Elder Scrolls VI Release Date: Gameplay Locations and Infinitely Playable like Skyrim Features

Domingo

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
17,530
For such a supposedly bad game, Skyrim has sold a ton of copies including ports to every system known to man. It's not like it's an unknown quantity that people keep buying and re-buying by mistake. Did I like it better than Oblivion? No. That's just my opinion, though. Hell, I think clumsy-ass Daggerfall is probably my favorite. Morrowind was a boring brown mess of inventory management hell to me.

Anyway, Skyrim has been a massive success, so I bet they try an emulate it as much as possible.
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,624
Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim...they're all console ports. They're not great games no matter how you look at them, and the only reason Skyrim is any better is because the devs made Skyrim SE and the modding community fixed the rest. It's an experimental game world which is why the plots and the settings come second. Or third. Or whatever number is at the very last minute.

Complaining about Skyrim for being too easy is no different than saying Morrowind was ugly, or that Daggerfall was basic. And do not defend the plot of Oblivion, which was "holes in space, go fight aliens, come back soon." Skyrim had a lot more permanence in the world around you (so much so that there are ways to disable it with mods) and the plot was hard to follow because Skyrim tells the story of Lorkhan, and it tells that story better than any other Elder Scroll game has, period.

The fact that they were all experimental in one way or another made them all fun in their own ways. If there's going to be anything that worries me about TES VI it's that it probably won't be experimental, and it's definitely going to be another console port...
 

M76

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,232
Morrowind was a boring brown mess of inventory management hell to me.
Brown boring mess sounds about right.
Anyway, Skyrim has been a massive success, so I bet they try an emulate it as much as possible.
Skyrim might not have been better than previous games in all possible metrics, but that doesn't automatically make it bad. I preferred oblivion as well.
 

Derangel

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,476
The simple truth of the matter is that there isn't a better single player computer based RPG maker on the market at all. Ever since Bioware has gone the way of the Dodo, I can't even think of one.

Sure there are better MMO makers but that isn't the market for the next elder scrolls and I for one am looking forward to it.

Would I like a new engine? Sure. Do I NEED one.... ehhh I dunno.
Bethesda barely makes RPGs these days. FO4 barely qualifies and 76 definitely doesn't. As for better, CDPR. The Witcher games all have their issues, but over-all I'd call all three of them better than Skyrim.

And, yes, Bethesda needs a new engine. Desperately.
 

Grimlaking

2[H]4U
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
3,118
Bethesda barely makes RPGs these days. FO4 barely qualifies and 76 definitely doesn't. As for better, CDPR. The Witcher games all have their issues, but over-all I'd call all three of them better than Skyrim.

And, yes, Bethesda needs a new engine. Desperately.
I never gave he witcher games the time of the day beyond the intro combat that I felt clunky and uncomfortable in the 1st witcher. So yea I'll include CDPR they have a great rep.

I enjoyed FO4, and Skyrim and their predecessors.
 

Kardonxt

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
3,105
You can hate on Skyrim all you want, but if you add the current steam player count for normal and SE it's at the 21st most popular game on steam currently. That's pretty impressive for its age.

I tried Witcher but found the controls clunky to the point of unplayable. I am excited to see what ES VI brings, I just hope this isn't the game they finally decide to force all mods behind a paywall for good.
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2018
Messages
692
im still trying to wrap my head around calling skyrim a bad game and actively comparing it to the euro-jank known as the witcher franchise with only 1 good game.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
The simple truth of the matter is that there isn't a better single player computer based RPG maker on the market at all. Ever since Bioware has gone the way of the Dodo, I can't even think of one.

Sure there are better MMO makers but that isn't the market for the next elder scrolls and I for one am looking forward to it.

Would I like a new engine? Sure. Do I NEED one.... ehhh I dunno.
Skyrim isn't an RPG, it's Action-Adventure. In an RPG, player agency is the primary focus, with the world responding to the player's unique choices and actions to create a dynamic an unpredictable story. Action-Adventure is an RPG with the player agency aspect removed so that the player can focus on exploring and combat (AKA Action and Adventure). Skyrim has the player agency aspect removed via quest markers, quest directives, and by having singular narrative paths that the player has no choice to do contrary to but can only play out the one path that's been hard-coded for them. In no way is Skyrim and RPG.

And there are many better games, both Action-Adventure and RPG, on the market than Skyrim. Gothic 1, Gothic 2, and Morrowind are but a few. Assassin's Creed Black Flag is another, and I would even say Assassin's Creed Rogue and maybe even Assassin's Creed III.

The first 2 Gothic games and Morrowind can be modded to look pretty good - which makes them no different than Skyrim which also needs to be modded to look good.
 

Derangel

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,476
im still trying to wrap my head around calling skyrim a bad game and actively comparing it to the euro-jank known as the witcher franchise with only 1 good game.
I find more "euro-jank" games enjoyable than a lot of Western AAA releases. And I'd argue Witcher 1 is the only one that really qualifies as "euro-jank". 2's biggest issue was clunky combat, everything else was fine. World design, world building, characters, quests, over-all plot, enemy design, etc where fuck loads better in all three Witcher games than Skyrim. Even with the clunky combat across all three Witcher s its still a hell of a lot better than any combat system Bethesda has ever designed. The only thing Skyrim does better is creating that sense of discovery, something the Witcher games aren't even going for. Unfortunately, Skyrim's world isn't all that interesting to discover. Morrowind, Oblivion, FO3, FO4 (to a lesser extent), all have great worlds to explore and leave me wanting to see what's over the next ridge or in some random direction. I just don't give a damn about Skyrim's land, never could.
 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,931
I find more "euro-jank" games enjoyable than a lot of Western AAA releases. And I'd argue Witcher 1 is the only one that really qualifies as "euro-jank". 2's biggest issue was clunky combat, everything else was fine. World design, world building, characters, quests, over-all plot, enemy design, etc where fuck loads better in all three Witcher games than Skyrim. Even with the clunky combat across all three Witcher 3 its still a hell of a lot better than any combat system Bethesda has ever designed. The only thing Skyrim does better is creating that sense of discovery, something the Witcher games aren't even going for. Unfortunately, Skyrim's world isn't all that interesting to discover. Morrowind, Oblivion, FO3, FO4 (to a lesser extent), all have great worlds to explore and leave me wanting to see what's over the next ridge or in some random direction. I just don't give a damn about Skyrim's land, never could.
I can get behind this. I do love skyrim but found myself not exploring every nook and cranny. FO4 and oblivion I would really want to know what might be around the bend, could be a small cave to explor, or an altar, or some survivor that wants to give me something etc.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
You said it yourself it's an RPG.
I said the opposite: That Skyrim isn't an RPG.

An RPG with the one specific element that makes an RPG an RPG removed is no longer an RPG. Skyrim has that element removed. Action-Adventure is what an otherwise-would-be-RPG game is without that one element that's essential to an RPG, which is player agency.
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,624
I said the opposite
I mean, not with the words you used, that's all.

If you want to discuss your original premise, that Skyrim is not an RPG, I couldn't disagree more. You're not bound to any of the quests or storylines outside of the player introduction, which is essentially a tutorial, it has game mechanic that allows player character development through any of the game's areas (with some of the character development bound to specific areas of the game but not all of it) and you can fully realize a completed character without even bothering to pursue any of the game's stories or quests.

In Skyrim, you can work a forge, buy a house, get married and adopt kids and barely step food outside of your hold to do so, and still hit level 252. That's absolutely a role-playing game, and it absolutely has player agency.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
I mean, not with the words you used, that's all.

If you want to discuss your original premise, that Skyrim is not an RPG, I couldn't disagree more. You're not bound to any of the quests or storylines outside of the player introduction, which is essentially a tutorial, it has game mechanic that allows player character development through any of the game's areas (with some of the character development bound to specific areas of the game but not all of it) and you can fully realize a completed character without even bothering to pursue any of the game's stories or quests.

In Skyrim, you can work a forge, buy a house, get married and adopt kids and barely step food outside of your hold to do so, and still hit level 252. That's absolutely a role-playing game, and it absolutely has player agency.
You aren't bound to quests in Skyrim just like when playing an FPS game the player isn't bought to move forward in the game. But if you want to progress anywhere in Skyrim, then you are bound to the main questline which has player agency removed from the way the player might handle the quests just like the sidequests do.

Being able to do various actions isn't the definition of an RPG. In a FPS game, the player can choose which weapons to pick up, whether to restock ammo, when to fire, which way to move the controls, whether they do headshots or body shots, and can imagine their character to be anything they want. In some FPSs, the player can also allocate stat points to build their character. But none of that stuff makes an FPS game an RPG.

In Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag, and otherd, the player also isn't bound to do quests in any particular order or to do any quests other than the main quest-line. And in that AC game as well as others, the player can also do a wide variety of actions. But those things don't make it an RPG - it's an Action-Adventure game just like Skyrim.

In the Just Cause series, the player can choose which missions to take and when, and can ignore them and freeplay in the world doing various other things. But, despite having those options, it's not an RPG series.
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,624
if you want to progress anywhere in Skyrim, then you are bound to the main questline
Nope. You are not. Most of the game is accessible without completing any of the main quests or any of the guild quests.

I've played past level 40 while doing nothing but radiant Jarl/inkeeper jobs and nothing but entry into the Thieves' guild.

You can fast-travel to Markarth, do the Forsworn quest, get a set of good light armor, drop by Calcelmo, read the The Aetherium Wars and go adventuring with Katria in the old dwarven ruins. Free bow! Immortal tank!

And that's with the vanilla game. With mods you can do even more; you don't even have to start in Skyrim, you can kick dirt in Bruma for weeks with Beyond Skyrim before heading up north.

All the while you're developing, leveling, equipping, and progressing your character. That's what makes it an RPG. I don't know what your other criteria are.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
Nope. You are not. Most of the game is accessible without completing any of the main quests or any of the guild quests.

I've played past level 40 while doing nothing but radiant Jarl/inkeeper jobs and nothing but entry into the Thieves' guild.
Wandering around is not progressing the game, and to progress the game you have to engage the storyline. But being able to select when to do quests and which ones to do is not what makes a game an RPG, and you can do that stuff in various FPS', Action-Adventure games, ARPG, and other genres. So, that point is moot, anyway.

All the while you're developing, leveling, equipping, and progressing your character. That's what makes it an RPG. I don't know what your other criteria are.
Character building, levelling, equipping, all exist in other genres including FPS, Action-Adventure, and others, and have nothing to do with whether a game is or is not an RPG.

There is one criteria for an RPG, which I've explained previously: To be focused on player agency so that the game's story dynamically responds to player choice and action to create a unique narrative. The "player-role" in Role-playing game refers to the player's unique thoughts and how the player handles information it is presented being an essential part of the story that unfolds. Games like Skyrim that depend on quest markers and quest directives and which have singular quest narratives including in the main quest are not RPGs.

RPG means "role-playing game". And the "role" to be played is in shaping the story that manifests as a result of player agency (choice, action, reaction, situation handling). A game where the player's own thoughts don't play an integral part in shaping the narrative is not an RPG.
 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,931
Other than pen and paper, are there any video games that fit your uniquely specific definition?

God we get so caught up in the stupid terminology of things anymore. Arguing about what to call something is the one thing that seems to trigger the most people.
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,624
To be focused on player agency so that the game's story dynamically responds to player choice and action to create a unique narrative.
OK, heard, but that has nothing to do with RPGs. If that was the criteria, then Myst is an RPG, and Baldur's Gate is not.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
OK, heard, but that has nothing to do with RPGs. If that was the criteria, then Myst is an RPG, and Baldur's Gate is not.
That actually has been the definition of RPG since about the term existed. That's what it is and an RPG is a game which that description befits.

In Myst, isn't there just one path to take? It's an interactive story type of thing like a point-and-click adventure.
 

Derangel

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,476
That actually has been the definition of RPG since about the term existed. That's what it is and an RPG is a game which that description befits.

In Myst, isn't there just one path to take? It's an interactive story type of thing like a point-and-click adventure.
Myst has one end point but you have freedom to pick the order you approach each puzzle and you can even skip all of them and go right to the end from the get-go if you know the solution.
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,624
From The Wikipedia: "A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting...Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative...Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines."

"Role-playing games also include single-player role-playing video games in which players control a character...These electronic games...emphasize character advancement more than collaborative storytelling."

What typically makes a game a role-playing game is that the player can develop a character in a narrative, usually using a framework to demonstrate their character's development.

With Baldur's Gate, you can't play to any other outcome other than confronting Sarevok and either winning or losing. The end. The narrative is what you do between starting the game and finishing it, but you don't affect the world much at all in the process and your decisions largely don't matter other than changing the path you take to complete the singular narrative.

In Myst, you don't do any character development (apart from role-playing in your head) but the path you take greatly affects the outcome of the end of the game. There's a happy ending but you can also kill everyone.

Edit: what I'm saying is the thing that most RPGs have in common is developing and controlling a character within a narrative; controlling a narrative is not an element of RPGs.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
From The Wikipedia: "A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting...Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative...Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines."

"Role-playing games also include single-player role-playing video games in which players control a character...These electronic games...emphasize character advancement more than collaborative storytelling."

What typically makes a game a role-playing game is that the player can develop a character in a narrative, usually using a framework to demonstrate their character's development.

With Baldur's Gate, you can't play to any other outcome other than confronting Sarevok and either winning or losing. The end. The narrative is what you do between starting the game and finishing it, but you don't affect the world much at all in the process and your decisions largely don't matter other than changing the path you take to complete the singular narrative.

In Myst, you don't do any character development (apart from role-playing in your head) but the path you take greatly affects the outcome of the end of the game. There's a happy ending but you can also kill everyone.

Edit: what I'm saying is the thing that most RPGs have in common is developing and controlling a character within a narrative; controlling a narrative is not an element of RPGs.

Wikipedia is a terrible source for information and its offered description of an RPG is overtly BS.

"A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting...Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative...Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines."

That describes every character-based game in existence.

So... an RPG is any game where you play as a character, then? Nope. An RPG is as I've explained in this thread.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
baldurs gate fails thee same test you make skyrim fail. its a linear story with side missions.
It doesn't fail the same test. In Baldur's Gate, the player can actually think, choose, and act in unique ways and the game world acknowledges it and responds accordingly. In Baldur's Gate, there are multiple possible outcomes to many quests and what a player chooses to do at one point can affect what options the player has at other points.
 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,931
It doesn't fail the same test. In Baldur's Gate, the player can actually think, choose, and act in unique ways and the game world acknowledges it and responds accordingly. In Baldur's Gate, there are multiple possible outcomes to many quests and what a player chooses to do at one point can affect what options the player has at other points.
It is showing more that you just hate skyrim I get it. yes you get to think in baldurs gate "click option 1, 2,3 or 4" and the flow chart for what comes next will happen. They are predefined choices with predefined outcomes, how much different is that? And many don't have a choice I like so I pick something closeish to what I want. Great game dont get me wrong.

rpg is a genre, and a lot can fit in there. Baldurs gate is closer to a choose your own adventure book
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,624
In Baldur's Gate Skyrim, the player can actually think, choose, and act in unique ways and the game world acknowledges it and responds accordingly. In Baldur's Gate Skyrim, there are multiple possible outcomes to many quests and what a player chooses to do at one point can affect what options the player has at other points.
Checks out.
 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,931
Lot of choices in skyrim, the big one is the major conflict with the (cant remmeber the two faction names offhand) and which one you start to ally with. Ive had to pull old save files for going too far down a path and wanting to change my decision
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,624
This entire page is bitching about what an RPG is. I want my brain cells back.
You're right.

The upcoming Elder Scrolls RPG sequel to the RPG Skyrim, part five of Bethesda's Elder Scrolls RPGs, which are arguably middling RPGs but with amazing mod support from the RPG mod community that keeps these RPGs relevant and imminently replayable, that RPG, is the subject of this thread on Bethesda's ultimately very popular RPGs.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
It is showing more that you just hate skyrim I get it. yes you get to think in baldurs gate "click option 1, 2,3 or 4" and the flow chart for what comes next will happen. They are predefined choices with predefined outcomes, how much different is that? And many don't have a choice I like so I pick something closeish to what I want. Great game dont get me wrong.

rpg is a genre, and a lot can fit in there. Baldurs gate is closer to a choose your own adventure book
I'm only stating the truth about Skyrim not being an RPG. RPG is a genre defined by player agency being what shapes the story. Skyrim is a game of 'follow these instruction as the pre-determined narrative plays out'.

In Baldur's gate, different conversation options lead to different conversation outcomes. In Skyrim, you just click through the dialog to reach the singular outcome and then follow the quest marker and do the prescribed thing to complete the quest.

Lot of choices in skyrim, the big one is the major conflict with the (cant remmeber the two faction names offhand) and which one you start to ally with. Ive had to pull old save files for going too far down a path and wanting to change my decision
Like Witcher 3, in Skyrim there are a few token blunt A or B choices that are presented. They don't characterize the game's design and style, they aren't frequent, and they don't have significant impacts on the game.

Checks out.
It doesn't. Skyrim doesn't have that. And Skyrim isn't an RPG. Bethesda hasn't made an RPG since Morrowind.

I think that if someone feels they need to call a game an RPG in order to like it, then it must not be that good of a game if looked at on its own merits.
 
Last edited:

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,931
I'm only stating the truth about Skyrim not being an RPG. RPG is a genre defined by player agency being what shapes the story. Skyrim is a game of 'follow these instruction as the pre-determined narrative plays out'.

In Baldur's gate, different conversation options lead to different conversation outcomes. In Skyrim, you just click through the dialog to reach the singular outcome and then follow the quest marker and do the prescribed thing to complete the quest.



Like Witcher 3, in Skyrim there are a few token blunt A or B choices that are presented. They don't characterize the game's design and style, and they don't have significant impacts on the game.
We aren't talking about witcher right now, stop changing the topic.

So there is a numeric value for how many in game choices that affect a future event to be considered an rpg? Could you please specify that?

Played through bg1 and 2 and their expansions, as well as icewind, planescape. All rpgs I am not fighting that, but when playing skyrim that similar feeling comes over me but in an immersive environment and not a 2d grid. The guild storylines in skyrim were really good and would change based on your choices through them, especially the dark brotherhood. I've sat and mulled some choices because especially on my last playthrough i promised myself no backloading. Which really is the right way to play any of these rpgs, having the ability to load back before a decision kinda waters it down.


Ive said my last, you go ahead with yours. But in the end you like your beer and I like mine and don't think this will change either way.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
We aren't talking about witcher right now, stop changing the topic.
In no way did I change the subject by saying "Like Witcher 3, in Skyrim there are a few token blunt A or B choices that are presented". Likewise, I didn't change the subject when I brought up Assassin's Creed, Daikatana, and other games as examples that share features with Skyrim that also aren't RPGs.

So there is a numeric value for how many in game choices that affect a future event to be considered an rpg? Could you please specify that?
As I have stated from the beginning of this discussion:

"In an RPG, player agency is the primary focus, with the world responding to the player's unique choices and actions to create a dynamic an unpredictable story."

A couple token choices, especially unavoidable ones presented as 'this or that' during dialog, does not define the genre. FPS games and other genres can have those types of choices in them, too.

Played through bg1 and 2 and their expansions, as well as icewind, planescape. All rpgs I am not fighting that, but when playing skyrim that similar feeling comes over me but in an immersive environment and not a 2d grid. The guild storylines in skyrim were really good and would change based on your choices through them, especially the dark brotherhood. I've sat and mulled some choices because especially on my last playthrough i promised myself no backloading. Which really is the right way to play any of these rpgs, having the ability to load back before a decision kinda waters it down.
In Baldur's Gate, the discrete influence of player choice comes regularly through conversations and encounters and those interactions are a focus of the game experience. In Skyrim, blunt A or B choices are rare token occurrences and aren't a focus of the game experience.
 

PCMusicGuy

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,192
So Jade Empire and Lands or Lore: Guardians of Destiny would both be RPGs still. Great. Some of my favorite.
 

tybert7

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
2,654
I have played daggerfall onwards, And I picked up daggerfall in the 90s when it was still sold in stores with that holographic skull packaging.

As such, I out rank all other opinions on which elder scrolls game is better or worse.

Daggerfall had the most options for your character, by far. With each successive game, the degrees of freedom were more stripped down and pruned. Skyrim was the most restricted game of the series so far, but was surprisingly good in spite of more character limitations.

And now for my judgement. The worst version of the game was.... Daggerfall. Still fun to play, but it was no man's sky in procedurally generated dungeon form before that was a thing.
 

DukenukemX

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
4,556
Give it another chance, learn the perfect block from Captain Bernard. Its challenging, once you figure it out its quite rewarding. After you learn to parry, combos become the next hurdle, best sword and board combat I've ever played. You need physical skill to win.

I breezed through the game because of a single trick I used. You walk up to your enemy and just push them against a wall or a tree and go to down on them. They'll recover and you just push them again and rinse repeat. I tried doing those complicated moves but pushing them and putting a sword to their face is super easy.
 

DukenukemX

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
4,556
I disagree. When Skyrim came out in 2011, it was painful how dumbed-down and below average complexity it was. The phrase "wide as an ocean, deep as a puddle" was common on the Bethesda forums when it released. Skyrim was a major new low in Bethesda over-simplification in their games.

For its time, Skyrim was lackluster. That didn't stop lots of people from loving it, but by the standards set by games that had released since 2000, Skyrim was sorely lacking in depth.
Skyrim is a good game but did have some serious issues. For one, the leveling system is broken. You level up, your enemies level up, which is the dumbest shit I've ever seen. If you know what you're doing you can just destory everything in the game, like one shot enemies with a 2h sword by abusing alchemy, smithing, and enchanting. You can do this in other Elder Scrolls games but here they just put a limit, which doesn't do much when you can still one shot everything. Basically the game gets so easy that I download mods that make my slutty female enemies into a real threat.

The best thing about Skyrim is how it rewards exploration, as you walk into a cave and suddenly you have a very complex and well written quest. Unlike Breath of the Wild where exploring rewarded you with a seed that if you collect enough you can expand your inventory... YAY! Skyrim has good lore, good side quests, good music, and the Dragon speech was genius. Skyrim certainly has its flaws and the next Elder Scrolls game should try to avoid those mistakes. As for the next Elder Scrolls game, I'm not putting much faith into it after the fiasco that is Fallout 76. Not only are they not fixing the game, but somehow Bethesda has found ways to make it worse. Skyrim might be the last good Elder Scrolls game we'll ever see. My prediction for Elder Scrolls VI is it'll be Co-op and will have micro-transactions. It'll be junk.
 

smarenwolf

[H]Lite
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
109
for me, the shortcomings of Skyrim's "RPGness" come to light when comparing it to something like Deus Ex or Dishonored.
 

Arcygenical

Will Watercool for Crack
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
24,883
im still trying to wrap my head around calling skyrim a bad game and actively comparing it to the euro-jank known as the witcher franchise with only 1 good game.
Skyrim isn't a bad game, it's a boring game - at least, if you're not a huge RP fan. It's a lovely make your own adventure sandbox but the stock story/quests are usually pretty boring.

And I just found it wasn't "fun" either. The combat and magic system felt sort of like fucking your own sister... Sure, you're getting something, but it just isn't right.
 

fuzzylogik

Gawd
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
633
Yay! I'll take it - would be great if they made it so that you can play your game, have a friend jump in from their own game 'world' and do a few quests and leave (while keeping everything else pretty much unique to the player). Not an MMO, just an interesting way to do a type of multiplayer. Been wanting that since Morrowind when I played the game with friends on multiple computers in the same room. But... nowadays not really in that same point in life so not really a big deal - but heck it was a big wish back then. Liked all the games - will grab this one too someday.
 
Top