You don't need to ponder too deeply on this one Todd: The Elder Scrolls is beloved because the scale of the world is unique to the franchise, and to gaming in general.

What you're seeing is simply the effects of an unintentional monopoly.
Subtract the visuals and scale, and you end up with a very boring RPG.

Fappy:
I always thought Todd Howard was an awesome dev. At least he's honest.

He wasn't always. Back in the Oblivion and Fallout 3 days, he was slammed for making promises on things he could not deliver. The gaming world used to joke that Peter Hines (Todd Howard's cohort in crime at the time) and Peter Molyneux used to compete for the title of "Pete the Liar" when the marketing blitz began.

Mr. Howard has since backed off on that practice, as evidenced by his more "tempered" approach for Skyrim, and it's the only bit of sense I remember seeing from the otherwise agonizingly irritating year-long campaign of hype for Skyrim.

Extragorey:

I've played Skyrim for around 200 hours on one character. A mage. And I've found quite the opposite: mages are incredibly overpowered. Particularly once you get the "Impact" perk, because then even dragons can't attack you while you're attacking them.

I thought that might be the case, but I never got that far on it. Constant face-raping before I could level up high enough, and the fact that the magic is so spread out over so many schools kept me from getting that far, I guess.

Surprising also that no one mentions the interface. The interface, for me, (specifically the inventory/barter/container menus) really held me back when I first got the game.

No argument here, but I figured that, since even people who have never played the game know about its shitty interface by now, that I might as well leave that particular greasy, horse-shaped smear on the pavement unbeaten. ;)

Thank the maker for SkyUI

Ragsnstitches:

ZippyDSMlee:

Ragsnstitches:
snip

Ever think they could make a better game but don't have to because no one cares enough?

I have no doubt they can make the game better. That Gamejam session shown a few days ago proves that, whether it's minor touches or giving what the fans wanted. Anything added at this point that does not break the game or remove content is technically and definitively, an improvement.

Yet...

Ever think that it is a great game, but not a great game for you? Since you no comprehend the notion of subjective opinion (IE, everything you have said in this topic thus far), I'll keep this light:

Pick any game in your top 5 games of all time roster, make a topic on it and tell everyone how these games are so great. Then sit back and watch as a few people agree with you, then a fuck ton of people dismiss your opinion and interject their own. Surely the only reason for this anomaly is that everyone is either a Troll or is some uncultured swine. They can't POSSIBLY not like the stuff you like for genuine reasons of taste. After all, you are the pinnacle of refined taste?

Oh wait, you have meme based avatar, superimposed onto the Space Ghost villain, Brak. Fuck no... your taste is awful and you have no right to tell me otherwise.

Seriously though, I don't give a hoot about your avatar, but my point stands. You can, by all means not like a game and even state why, but you cannot tell other people that they are wrong and are "casual fodder" or the "great unwashed". That is just arrogance with no foundation... also known as being full of shit.

I could probably keep this up ad nauseum, but you're not worth the effort. I'll just leave on one last personal point. "Glass half empty" folks are never the target for any developer, big and small... who would want to make stuff for a person who only see's the worst in things, but omits the stuff done right? "Glass half empty" folks are not enlightened and lack perspective for proper critical analyses.

Addendum: It's not your opinion that irks people, it's your flagrant disregard and demeaning of other peoples tastes and preferences. This is why people will just scoff at your point of view. Why should you care though? Well, if you didn't want your opinion heard you wouldn't be on a forum notorious for heavily opinionated topics now would you.

El Luck:

Ragsnstitches:

On a side note: Balance? What the hell? Yes there are overpowered builds in Skyrim. But you know what? It's your choice to choose those perks, to use that armour, to abuse that system etc. etc. You suffer for your lack of imagination in this regard.

Ever think of handicapping yourself... like the perks you invest in? Try no straight damage boosts after a certain point (maxing out at 3/5 Strongarm for the One handed skill as an example), or limiting yourself to a certain grade of weapon (Capping at Steel or Elven, not touching Daedric or Ebony?), or forcing yourself to not loot corpses for anything other then Necessary items (keys and notes). Be inventive.... ROLE PLAY.

Though not specifically aimed at you, I find it funny whenever people argue the lack of roleplaying options in Skyrim, as that ironically shows a lack of imagination... something intrinsic to roleplaying.

From a roleplaying point of view I can somewhat see where you're coming from.

From a gameplay point of view...nope. Not at all. If there are issues with balance (which lets be honest...there really are) They do need to be sorted and resolved so that the game is an actual challenge rather than the left and right mouse buttons becoming 'Iwin' buttons. Simply saying 'well don't pick that perk' doesn't solve the problem.

I actually agree with you. The imbalances shouldn't be ignored and if Todds word is anything to go by (hint: it's not) they will get to balance when all the major bugs are ironed out. However there are 2 things you must be aware of:

1. It is not feasible to release a flaw free game. From bugs to balance issues, even with excellent game testers mowing through a game the number of possible things that can break is monumental. Even strictly linear games like Half Life or Unchartered have such issues despite the pedigree of the people working on it. This means that you will inevitably have to deal with problems, or change the type of game you play.

2. Balance is impossible to perfect. Imagine you are playing that game you found obscenely difficult to the point it actually soured your enjoyment. Even a person who enjoys challenges will encounter such a scenario (like myself). Now imagine someone playing a game you thought was perfectly balanced, but they are struggling so much that they are starting to contemplate breaking their TV. You see, the game might have been calibrated by people like you, but it might still be too punishing for other people. A game like Skyrim which now has mass appeal, for better and for worse, will never be a source of challenging gameplay, PC mods might/will come out that address that but for console gamers you will have to make do.

If balance is made in skyrim, it will be made to avoid exploitations and to cut back on obscenely overpowered builds and to make weaker builds more tenable. But the TES team have always wanted to empower the player, so much so that the biggest complaint in Oblivion was that at no point in the game did you feel powerful, since most enemies/creatures levelled with you. That itch you have that makes you play truly difficult games will never be scratched... officially at least.

So, where I stand, Handicapping yourself is a good way to improvise... especially if you are on a console. It also fits with Role Play, but it's not specifically why I do it. I'm currently doing a playthrough with a Nord in a combination of Iron and fur armour, and Iron weapons, focusing on blocking and specialising with axes. After 300 hours it helps to keep things fresh as well.

Wow a concise and thought worthy reply. I will try and respond without going on the reg again....I duno about drool control tho I seem to carry a bucket with my no matter where I roam.

Yes I know my opinions mostly suck thus why I have the idiot/lulzy/mario=gamer avatar. LOL

But I have had these arguments before and frankly its easier to just rage on the rag with a sipy drool cup than it is to have a intellectual conversation over why today's standards in media suck and why its not going to change for the better its only going to get worse.

It seems I get more intellectual conversation over an issues by nerd raging first then when I get soemone who cares only then something worth while seems to crop up, then again it could be me since I am a idiot LOL.

Tho it brings up another interesting question if I can call myself lulzy then why do I hate lulzy gameplay mechanics. Well mostly because one interacts with a game, story and such becomes a tertiary concern.

System Shock 2,Fallout 1-2,Hali life,Balduers gate/Morrowind(and Final fantasy 4/6/9 and golden sun on the gba) might have been overly restrictive but the depth within it made each gain with a feeling of personal achievement. Bioshock/Fo3/Oblivoin/HL2/FF8/12 made it as something to get as fast as you can with not much care involved in the details it was just enough to keep variety up.

Oblivion had a few issues compared to FO3 but one of the things they did right was building the world in such a way that as you explored you found most of the extra hidden crap, in FO3 its all over the place and hard to pace. But thats not the only problem with FO3 you level and raise skills to fast(skills should go to 200 not 100) there should have been 10 times as much equipment or equipment stat randomizes so there's always something new to get.

I guess if FO3 was a 15-20 hour shooter the vanilla stuff works great, beyond that it falls apart and you hit the meh doing the same thing with the same equipment/skills grind much to quickly, also would have been nice if they put all the FO1-2 enemies in FO3 with the FO3 stuff to boot.

I guess you could say I am basis to the older games because they flowed better within the gameplay narrative that they set than most of the new stuff that seems to be made so antisepticly so safe that there is no good balance because the foundation is off. I am also creative and can think up better things to do with this or that half the time and half that time they are real/fun/inovative things to do even LOL

On a side not FF10 I hated the level design but loved the skill system, FF12 I loved the level design but hated the skill system. FF7 had some generic issues like FF6 magic system but it had base character classes to keep it grounded. Mass effect 2 messed up everything I loved about mass effect and dragon age was a bit half assed a shame DA 2 is a "WTF" game.

Another quick rant, got done with Dungeon siege 3 on the up side combat can be fund on the down side you need the DLC to unlock key binding options and strafe you have no control over your AI companion and you only get a 2 member group...while DS 2 was generic at least you commanded a group of 4-5...what made DS 1 shine for me was the lack of respwan it forced you into 1 or 2 classes.

One last thing Bugs I can handle even the dissapaering NPCs and items but good god balance and difficulty..... I need more of it not less and less and less.

ZippyDSMlee:

Wow a concise and thought worthy reply. I will try and respond without going on the reg again....I duno about drool control tho I seem to carry a bucket with my no matter where I roam.

Yes I know my opinions mostly suck thus why I have the idiot/lulzy/mario=gamer avatar. LOL

But I have had these arguments before and frankly its easier to just rage on the rag with a sipy drool cup than it is to have a intellectual conversation over why today's standards in media suck and why its not going to change for the better its only going to get worse.

It seems I get more intellectual conversation over an issues by nerd raging first then when I get soemone who cares only then something worth while seems to crop up, then again it could be me since I am a idiot LOL.

Tho it brings up another interesting question if I can call myself lulzy then why do I hate lulzy gameplay mechanics. Well mostly because one interacts with a game, story and such becomes a tertiary concern.

System Shock 2,Fallout 1-2,Hali life,Balduers gate/Morrowind(and Final fantasy 4/6/9 and golden sun on the gba) might have been overly restrictive but the depth within it made each gain with a feeling of personal achievement. Bioshock/Fo3/Oblivoin/HL2/FF8/12 made it as something to get as fast as you can with not much care involved in the details it was just enough to keep variety up.

Oblivion had a few issues compared to FO3 but one of the things they did right was building the world in such a way that as you explored you found most of the extra hidden crap, in FO3 its all over the place and hard to pace. But thats not the only problem with FO3 you level and raise skills to fast(skills should go to 200 not 100) there should have been 10 times as much equipment or equipment stat randomizes so there's always something new to get.

I guess if FO3 was a 15-20 hour shooter the vanilla stuff works great, beyond that it falls apart and you hit the meh doing the same thing with the same equipment/skills grind much to quickly, also would have been nice if they put all the FO1-2 enemies in FO3 with the FO3 stuff to boot.

I guess you could say I am basis to the older games because they flowed better within the gameplay narrative that they set than most of the new stuff that seems to be made so antisepticly so safe that there is no good balance because the foundation is off. I am also creative and can think up better things to do with this or that half the time and half that time they are real/fun/inovative things to do even LOL

On a side not FF10 I hated the level design but loved the skill system, FF12 I loved the level design but hated the skill system. FF7 had some generic issues like FF6 magic system but it had base character classes to keep it grounded. Mass effect 2 messed up everything I loved about mass effect and dragon age was a bit half assed a shame DA 2 is a "WTF" game.

Another quick rant, got done with Dungeon siege 3 on the up side combat can be fund on the down side you need the DLC to unlock key binding options and strafe you have no control over your AI companion and you only get a 2 member group...while DS 2 was generic at least you commanded a group of 4-5...what made DS 1 shine for me was the lack of respwan it forced you into 1 or 2 classes.

One last thing Bugs I can handle even the dissapaering NPCs and items but good god balance and difficulty..... I need more of it not less and less and less.

First off, I pegged you for a fool. You have proven me wrong. Good on you.

Secondly, I can agree with you on pretty much everything you said... I too find the loss of challenge in recent gaming ventures (i.e past decade) to be disheartening to say the least. Yes, I like myself a good ol' roller coaster ride every so often, but sometimes I prefer to test my mettle... not sit back and grind through "cinematized" single player games (yes I made that word up) or haphazardly waltz through ego coddling multiplayer games (I'm looking at you CoD).

I also agree that in being so vast, TES games and Fallout 3/NV games suffer from a serious case of dilution (Yahtzees Bramston Pickle metaphor comes to mind). But this has been the staple for Bethesda and quite frankly they suck at linearity (That one TES game before morrowind that everyone ignores) and multiplayer (Brink... though I think they only acted as publisher for that). I'm no chump, the Bethesda team are far from a standard I would idolise. BUT, to give them the credit they are due, they are not afraid of experimenting. Honestly look at the TES series and find another series of games that offer the same "experience". They are few and far between. What's more, Bethesda isn't afraid to muck around with their formula, though they always keep to the same "grow by doing" mantra that carries over through each game.

Anyway, cutting away the bullshit, I go into TES expecting something different then what you do... for you the challenge aspect suffers where for me the ability to just become engrossed in their worlds has improved. The retarding of the difficulty curve has allowed for a more seemless RPing experience, for me. Now I said in my above post at some point that I rate Skyrim on par with morrowind, but I do not imply there was a misstep in oblivion. Oblivion had it's fare share of problems, but I definitely sank more hours in that then I did Morrowind (Heck, I sank more hours in Daggerfall then I did the following 3 games combined, though I was lost for most of it).

I suppose in a sense, TES resonates with me better then it might do others, for reasons beyond technical proficiency (which they most certainly fall short on).

As for Fallout 3 and NV? I will simply say this, Fallout 2 and New Vegas are my favourite Fallout iterations, with Fallout coming in a close second and Fallout 3 coming last (I never played any of the spin offs, despite the Tactics game apparently being decent). I honestly can't choose between F2 and F:NV. They each have something that I just love... and being a post apocalyptic cowboy is just spiffy.

Also, just as a point of interest. I don't particularly like the Final Fantasy series... yet I thoroughly enjoyed 12 and thought it had the most engrossing combat system. It is also the only FF I sat through to completion, since the plot didn't bore the hole off of me before the 2nd arc. Different folks, different strokes.

Ragsnstitches:
snip

I know what TES are now I just wish they would be a bit more mindful of the full 50 hour experience and craft a game that dose not go all lulzy if you do it.

Also I think FO3/NV were held back they wanted to make it to much like FO1-2 without giving much thought of just how much was changed.

I need to fire up NV and put some serious hours on it but I been putting it off since I have not finished FO3 since I easily get side tracked then jaded/lost on the main story.

I got a few mods a going to try and make it harder one is the wastlanders(SP) mod another is making all the exp you get for killing things to be like 1EXP I love hacking and lock picking so I will get a good bit of EXP from that, other than that I really need to remain focused on what I am doing so I do not get lost and screw over the pacing.

I am a FF fan but not so much of the sci fi FFs they been more on the half assed side of things. I did enjoy the combat of FF12 it could have been a bit more like dragon age for my tastes(at least the group control bits) the rest of the bits of the game from skills to equipment felt bland generic and under utilized, I would have enjoyed it much more if I could equipped 2-4 accessories that IMO would have been a game changer(well that and make your own equipment like in FFX). I really wish they would keep the "experiments" to a separate FF series and then have the flagship as the one with the more traditional gameplay elements.

But all in all I do very much agree with the sentiment of how watered down new games are, seriously if they want to do that make the games play themselves so I can enjoy the fiction without all the mindless button mashing.

Hevva:
When asked why Skyrim has done so well, he responded, "The short answer is, I don't know."

I'll tell you why. Because all the "brosephs" and what not that have the one nerdy friend that played daggerfall and morrowind and oblivion and said, "PLEASE PLAY THESE GAMES THEY ARE EXCELLENT AND INCREDIBLE!" and the brosephs said, "naw, doze gaymz be fer faggz." saw a damn commercial on damn Spike TV for damn Skyrim and decided to damn play it and FINALLY realized that those damn games are damn awesome.

THAT is why.