I remember finding the Ring of Leapfrog at some point, and just bounding around Vivec without the need for bridges. Then seeing the floating palace, and wondering what feat of magic would allow me to reach it. The sense of curiosity and awe has just been unmatched since.
If I saw a floating island in Skyrim, I would assume I can only reach it through some feat of cutscene.
Decent game, but shallow. Never could bring myself to finish it. Terrible dialogue system, weak RPG elements, and a heavy-handed attempt at being dark and serious. The world itself is great though.
It was my favorite ES game for sure. It had a world I enjoyed exploring more than any other, and a world that felt more alive and lived in. Mods certainly helped the game for me but I played hundreds of hours before diving into anything other than a few texture mods.
Yes, you can easily criticize the game, but a lot of people really really enjoyed it despite the kinda boring and clunky combat. Other points of criticism are far more subjective so I won't get more specific on those. More so than any other ES game before it, people played the hell out of Skyrim, and that's probably for a reason.
I'd say that both Morrowind and Oblivion are better games if you actually liked the genre pre-Skyrim
Maybe WERE better games, as in for their time, but have you actually gone back to them? If you thought Skyrim had lackluster combat, awful AI, etc, those games blow Skyrim out of the water. Oblivion maybe has some more creative quests if you only look at the big lines like the guilds, but beyond that I think they just all have something different to offer. Skyrim is probably the best game but the others have plenty to offer.
Morrowind is really hard to get into now as well. Oblivion a little bit less so.
Yeah, I have. Different people play games for different reasons; I already thought the combat in Skyrim was aggressively bad, so having equally bad combat in the two previous games wasn't going to change my opinion. The huge steps down and changes to the systems of character customization from Morrowind and Oblivion to Skyrim are what made me like it a whole lot less.
I would make the same argument for something like Diablo III. Yeah, it's the smoothest-playing game in the genre, but the fundamental game design and character customization choices mean that Diablo II, Path of Exile, Titan Quest, and even Torchlight/Torchlight II are better games if you were already a huge fan of the genre pre-Diablo III. Other people who were introduced to the genre with Diablo III or were just casual fans who are never going to care about the depth of character builds or even reaching the endgame grinds only care about how smooth the gameplay is so they like Diablo III the most, and that's totally fine. Different games for different people.
I never bought the argument that Skyrim's progression was less interesting. Oblivion and Morrowind were JUST percentage point increases for the most part, and the only places where it was more retained that same depth in Skyrim as I recall (special effects on different directions of attacks for example). Skyrim had fewer "trees" but those trees did more than just make you X% better at Y. You could get meaningful changes to gameplay, new mechanics and moves, and you got to choose them. Oblivion and Morrowind were just "as you do Y, Y gets X% better every time you do it so many times.
I take the same issue with Diablo 3, albeit less severely because I feel it is similar or slightly lesser in complexity, just in a different way from previous games. Yes you could do things like create synergies but ultimately that was just connecting dots to increase percentage points. Diablo 3 has ruins, which alter the mechanics of skills. The complexity and character building is different, not lesser.
I never understood people like you seem to be that feel that having a bigger grid of increasing numbers is more complex than a smaller grid of more dynamic options. I think it comes down to you preferring the number game vs what Skyrim and Diablo 3 do.
Maybe better game is the wrong word, but I meant it as a general "it better lives up to more of today's standards" kind of statement. I still feel Skyrim is more polished in some ways, but agree that it's down to the type of player you are. I prefer the kind of customization and character building that is in something like Skyrim over Oblivion (although I also enjoy that) because it feels more involved than just min maxing numbers that I never really "see." I find that stuff more engaging in something like Diablo where I can see the actual numerical impact. In Skyrim, I can see what the impact is because I can do something I couldn't do before, rather than the same stuff with a little more proficiency, ala Oblivion/Morrowind.
@zevvion: You, uh, should re-read my post.
Especially this part: "...it's the game that broke out in massive wide appeal from a niche but fervent fanbase while also alienating some older fans and arguably messing up the lore in the process."
I'm well aware that the active community had problems with the game. I had problems with the game. It was, however, also the first to break into massive mainstream appeal. It sold some 8 million copies. That doesn't make it good (nor bad), and I wasn't making that argument. I was simply stating that it was the game that gained notoriety with non-RPG gamers and achieved widespread cultural awareness, much like Fallout 3 did for the Fallout franchise.
Did Fallout and Elder Scrolls exist before those games? Yes. Would the casual gamer be able to tell you anything about those games before the release of those games? Most likely not. That's my point.
Perhaps you should calm down, read what people are saying, and not be so quick to launch into an attack.
@zevvion: You, uh, should re-read my post.
Especially this part: "...it's the game that broke out in massive wide appeal from a niche but fervent fanbase while also alienating some older fans and arguably messing up the lore in the process."
I'm well aware that the active community had problems with the game. I had problems with the game. It was, however, also the first to break into massive mainstream appeal. It sold some 8 million copies. That doesn't make it good (nor bad), and I wasn't making that argument. I was simply stating that it was the game that gained notoriety with non-RPG gamers and achieved widespread cultural awareness, much like Fallout 3 did for the Fallout franchise.
Did Fallout and Elder Scrolls exist before those games? Yes. Would the casual gamer be able to tell you anything about those games before the release of those games? Most likely not. That's my point.
Perhaps you should calm down, read what people are saying, and not be so quick to launch into an attack.
What part of what I wrote did you interpret as an attack? To be clear, I'm not attacking you, nor anyone else. I was explaining the disconnect between the userbase of this site and the general public. I honestly can't tell why you think I'm all riled up over here. I didn't go all: 'WHAT?! You're joking right!?' or something.
I did read your post though. I was referring to this part:
Oblivion was the Fallout 3 of the Elder Scrolls games, in that it's the game that broke out in massive wide appeal from a niche but fervent fanbase while also alienating some older fans and arguably messing up the lore in the process.
If it isn't clear, I'll explain my thought process. OP asked if Skyrim was a really good Elder Scrolls game. You reply saying Oblivion was popular and Morrowind is something special. It seems to imply you think Skyrim is neither, or at least not as popular as Oblivion and not as special as Morrowind, since that is the question posed in this thread. Here is where my reply to you comes in. Oblivion was not nearly as popular as Skyrim was is. Not even close, really. Especially if you also start looking at name recognition.
The content of OP's post:
...but compared to the other games at their time was Skyrim the Fallout 3 of the Elder Scrolls series ? or were they all this great, and I missed out on some really awesome games ?
I was replying to the content of his post, not merely the title.
If you wish to talk to a general userbase and not to someone specific, I would recommend not replying to someone and addressing them in your post. You don't address a crowd by yelling out someone's name then trying to address the crowd as 'you.'
I love Morrowind a whole lot, but Skyrim is just superior in most ways IMO. I had a ton of fun as a summoner type player. The mages college questline and all that made me feel more like a wizard than pretty much anything outside WoW.
I played 100 hours in the first week of that game's launch. It was time well spent!
Please Log In to post.
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.
Log in to comment