The World of Skyrim Means Nothing... Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT | |
Why the hell would you want that ? | |
Interesting characters off the top of my head: | |
Y'know here's a novel idea, when you find out you don't like something, even after sinking some time into it, have you tried... Shrugging and moving on? Just try it, you'll feel the burning to moan and complain for a little while but it will fade once you find something else. I've had to move on from having my entire life destroyed and restructured, but oh no, something about SKYRIM offends you enough to write a page of flaws? Oh dear. Time to step back. On a similar note, enough Skyrim whinging, this horse is dead, either you like it, or go find something in the pile of endless 'things to do in life' to occupy your mind with instead. Nothing is perfect. Ever. Nothing. Something better will always come along but nothing will be perfect. So why be contrived little nagger about it. Some people 'like that sort of thing'. A game that caters perfectly to your tastes must exist somewhere so search harder instead of knit rifling through a popular title. If it doesn't, send more chocolates and roses to your developer of choice. | |
I don't know, I think New Vegas handled their Civil War plot line a little better. There were two sides, but four outcomes. Sure, the Legion was almost comically evil on the outside, but they seemed to have an end goal that was more than "Let's kill the NCR". It seems like to me that they wanted to make the Stormcloaks and Imperials so ambiguous and "technically not the bad guys" that they're both just uninteresting. Something else I like is how the Legion and NCR have more differences beyond just wearing different armor. Their very manner of speaking is different, and the way they talk to you is different than the other side. Not to mention that every faction tends to favor different weapons. The Powder Gangers will focus on things like small arms fire and explosives, later on they'll start getting Plasma weapons. The Legion Assassin Squads will usually have a guy with a VERY strong melee, usually a Ripper or Super Sledge, backed up with a couple guys with higher caliber submachine guns and maybe a guy with explosives. NCR Bounty Squads will favor more traditional "military" looking weapons like Sniper Rifles and Assault Carbines as well as Hunting Revolvers. Just makes your engagements more interesting when you have to do more than backpeddle to win a fight. That's just me though. Just seems like when a game totes a universe with wildly varying races, there would be more variety in your fights with them. | |
Niche feature... I'm guessing you're not overly familiar with the ME franchise. The SINGLE most common criticism leveled against ME3 - specifically at its ending, but in general as well - was that there was not enough consequence for your actions. And believe me, there was more consequence for my actions in ME3 than there was in Skyrim. Entire races were wiped out right in front of my eyes simply because over the course of the last two games I failed to take every opportunity to make them see reason. All characters from those races died. Other characters talked about this event. Suffice to say, it was a big deal. And people - not just me - were still dissatisfied with how much consequence there was. So saying that it's a niche feature, implying that there's no market for something like this, is more than a little out of touch with what's going on in gaming, I think.
This is a more reasonable rebuttal, I think. But even so I have to ask you: what do you see Skyrim-like games looking like 10 years from now? 20 years? How are they different? Just better graphics, bigger towns to explore, or are there other things going on as well? I find it very hard to believe that the game worlds are going to remain at the same level of (non-existent) depth. So you might say that all I'm doing is trying to speed up the inevitable. Because I really, really, really want to play Skyrim 5.
As long as it's fun. Exciting. Interesting. Thought-provoking. Whatever. Then, absolutely! If the game developers can find a way to make going to sleep and worrying about locks getting picked fun, why in the world would any of this stuff be a bad thing? And if you can think of a reason why a world with more meaningful interactions with and amongst NPCs might be a bad thing, I'll eagerly hear you out. | |
All things considered, the Skyrim engine is new and shiny. Way better than the Oblivion engine. I'm not saying I want that god awful abortion of a level up system Skyrim has, just the shiny new engine and the possibility of dual wielding in my Fallout game.
Well, if I've got a game with Orcs and Elves, I want it to be fun. But unfortunately, the "fantasy" genre has become stagnant with tropes that seem to pop up in every "fantasy" game. Forced racism to make us sympathize with "non-human" races, the very idea of orcs, and every game being seemingly set in medieval Europe, ect. I understand that TES is supposed to have this deep interesting Lore, but you just don't seem to see it. You just read about it and hear about it, so it PLAYS like just another standard fantasy game. | |
I definitely know what you mean. I make sure everyone creates their own race and that there is no mention of "standard" classes or races in any game I play. I'm so sick of elves being fair skinned pricks or little people in forests, dwarves being miners and humans being some jack-of-all-trades, master of none. Drop them all from our fantasy vocabularies, I say. | |
My main problem with Skyrim, as with every Bethesda game, is that the land just feels dead. I have trouble getting immersed into that world, and I find most of my enjoyment coming from killing dudes, sure that's fun but it doesn't really draw me into the world. I want to venture into the city and not have people notice me and stop in their tracks to spout their inane dribble that I've probably already heard from another guy with the exact same voice. I want to believe that these people are actually people instead of bits of data doing what their programming tells them to, and sometimes failing at that and glitching out. Basically, in Bethesda games I'm very aware that I'm playing a game instead of exploring a living breathing world, and interacting with its citizens, and that's not even getting into the glitches. Oddly enough I find myself more immersed when the people stand ram-rod still, don't talk to me and just wait for me to walk by them so they can give me a quest. But, still a fun game, still the best Bethesda game I've played, and the problems I have with it were more severe in previous games (Fallout 3, Oblivion). So, I guess it means that they're getting continually better. | |
While they were still pretty generic, I really liked the way Dragon Age: Origins handled Dwarves. They weren't just "short people who live underground that mine", but they have a Caste system and were somewhat immune to Magic because of their handling Lyrium. It was different enough to make them interesting. Their Elves were still "tree people" but they were handled in a way that was refreshing since the Dalish, who were the elves that proudly lived in the forests and shunned the more "civilized" world, hated the "City" elves, who were lucky to be even treated as second class citizens most of the time. There was a little more dynamic to the relationship there beyond just "HUMANS HATE ELVES". | |
Wouldn't you rather have something that actually provided some good combat, FFS ? Fuck new and shiny. Gameplay over graphics, remember ? | |
Well, Oblivion didn't have particularly engaging combat either, but they made Fallout 3 and New Vegas out of it. I'd say they could make a Fallout game out of Skyrim fairly easily. I've actually heard a couple rumours that people have found Fallout data in Skyrim, so if that's true, it means that the engine could be easily adapted. | |
I could get into this, go on about the problems I had with skyrim, but I think I'll just go play Dark Souls. | |
The two situations are different. The original situation you gave is consequences for seeing condequences on a far smaller scale. For the Mass Effect example you have consequences for your decisions with the buildup of 3 games. And yes I can agree that was a total failure of closure because you didn't see these consequences almost at all. That being said, that is very different to being able to see the consequences of killing a group of people, or even sometimes of just completing one quest. You might say that there wasn't as greater set of consequences for some missions or for the story missions in Skyrim, but its simply not practical in a game of that scale. The difference is because in Mass Effect, the story IS the game so seeing the consequences of your actions is key. In Skyrim, planning out these elaborate consequences for the major decisions you can make becomes incredibly convoluted, because a lot of the time, players might not even experience that content.
My last point basically leads into this. They will become what you want. Thats not a maybe or an "if" its a will. Skyrim has made great steps into the breadth of content, there are some really cool quests and really in depth storytelling for something as simple as a cave full of bandits. There are essentially two ways games like Skyrim can develop. Either by expanding on the "standard" amount of content and story telling, focusing on character depth and plot etc, or expand on content to give a huge amount for players to do. Mass Effect does the first option while Skyrim does the second. In the future what will happen is games will be able to do both, taking a huge volume of content but being able to develop it to the level that you want. Right now though its mostly on or the other or a mixture. So in short, be patient :) | |
Yea, and Fallout 3 and Vegas' combat sucked too. Vegas was good DESPITE the engine. I'd rather have the Fallout 1/2 engine, if it was either or. | |
so what if most of the characters in skyrim are brainless mountain hicks with nothing interesting going on in their lives? to me that makes it more realistic than most games, take mass effect 3 for example, where commander shepard just happens to run into every important citizen from every species in the same 5 recurring rooms of a citadel of billions and just happens to turn up every important reaper fighting artifact in the galaxy. | |
Ahem, Both Dark and Demon souls would like to have a word with you alone, and in private. Dont mind the 50 lb axe and Club respectively being wielded by each. Surely thats just there for ornamental purposes. A: You are not immortal, your dead. So yeah, not "every" RPG. Most? yes, all? Nope. So yes. Go play Souls, either one. Then you really wont care that much about skyrim any more because the only failing the souls games has is being damn near devoid of a story, and after playing it long, you wont care what level of story Bethesda has to offer because youll be content with anything. | |
Unfortunately, the era of the "Tactical, Turn-Based, Isometric adventure RPG" has long passed. While I loved Fallout 1 and 2, I adore the Combat in Fallout 3 and New Vegas. It's not perfect, but it works with the new genre the series has become. I'd say the way they made the different factions in New Vegas behave differently when you fight them made the combat somewhat tactical again. You have to consider WHO you're fighting before you start shooting. The Legion begaves differently than the NCR, both are different than the Khans and Fiends, and they're all different than the Brotherhood or Boomers. They all favor different weapons and have armor of varying qualities. I loved having to consider my tactics when a Legion Assassin Squad would show up because I had just been fighting Cazadores, and my tactics of "PUNCH THE FUCK OUT OF THEM!!" doesn't always work against a squad who have set up with a Super Sledge, a Grenade Rifle, and a couple 12.7 SMGs.
All things considered, Shepard is THE kind of person that would run into all the most important people in the Citadel because he's pretty goddamn important. In ME1, he's the first Human Spectre and in charge of tracking down Space Hitler. In ME2, he's just come back from the dead and is trying to unravel the mystery of what's happening to all the colonies that are disappearing, all while working for a group that's considered terrorists. In ME3, he's THE go to person on Reaper knowledge. He's pretty much THE most important person in the galaxy during that time. | |
Why do people want to kill kids so badly? I don't understand the appeal... maybe I'm not a psychopath or even a sociopath... Explain this to me OP, cause I don't get it. | |
These games would be so good if they had freedom AND interesting characters and quests. Right now it's like an action adventure. A hack n' slash hiking simulator. | |
I don't think it's the desire to kill kids exactly, but more about there being NPCs that are inexplicably immortal. I personally don't care, because I'm not the kind of person who goes into murder spasms and kills a town full of people, even in games I actually like. The argument eventually just became the "I want kids to be killable" against the "You're just psychopaths" sides of the argument. | |
There are very few people who want to "openly" kill kids (but they just do it for the perverted lolz), but most just find that its 'bad game logic' that when a dragon is toasting and killing everybody else, a kid can just randomly run around on fire and not die. I've seen in once instance, a giant being lead into town, kill all the guards, men and women in a single hit, but launch a kid into next Tuesday but the kid just gets up and continues to run around unfazed. | |
It would be great if we didn't need to post a new thread about this every time someone realises it. Skyrim is shallow. It sold well because it looked shiny and had good marketing. | |
Said it before and I will say it again; theres two parts to a game. The technical bit (engine, etc) and the actual GAME part. Modders beat Bethesda at the game part every time. So yes, they do make better games. Do they make better engines? Could they make better engines? Probably not. But when it comes to gameplay, story, and the likes? They make better games every time. So chill the fuck out. No one ever claimed SureAI built a Cryengine 4. | |
Hmm, I just finished playing Batman Arkham Asylum and Arkham City over the last 2-3 weeks, back to back. I have to say that I really liked the characterisation of the Joker, particularly when he's calling Batman and leaving messages on his 'answering machine' - obviously there's plenty of existing material to draw upon, but the the little details that flesh him out, and the classic humour, really blow away any characterisation done by Bethesda. Now that the Skyrim engine is looking so nice, I hope that they can now put a lot of work into developing more compelling characters, stories and get decent acting - voice and otherwise. They seem to be taking that more seriously over time, but I think they could learn a lot from the Batman games and GTA IV to start with, and look further afield at TV and stage acting/stories and develop a level of narrative sophistication, like Rockstar appears to be aspiring to. | |
Wow, thanks for not spoiling the main storyline, I mean it's not like it would be really fucking annoying or anything. | |
I assume you're not forgetting the part where they make money with game. Being able to work freely without deadlines, the business side of making a game and having to make/improve/fix the technical part means modders have much more time to make what they want to make. I'm just thankful mods have something that allows them to exist. | |
Because that isn't cool, or smart, that's just stupid. I can understand needing a silver weapon to like fight ghosts, or do extra damage against shit like werewolves, but needing an entire extra blade for the sole reason of "we made it that a sharp blade can't do anywhere near as much damage as an equally sharp blade because its not made out of a special "anti-monster" material is just dumb. Its a fucking sword, like I wouldn't care if one did slightly more damage to monsters then the other, but NEEDING a 2nd sword just to fight monsters is fucking dumb, and arbitrary. It just exists to create FALSE complexity by imposing an BS and unreasonably stupid limit on the player.
Dude its been 6 months, get over it. Its like getting pissed if someone says Snape killed dumbledor.
I can't stand dice-roll and turn-based things mostly because those games lack urgency during combat. I mean I get were people say Skyrim lacks urgency in its MQ, because it does, but really turn-based games are the single least urgent form of combat ever, you can sit there for 4 days in the middle of a fight and never die because you haven't taken your turn, thus the enemies cant do anything. Yeah it gives you time to "plan shit out" but if your original plan doesn't work there's no form of negative consequence for that because you can just sit there for infinity planning a better next move. In Skyrim if you fuck up, your fucking death because you just aggored like 6 Dragur death-overlords who now bum-rushed you and are attacking you at once, you actually have to face the consequences of fucking up instead of getting a infinite time ti sit around and plan. Furthermore you cant be a jack-of-all-trades in Skyrim, without perks in a skill tree yeah you may have it at 100 but that doesn't mean much of anything.
I know he is Sheo, but other people dont. People see him as the Sheo that always has been, and have forgotten his past.
.............. You do get yelled at for wearing imperial armor in a stormcloack camp and vise-versa | |
Of course modders have more time and freedom. Does it matter? Not really. I'm just looking at two finished products: Skyrim and Nehrim, and saying which one is better. IMO of course. Which one had more time in development or money behind it is irrelevant, its the game that matters. | |
Because the limitations that the respective content makers have to work under don't matter, nor should they be taken into consideration when reviewing each maker's final product ? I am not really sure if you actually believe what you just said or not. | |
I think the internal logic of the series says that the Silver Sword is supposed to be used against Monsters because the metal itself is comparably delicate to a Steel Sword, so the "magical" nature of the metal being much more useful against monsters where the Steel Sword, which is much stronger, is more utility to Humans and non-magical creatures. Admittedly, I don't know anything about the series itself to back that up, it's just my personal speculation and observations on the series seemingly trying to inject some semblance of "pseudo-science" along side the magic of the world. | |
Didn't Hannibal Lecter once explain that the biggest thing that separates serial killers from everyone else is their imagination? Point is, he's right. Here's a rule of thumb for "evil" character design: give me the option to escalate things. Ever notice how all RPGs have an "intimidate" function, but it could very easily be relabeled "bluff" because you're forbidden from following through on your threats? Here's a thought: intimidate should be followed by "vicious beating", and then "dagger to the throat". And as for the elaborate torture scenarios described above? You don't *NEED* to be Ramsay Bolton, but when it comes to characters who've given me personal cause to be pissed off? The one's who've kidnapped me, harmed my loved ones, that kinda thing? Give me the chance to savor the moment. I don't need to parade my enemies down the town square, but I'd *love* an opportunity to hear them beg a little after I've left them in a broken heap on the floor. Also the "money shot" in scenes like that are a perfect opportunity to include some gore in the game. When I'm upset with someone, I don't mind watching a blade pass through their esophagus slowly. Point of fact I kind of enjoy it. Oh, and the "WON'T YOU PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?" people: I wanna be able to kill the kids in Skyrim because the kids in Skyrim are universally spoiled/whiny brats who seem hell bent on engendering my ill will- and are fully capable of fucking me over by witnessing my crimes, yet can't be silenced. Ever. I have to listen to this line: "Oh look, another wanderer here to lick my father's boots. Good job." Every. Fucking. Time. I wanna visit Whiterun. Every time. And if it's not the prick kid calling me a lickspittle, it's the dumbass kid telling me how he likes to practice with his fists, or the brat kid telling me to go cook her dinner. I already don't much care for kids. They're brainless proto-humans who're convinced that because their teachers/parents are nice enough not to beat them that they're untouchable and infallible. The kids in Skyrim are without exception irritating caricatures of the very worst kinds of children. And the game's mechanics when it comes to crime/violence are set up to allow them to fuck me over (IE: they're the witnesses that're impossible to get rid of). And they all have the same voices. Which remind me of a: stoned pre pubescent Macaulay Culkin and a Prom Queen who's had her toe stepped on by a horse respectively. | |
No, they should not. Do you remember Gothic 3? It was so buggy, it was literally not playable. 50% of players could not even get the game to launch. Why was it so buggy? Because the studio working on it were rushed to hell and back and went through some financial problems. So, does that excuse the bugginess of Gothic 3? Of course not. When reviewing a final product, the quality of the product matters, not what went on in development. | |
The Elder Scrolls became really shallow from Oblivion onward. Daggerfall had more characterization in the form of immutable 2-D sprites that tapped their foot for all eternity and communicated through yellow on grey text. I was genuinely interested in what was going on. I really hope the graphics race ends soon, though the introduction of new consoles may make that no more than a dream. | |
Considering that the quality of the final product, and what happened in development, are intrinsically related, yes it should be taken into account. did I EVER say that having a crappy development cycle gives a 100% write-off for its problems? no. | |
| Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT | |
If your D&D games are "standard," you're playing with a boring DM, lol. There should never be anything mundane or default about fantasy--the very word means the opposite everything the aforementioned stand for.