Skyrim - should I play it?

[menage]

Originally Posted by Panthera

Even running backwards swinging your axe, you have to watch your health.

I'm not saying it couldn't be a lot better. I'm just saying that turning it into an action game isn't the solution.

I'm not saying it should be an action game. Just better combat that would actually work in 3rd person. I don't believe in fps melee that much.

Dragons Dogma, Dark Souls, etc. are still rpg's in my book. Only with better fighting

[JayK47]

Hell, I enjoyed the combat is Morrowind probably more than Oblivion and Skyrim. My most memorable combat moments in an Elders Scroll game are from Morrowind. Morrowind let you eventually have a really powerful character and didn't level enemies to match you. So there where caves where I would one hit the weaker dudes plowing my way to the main guy. Reminded me of Madmartigan from Willow. And the lucky arrow that hit some running guy.

So yeah, this thread reminded me of why I am still pissed at Skyrim. A game that by all accounts was my most highly anticipated game of 2011 and in the end I pretty much hated the game and Bethesda as well. Bethesda seems to be hit or miss for me. When they are releasing a new game I think of games like Morrowind and Fallout 3. Games that had bugs, but bugs I could live with. Just save frequently and do a reload when you get hung up on something.

Skyrim went well beyond bugs and could be classified easily as a lemon that demanded a recall. At release it was broken. Ask any PS3 gamer (No DLC for PS3. Really?). The more you played it the worse it got. Instead of the usual random crashes, Skyrim crashes were getting closer and closer together. As if set to a timer, each crash was more and more predictable. So in order to play, I needed to launch an external executable just to play it (thanks PC mod community). I have never had to do that in all my years as a PC gamer. The menu is the worst menu no matter what system you are playing on. Quest bugs were so bad no amount of saving and reloading could fix them. The bugs literally started to stack on top of one another. Previous Bethesda game bugs seemed to damn near reset and disappear or are easily fixed by a save reload. Not in Skyrim. The bugs ruined major boss battles (Quest dragon suddenly gets sucked up into space. I guess he decided it was time to leave). Calling Skyrim buggy is being way to generous. It was broken and needed months of patching to get to buggy. It was luck to get through it without any issues.

I'm not sure if I can go back to it later because it will bring back bad memories. It really left a bad taste in my mouth. And because of the size of the problems with the game it took a long while for patches to fix most issues. Games like Dead Island had a buggy release and within days was up and running. No hard feelings there. I'm sure by now Skyrim is now buggy rather than broken and with a good sale could be considered worth buying. Timing is everything. I paid full price for broken and it completely ruined my experience with the game. Issues that I can't just overlook. It is one of the few games I honestly wanted my money back on. I really wish I could get refunds for broken ass games. Which is why lately I have been waiting for a sale no matter what game and no matter what developer. Gaming is so much better when the price is right and the game patched. It is just too risky these days paying $60 or more for a new game.

[TheKeck]

Man I loved Skyrim.

[National Kato]

Originally Posted by JayK47

Skyrim went well beyond bugs and could be classified easily as a lemon that demanded a recall. At release it was broken.

I must have golden magic hardware. I've owned the 360, PS3, and PC versions and only the PS3 had issues with lag as you got past about 60 hours of play - that is, when save files became huge. It's a well documented problem with the PS3 hardware, but I've had no bugs on 360 or PC from release to current day. None.

YMMV.

[Blue]

I'm with Keck.

[JayK47]

Man I wish I loved Skyrim too. I really do.

[Karak]

Originally Posted by menage

I'm not saying it should be an action game. Just better combat that would actually work in 3rd person. I don't believe in fps melee that much.

Dragons Dogma, Dark Souls, etc. are still rpg's in my book. Only with better fighting

Its hard to compare Skyrim to DD for me for some reason. DD is this strange...weird world that really is sort of ugly but pretty at times, and has some weird shit that happens that makes no sense but you bite off that bit and spit it out and enjoy the rest.

Skyrim is this mystical journey that has some weird technical problems that makes you wonder if a giant exclamation point will show up randomly in front of you, but you sort of ignore that because OH LOOK STAIRS!

Crazy but I have a hard time coming to a comparison between them that doesn't involve simple stuff like you stab things in both of them.

[Dorkandproudofit]

If you hate bugs and stuff, buy the PC version. As a matter of fact, I have no idea why anyone would ever buy a console version of a mod-centric game series in the first place.

Sure, on its own, Skyrim is average, and that's not including the bugs. But the mods not only fix every bug, not only do they add incredible things to the game, some of them change the gameplay in amazing ways; if the combat isn't your thing, odds are there's a mod for that.

[muddi900]

Originally Posted by Panthera

I'm still kind of baffled that people expect action game combat in an RPG.

Because only Action Game combat can be fun, right?

Edit:
Read your later posts. Mostly agree.

[Wraith]

I played some Morrowind (PC), but never got terribly far with it. I mostly just liked the novelty of exploring a big 3D environment, taking screenshots, stealing things, enchanting weapons, etc. Hated those cliff racers.

I tried getting into Oblivion (360) several times, but just couldn't. Part of it was that either I sucked at combat, or it was too difficult for me at the wrong times. And some of it was the somewhat generic-feeling fantasy setting. (I know Elder Scrolls has its own lore and everything, but sometimes you just get sick of Tolkien-esque fantasy settings, characters with names you'll never remember, etc.) Any time I went in that first Oblivion gate, I knew I was in for a bad time.

I read about the "leveling problem," where if you don't level skills appropriately, then the enemies' auto-leveling will eventually out-level your ability to fight them. Sounds like it's punishing players who want to explore all the different things you can do in the game.

I liked what I played of Fallout 3 (PC), having never played any of the Fallout series before. I haven't played it in a while, but plan to go back to it eventually.

I didn't jump on Skyrim (360) right at launch, in part because of Oblivion, but it does pretty much everything right. It's a world that I want to keep exploring, because there's just so much to see, and it rarely feels like a chore. Yes, there are some bugs, but nothing game breaking for me so far. It's just part of making game of this size and complexity.

I think I'll try the DLC the next time I get back to the game.

[Widgetcraft]

Originally Posted by Panthera

RPG combat is about resource management and decision making. What you bring to the fight should be very important.

That's one way to do it. The other way to do it is to have it depend on fast-paced twitch combat. There is no law saying that one is better than the other. I hate that roleplaying has become tied so closely to stats and numbers.

[Karak]

Originally Posted by Wraith

I didn't jump on Skyrim (360) right at launch, in part because of Oblivion, but it does pretty much everything right. It's a world that I want to keep exploring, because there's just so much to see, and it rarely feels like a chore. Yes, there are some bugs, but nothing game breaking for me so far. It's just part of making game of this size and complexity.

I think I'll try the DLC the next time I get back to the game.

This is funny it got me to thinking. Morrowind felt like an old crunchy RPG to me. Oblivion like an action RPG and Skyrim like a normal RPG. Like the perfect middle ground. I don't know what it was about Skyrim but not since Morrowind has exploration offered such tangible memorable moments and memories. Everyone remembers the stair climb probably. Because it was made to be that way. But Skryim was full of moments of discovery that felt like you could see something unique and new every single second. Really flawless in its layout of areas.

[Panthera]

Originally Posted by Widgetcraft

That's one way to do it. The other way to do it is to have it depend on fast-paced twitch combat. There is no law saying that one is better than the other. I hate that roleplaying has become tied so closely to stats and numbers.

Roleplaying games always have been. Depending on twitch skill devalues the purpose of adventuring and character advancement. I have nothing against action games, and even hybrid games can be fun, but it just doesn't fit the elder scrolls.

[menage]

Originally Posted by Panthera

Roleplaying games always have been. Depending on twitch skill devalues the purpose of adventuring and character advancement. I have nothing against action games, and even hybrid games can be fun, but it just doesn't fit the elder scrolls.

See that's just not true to me. If my guy is a fierce knight I expect him to actually rain down hell in reality as well, by my doing. It isn't twitch gaming as you call it, having real control just doesn't make something twitch all of sudden. CoD is twitch. Dragons Dogma isn't. I'm roleplaying the guy, it has to believable. Not wave a sword true midair and have +10 appear in front of me just because the hit box is 4 miles wide.

What is wrong with decent combat if you got the stats to back it up? That really has to do with old school limitations and the origin of dice rolling imaginary table top.

Make the whole thing turn based then. Cause that's how that stuff works. Not pressing x to hit something in realtime with those stupid ruiles attached. It doesn't work for me. Like shooting something from 1 meter away in Mass Effect and actually missing something. It's just dumb.

[muddi900]

Yeah, a lot of those hits in action games are calculated by random number, like dice rolling. The only difference is that it's faster.

[Panthera]

Originally Posted by menage

See that's just not true to me. If my guy is a fierce knight I expect him to actually rain down hell in reality as well, by my doing. It isn't twitch gaming as you call it, having real control just doesn't make something twitch all of sudden. CoD is twitch. Dragons Dogma isn't. I'm roleplaying the guy, it has to believable. Not wave a sword true midair and have +10 appear in front of me just because the hit box is 4 miles wide.

What is wrong with decent combat if you got the stats to back it up? That really has to do with old school limitations and the origin of dice rolling imaginary table top.

Make the whole thing turn based then. Cause that's how that stuff works. Not pressing x to hit something in realtime with those stupid ruiles attached. It doesn't work for me. Like shooting something from 1 meter away in Mass Effect and actually missing something. It's just dumb.

Hey, you're totally allowed to dislike it. Not everybody has to like everything. That doesn't make you any less wrong, though.

[MagGnome]

Originally Posted by Gwinny

Also the game world in Skyrim, unlike Oblivion or Fallout, is so beautiful that sometimes I get a little choked up. Snow blowing off of desolate peaks, coming out of a cave into the sunlight and a snow shower almost-obscuring Dragonsreach on the horizon, gorgeous waterfalls... If just seeing what's around the next beautifully-rendered river bend compels you at all, you might enjoy Skryim a little more than predecessors?

Agreed. Skyrim is one of the most beautiful games I've ever played. The world is breath-taking. It helps that I really love mountains.

I need to get back to this game. I was super excited when it came out, and put in 25-30 hours in the first couple of weeks, which is quite a bit for me given that school and socializing take up so much of my time. I took a break from the game to focus on finals last fall, then I went out of town for over a week...then the next semester started...and I never got back to the game. I tried to pick it up again a couple of months ago, but I wasn't sure what my character was up to. I'm in a town in the Northeastern part of the map, and I was on my way to do something...but I can't remember what. I suppose it doesn't matter, but I have a hard time starting up a save after a long absence, yet I don't want to start over either*. I should just dive in and wander around or do some of the quests in my logbook.

Hey, maybe I'll do that today!



*This exact scenario has occurred many times and kept me from finishing several great games. Metroid Prime comes to mind as one example. Starting up a game after some time away from it can be difficult, but starting over always seems like a chore.

[MagGnome]

Originally Posted by Karak

We also had a huge playthrough and pic forum with some amazing places and people photographed so you can see some of the world.
http://www.colonyofgamers.com/cogfor...ghlight=skyrim

This thread was a lot of fun. Thanks for bringing back those memories.

One nice thing about Skyrim is that it's a lot less buggy than Bethesda's prior releases. I never ran into any really bothersome bugs, which is something I can't say for Morrowind, Oblivion, or Fallout 3. I've heard that some people had issues with the game, but I honestly can't recall running into a single bug that took me out of the game.

Edit - Another thing I liked about Skyrim: the dungeons. There are a lot of fantastic dungeons in the game, and they are way better than the generic dungeons of Oblivion and the largely repetitive ones of Morrowind. I came upon a lot of amazing sights in the Skyrim dungeons.

Edit 2 - The only thing I didn't like about Skyrim was the menu system, which was obviously tailored for consoles and was pretty weak.

[MagGnome]

Originally Posted by menage

Make the whole thing turn based then. Cause that's how that stuff works. Not pressing x to hit something in realtime with those stupid ruiles attached. It doesn't work for me. Like shooting something from 1 meter away in Mass Effect and actually missing something. It's just dumb.

I haven't run into this issue in most games, but I can see how one would find it annoying. In fact, that was my main problem with KOTOR and the reason I stopped playing the game - I thought the combat was boring and awful. There were several times where I'd miss from point blank range, even though my weapons clearly hit their target. It was really frustrating.

I haven't run into the same issues with the Elder Scrolls games though. :/

[menage]

Originally Posted by MagGnome

I haven't run into this issue in most games, but I can see how one would find it annoying. In fact, that was my main problem with KOTOR and the reason I stopped playing the game - I thought the combat was boring and awful. There were several times where I'd miss from point blank range, even though my weapons clearly hit their target. It was really frustrating.

I haven't run into the same issues with the Elder Scrolls games though. :/

Skyrim doesn't have that, it was more a response to the discussion about combat in rpgs in general, and the "reserve" people have against good action combat in rpgs.