Skyrim is highly overrated. It's same old same old.

No game's world this gen comes close to how alive and beautiful Skyrim's world is. Its a refreshing change from a gen that has consisted of a glut of sequels pumped out every year. The game deserves all the praise and Game Of The Year awards it has received

/thread

reach3

Red Dead Redemption was as alive and immersive as Skyrims. Skyrim is great but not as amazing as RDR's was imo at the time.

I've been playing Skyrim for a couple of weeks. And almost right from the start it felt like the same old same old I got from Fallout 3 and Oblivion. Don't get me wrong. Skyrim is a good game but not the glory train and masterpiece that people claim it to be. One problem that mainly annoys me and this more of my own opinon is that there is TOO MUCH to do in the game which a lot of times leaves sitting there thinking and deciding what I should do next. The same old same old feel that we get from skyrim is that we start off the game as a character who's little about themselves and their past we are sorta like the chosen one to acomplish this great quest and do all sorts of things. I didn't feel that compelled as I did in Oblivion and even Fallout 3. I know I cant be the only one who thinks this. Anyone here agree? Or disagree?

ToastRider11

Proof of trolldom.

Proof of trolldom.

Johnny_Rock

Start out as a prisoner and only managed to escape because some s**t went down. Isn't that how every TES starts?

[QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]

Proof of trolldom.

ChubbyGuy40

Start out as a prisoner and only managed to escape because some s**t went down. Isn't that how every TES starts?

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]

Proof of trolldom.

gamebreakerz__

Start out as a prisoner and only managed to escape because some s**t went down. Isn't that how every TES starts?

And the reason they start out that way is to not give you any backstory whatsoever because Bethesda wants you to create your OWN backstory/story. Call it whatever you will, sloppy writing, lazy people, and what not but I kind of like it. Gives me a sense of putting me into the role of my character which is the basic idea behind all RPGs...welll...it's supposed to be.

[QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Skyrim is by no means the same old, same old. There were PLENTY of changes and improvements from Oblivion (of course, it would be kinda difficult to not improve greatly from Oblivion).

I may not like it, but I wouldnt consider it overrated. After all, I can see why people like it.

Edit: In my definition Skyrim is NOT a Sandbox. Open world perhaps, but the world is too static and the player's influence in this world is too limited. There are scripted quests which can change the world somewhat (the civil war), but you can not interact with the world the devs might not have thought of.

skrat_01

Well it is definately true, it certainly is more reactive than GTA and Saints Row (although I dont call them sandboxes either). Skyrim's gameplay is not emergent at all, and nor do you have an affect on the world, in ways the devs did not intend you to have.

But outside of a few quests, what affect do you have on the world?

No game's world this gen comes close to how alive and beautiful Skyrim's world is. Its a refreshing change from a gen that has consisted of a glut of sequels pumped out every year. The game deserves all the praise and Game Of The Year awards it has received

/thread

reach3

I completly agree with this guy. There are dozens of on rail shooters every year, There are one open world RPG every 3 years and only Bethesda knows who to make a good one.

[QUOTE="gamebreakerz__"][QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

Start out as a prisoner and only managed to escape because some s**t went down. Isn't that how every TES starts?

Goyoshi12

And the reason they start out that way is to not give you any backstory whatsoever because Bethesda wants you to create your OWN backstory/story. Call it whatever you will, sloppy writing, lazy people, and what not but I kind of like it. Gives me a sense of putting me into the role of my character which is the basic idea behind all RPGs...welll...it's supposed to be.

I bet if this game wasn't as popular as it is, no **** would have been given to its review score here.

I'm normally not a fan of traveling in games (waste of time!) but in Skyrim traveling always has you running into new caves, new homes, new places to explore. It's almost like the quest is a trick to get you to open and explore all the nooks and crannies the game world has to offer.Bread_or_Decide

I tried that for a while...but later on the in the game, every road you take will feature the same dragon fight five times. Boring!

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Skyrim is by no means the same old, same old. There were PLENTY of changes and improvements from Oblivion (of course, it would be kinda difficult to not improve greatly from Oblivion).

I may not like it, but I wouldnt consider it overrated. After all, I can see why people like it.

Edit: In my definition Skyrim is NOT a Sandbox. Open world perhaps, but the world is too static and the player's influence in this world is too limited. There are scripted quests which can change the world somewhat (the civil war), but you can not interact with the world the devs might not have thought of.

Maroxad

Well it is definately true, it certainly is more reactive than GTA and Saints Row (although I dont call them sandboxes either). Skyrim's gameplay is not emergent at all, and nor do you have an affect on the world, in ways the devs did not intend you to have.

But outside of a few quests, what affect do you have on the world?

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"] I'm normally not a fan of traveling in games (waste of time!) but in Skyrim traveling always has you running into new caves, new homes, new places to explore. It's almost like the quest is a trick to get you to open and explore all the nooks and crannies the game world has to offer.Planeforger

I tried that for a while...but later on the in the game, every road you take will feature the same dragon fight five times. Boring!

Lol, that reminds me of that time, when I had to escort NPCs across half the map, killed like 9 dragons during my trip.

I really wish they didnt make dragons unlimited and instead had 12 dragons or so roaming the land, each fight unique, provides powerful rewards and has an effect on the world. Make fighting dragons more meaningful than that fight I had with a random Rattata in pokemon in Route 1.

[QUOTE="Maroxad"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"] It's a sandbox, and a far more reactive one then the likes of Saints Row and GTA to be honest. It's not an enormously reactive one though, that's very true, but honestly - not many games are.Bread_or_Decide

Well it is definately true, it certainly is more reactive than GTA and Saints Row (although I dont call them sandboxes either). Skyrim's gameplay is not emergent at all, and nor do you have an affect on the world, in ways the devs did not intend you to have.

But outside of a few quests, what affect do you have on the world?

You really think GTA and Saints Row are sandboxes? No they are open world games. Your freedom is very limited actually you can go anywhere you want, but you cannot really do that much in any of them outside of rampages and missions.

Edit: GTA, SR and Skyrim are open world games.

I think people love to confuse "alive" with "stuff do to". Skyrim has a tonne of quests, but the place never feels quite alive. too often NPC's are found glitching in some manner, repeating the same lines over and over. PErsonally I think GTAIV did a living world much better (better than any other game). While I agree the LORE in the game is amazing I think as far as story telling goes it's absolutly abysmal which detracts heavily from the "life" of the game. To address the TC - I think Skyrim takes what made Oblivion good and expanded and refined it. Early on when it "feels" like Oblivion it's passable because it's a nicely refined version of that, but about 80 hours in - for me at least - when I was rounding up major quest lines and doing less exploring and more questing it became a grind and Oblivion's same style of gameplay (get quest, fast travel here, clear cave, fast travel back, etc) snuck in very obviously and it became less enjoyable imo. But Skyrim was still a good game (for the scenery and finishing moves at the very very least).

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"] I'm normally not a fan of traveling in games (waste of time!) but in Skyrim traveling always has you running into new caves, new homes, new places to explore. It's almost like the quest is a trick to get you to open and explore all the nooks and crannies the game world has to offer.Planeforger

I tried that for a while...but later on the in the game, every road you take will feature the same dragon fight five times. Boring!

Yeah, the dragon fights are getting really annoying and they can screw up your quests as well. I'm actually considering downlolading a mod that outright removes them from the game as soon as one comes out.

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"][QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Well it is definately true, it certainly is more reactive than GTA and Saints Row (although I dont call them sandboxes either). Skyrim's gameplay is not emergent at all, and nor do you have an affect on the world, in ways the devs did not intend you to have.

But outside of a few quests, what affect do you have on the world?

Maroxad

You really think GTA and Saints Row are sandboxes? No they are open world games. Your freedom is very limited actually you can go anywhere you want, but you cannot really do that much in any of them outside of rampages and missions.

Edit: GTA, SR and Skyrim are open world games.

I think it's a little overrated, I don't thin it's the "the best game ever" but it is one of the best IMO, but not THE best. I love the game but the guilds were way too short, and the random quests get repitive after awhile and boring. But I don't have any main gripes with the game, there's alot of stuff to do.

I used to be a gamer with poor tastes just like you, but then I installed Skyrim on my PC.

If it's good enough to keep my interest for hundreds of hours then it's good enough. I don't care what it's rated. It has it's flaws just like any other game.

I wish i could fall in love with a game just because it has a big open world with lots of sidequests, but Skyrim/fallout/ and the other open world WRPG clones just do nothing for me.

I didn't like Skyrim too much. The world is the biggest pull factor in Bethesda RPG's and to me it had no sense of intrigue. Morrowind will always be the best Elder Scrolls World

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="reach3"]

No game's world this gen comes close to how alive and beautiful Skyrim's world is. Its a refreshing change from a gen that has consisted of a glut of sequels pumped out every year. The game deserves all the praise and Game Of The Year awards it has received

/thread

savagetwinkie

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Skyrim is by no means the same old, same old. There were PLENTY of changes and improvements from Oblivion (of course, it would be kinda difficult to not improve greatly from Oblivion).

I may not like it, but I wouldnt consider it overrated. After all, I can see why people like it.

Edit: In my definition Skyrim is NOT a Sandbox. Open world perhaps, but the world is too static and the player's influence in this world is too limited. There are scripted quests which can change the world somewhat (the civil war), but you can not interact with the world the devs might not have thought of.

Maroxad

Well it is definately true, it certainly is more reactive than GTA and Saints Row (although I dont call them sandboxes either). Skyrim's gameplay is not emergent at all, and nor do you have an affect on the world, in ways the devs did not intend you to have.

But outside of a few quests, what affect do you have on the world?

I don't think it was overrated. The only overration of the game is based on the community and that's it, really. I never heard Todd or anyone at Bethesda or Zeinmax claim this would be the greatest game ever. We all just looked at their promises and made assumptions and thus, overrated.

So in marketing sense, Skyrim delievered what it said it would deliever which is fine. However, in community sense and what they THOUGHT would be brought to the table and their over exageration on some promises, yes, it is very much overrated.

My initial impressions of it were outstanding. I put it down around the 10 hour mark though after hearing the PS3 version slowly becomes broken. I was hoping for a fix before delving back in but it doesn't look like that's happening.Master_ShakeXXX

Didn't they fix that with patch 1.03? :?

[QUOTE="Maroxad"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"] It's a sandbox, and a far more reactive one then the likes of Saints Row and GTA to be honest. It's not an enormously reactive one though, that's very true, but honestly - not many games are.skrat_01

Well it is definately true, it certainly is more reactive than GTA and Saints Row (although I dont call them sandboxes either). Skyrim's gameplay is not emergent at all, and nor do you have an affect on the world, in ways the devs did not intend you to have.

But outside of a few quests, what affect do you have on the world?

Skyrim certainly is more sandboxy than most games posing as sandboxes these days. Despite that I dont think they are strong enough for me to classify it as a sandbox. I dont know about you, but I feel people throw around the term sandbox too much these days.

But nevermind, I can see why people call it a sandbox. Though, it certainly aint no Aurora or Dwarf Fortress.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Maroxad"]

Well it is definately true, it certainly is more reactive than GTA and Saints Row (although I dont call them sandboxes either). Skyrim's gameplay is not emergent at all, and nor do you have an affect on the world, in ways the devs did not intend you to have.

But outside of a few quests, what affect do you have on the world?

Maroxad

Skyrim certainly is more sandboxy than most games posing as sandboxes these days. Despite that I dont think they are strong enough for me to classify it as a sandbox. I dont know about you, but I feel people throw around the term sandbox too much these days.

But nevermind, I can see why people call it a sandbox. Though, it certainly aint no Aurora or Dwarf Fortress.

[QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]

Proof of trolldom.

Start out as a prisoner and only managed to escape because some s**t went down. Isn't that how every TES starts?