Skyrim is bad as an RPG, but would have been decent as an action adventure: Discuss

Recommended Videos

Scow2

New member
Aug 3, 2009
801
0
0
Adellebella said:
They have their D&D/RPG players - I think OP fits here; these people want the world to act like a DM: they want their actions to have effect. Without it, it feels desolate to them. Good or bad, you want SOMETHING!
What you are thinking of is the "Storyteller"-type RPG player, who generally DOESN'T like D&D because of the "Lack of Choice"

There are still several more types of RPG players -

"The Optimizer"
"The Psychodramatist" (Skyrim REALLY plays well to these people)
"The Outlier"
"The Butt-kicker"
"The Strategist"

and there are a few more...

Legendsmith said:
Javarock said:
That said the real roleplaying I see within mount and blade is when you define your character yourself and make a story. You can do the exact same thing in Skyrim...
Yes you can, but it is a far shallower endeavour.
Oh hell no it's not! I have over fifteen completely different characters in Skyrim, all variations on Tough Warrior, all of them completely different. I have yet to create more magically-inclined or subtle characters, but I'm having a blast in Skyrim.

I don't need the game to tell me what I'm doing. Do you need voiceover to say when you're swinging your sword at someone?
 

Hero in a half shell

It's not easy being green
Dec 30, 2009
4,286
0
0
Legendsmith said:
I actually agree with you to a certain extent. It hit me when I was writing a post in another thread on this website, where I had to pick RPG characters to accompany me on an imaginary RPG Quest (here it is: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.336462-Build-a-5-man-party-for-an-RPG-starring-you#13588372)
My first thoughts went to Skyrim, and I didn't want to pick the Dragonborn because he can be literally any sort of character, so my other choices were Lydia, and, err... a dragon?

There are no personal plotlines of your main characters, they don't grow or change in any way due to your actions, and interactions with other characters are generally rather brief, and in this sense it isn't a traditional role playing game.

But I would argue that it still is roleplaying, but in a different sense. As I said the Dragonborn has no character, so he can be literally whatever you want him to be. You define his character and what he does, it's true that there isn't that much choice in quests, but there are tonnes of quests to choose from, and that is where your roleplaying choice comes from. I am playing a Neutral-good Nord, so I am not going to do the Dark Brotherhood quests, or the Thieves Guild, or indeed have anything much to do with Riften, but if I were playing a sneakier, shadier character I would be all over those quests. Hey, I've even heard of people who deliberately aren't going to play the main questline, because that's not what their main character is interested in. In that respect Skyrim is a roleplaying game. You just don't make choices in the content you play, but you choose what content you want to experience.
Although I would much prefer it if there was more personal quests to do with my followers or at least more personal dialogue and banter.
 

The Last Nomad

Lost in Ethiopia
Oct 28, 2009
1,426
0
0
The fact that almost everyone has a different opinion (and ll equally valid) of what makes a game an RPG make this thread null and void.

But to throw more rubbish into the pile, I would consider Skyrim an action adventure RPG...
although I've only played about an hour of it, but I know the series quite well.
 

Scow2

New member
Aug 3, 2009
801
0
0
Hero in a half shell said:
Legendsmith said:
I actually agree with you to a certain extent. It hit me when I was writing a post in another thread on this website, where I had to pick RPG characters to accompany me on an imaginary RPG Quest (here it is: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.336462-Build-a-5-man-party-for-an-RPG-starring-you#13588372)
My first thoughts went to Skyrim, and I didn't want to pick the Dragonborn because he can be literally any sort of character, so my other choices were Lydia, and, err... a dragon?
Try J'Zargo. You can't go wrong with J'zargo.

Kharjo is fine too.
 

Scow2

New member
Aug 3, 2009
801
0
0
Anthraxus said:
Scow2 - "Skyrim uses a combat system similar to Dark Souls."

The fuck ??
Moreso than Mount + Blade, yes. Except you don't have to fumble between two buttons to choose whether you want a shield bash or block, or normal or power attack. The lack of kicking, jump attacks, and plunging blows annoys me, though.
 

Scars Unseen

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
Did I just wake up and log onto RPG Codex by mistake? There has never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever been a proper CRPG. Never ever. UNLESS! If you count interaction with other players in multiplayer games such as Neverwinter Nights or (dare I say it) MMORPGs, then there has been role playing in a CRPG. But single player? Never. It's all approximation in varying degrees. Bioware and Black Isle's Fallout and Infinity Engine games? Great games. Fun to play. Still do from time to time. As much in common with role playing as a Choose-You-Own-Adventure book. Gold Box series? Dungeon Crawlers. Ultima IV? Little different than a JRPG with more scope, less dialogue and an unorthodox goal.

If you want to role play within the framework of a game, you currently need a friend. End of story. Any other role playing experience you've had is you stepping outside of the bounds of the game and using your imagination to make up for the deficiencies of the game you were playing. Which is pretty much what role playing is all about. So guess what? Everything I just said? Comeplete and utter bullshit. If you believe you had a role playing experience, you did. I don't get to decide, and neither does the OP.


Also, Captcha = itedEPa foreign-born. Who is that, Dovahkiin's racist cousin?
 

Scars Unseen

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
Anthraxus said:
Bhaalspawn said:
The problem I've always had with Skyrim is that it boasts a massive open world with numerous side quests, but since all the monsters stay on par with your level, there's really no reason to do any of it.

Most RPGs treat their side quests as ways to keep your level on par with the main storyline. That's how good RPGs work. You've got a main story leading you through the game, showing you where to go next, but it will quickly start kicking your ass if you aren't helping out the people around the world as you go.

Beating a game while staying at level 1 used to be a massive challenge for only the most insane players. Now, since enemies don't level up unless you do, finding a way to stop the levelling system is no longer giving you any kind of challenge.

Also, games are not allowed to boast having randomly respawning dragons unless they are actually difficult to defeat, which they are not in Skyrim.
Games like Skyrim aren't meant for ppl that are concerned with RPG mechanics, or else they truly fall apart. Your just supposed to get out there and start LARPing..ugh i mean roleplaying... and start picking those damn flowersskulls/rearranging the thingsskulls in your house !!
Edited for accuracy(don't look at me like that).
 

vidirg

New member
Sep 23, 2009
53
0
0
I think it should pass as an RPG you make your own character, you make decisions, your character gets better the way you play it and you role-play as the Dragonborn.
 

Thaius

New member
Mar 5, 2008
3,862
0
0
I understand what you're saying, but you seem to be judging a western RPG based on the standards of a Japanese one. You can't go into a WRPG and expect well-developed characters, with the exception of a few rare (though increasingly common) ones. You go in expecting an open world and a myriad of choice-based quests and storylines. If you want interesting characters, you should be playing Lost Odyssey, The World Ends With You, or Final Fantasy VI.

I don't mean to turn this into a JRPG vs. WRPG thing; both are great, and let's not even bring up the insipid notion that either aren't "real RPGs." But both are different. Judge them based on what they're trying to be.
 

Two-step

New member
Jan 4, 2012
3
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
Any other role playing experience you've had is you stepping outside of the bounds of the game and using your imagination to make up for the deficiencies of the game you were playing. Which is pretty much what role playing is all about. So guess what? Everything I just said? Comeplete and utter bullshit. If you believe you had a role playing experience, you did. I don't get to decide, and neither does the OP.
So everything is a Role-playing game, meaning nothing is. Equal parts deep and meaningless.


Since we've decided that Skyrim isn't an RPG any more/less than Joust is an RPG, I suppose it's up to us to figure out what Skyrim truly is, at its core.

I believe that Skyrim is a Bigfoot pizza from Pizza Hut. Do you remember that pile? It was a massive pizza, like the size of a bathtub, made with the cheapest ingredients anyone has ever dared use in a consumable product. But, this Skyrim pizza, you eat it alone, in a room, for hours and days. Every piece of it sustains you, only so that you can continue on to eat the next piece. Every piece tastes bland, and offers you almost noting in the way of nourishment, but it's still pizza, so you're not upset to be eating it. Pizza is inherently good, but, god damn, the more you eat this pizza, the more you come to hate the taste of it. After a time, it becomes a punishment. "Oh god, not another slice of that same stale-ass shit. There's so much of it, and none of it makes me happy! All this time and not once have I felt satisfied!"

This is the experience of playing Skyrim. It is an exercise in tedium that leaves you numbly continuing forward not for any meretricious reason, but only for its essential nature. TES games are always good in their nature, if not for what they offer. You will never feel as content to remain unsatisfied as you feel playing an Elder Scrolls game.

But, let's look to how and where it failed each gamers primary impulse so that such tragedies can be avoided.

The Storyteller is unsatisfied because there is no evidence growth or meaningful change, so there is no story. The hero does not change. The world does not change. The world-eater is banished, and the game continues on with little more than 7 extra lines of dialogue. There are no revelations or revolutions. You snuff the empire/rebellion and the new boss is the same as the old boss. Every now and then you'll get a piece of dialogue where someone will comment on how they don't care who's in charge. That's your revolution. And how they tried to make it "a world" is an insult. Just because the quest-and-money dispensers go to sleep for 8 hours a day, that does not make it any less robotic. They are just robots that are programmed to be unhelpful.

The Power Gamer is unsatisfied because the system is too simple and broad. There is a single perfect path, as obvious as can be. Max out all crafting skills and make unstoppable weapons, accessories, and armor. Grind BS until every skill is maxed. Every character can be perfect given enough time, regardless of skill or expertise. But there are no rewards worth having, no powers worth acquiring, and no one who gives a crap that you've done either. If you concentrate on a few key skills, you can top out in effectiveness so early on that you will spend the next 90% of the game wearing the same armor and using the same weapons to 1-hit kill every enemy in the game, and only bother with other crap to break up the tedium of being a perfect killing machine.

The Butt-Kicker is unsatisfied, because the combat is crap. Here's how bad the combat is. Adept, the "normal" difficulty setting that the game starts on, has enemies taking 70% of the damage that your weapons are advertised to do and dealing 130% of the damage you would with an equivalent weapon/spell. That's how they decided to challenge you, by making you half as effective as your enemies. So, that spell you have that does 60 damage, really does 42 damage when you cast it, and 78 damage when you get hit by it. Beating a bear to death with a nerf bat is not the key to The Butt-Kicker's happy place.

The Tactician runs into the same problem as The Power Gamer. Every situation is best solved by a sneak attack with a Daedric bow for 3000 damage. That's the best way to clear every dungeon and win every fight, as well as the most realistic way for a person to survive.

The Specialist is out of luck, because while he can totally create that character that he plays in every game, even if that character is a catman acrobat, he still can't play that character. Or, more accurately, the world doesn't give a shit who or what his character is. Race and gender barely even matter for fluff. Can you really play a character when the essential nature of who your character is has no impact on anything?

The Method Actor has no audience and {multiple choice - same outcome} syndrome. It's "But thou must!" from here to eternity. Nothing to play off of and minor amusement only within the confines of what's possible. You could role-play a schizo-prophetic thief who believes that he exists in a boring world full of useless automatons and he must steal all their keys in order to turn them all off. You could even have a decent time of it. You could also glue silly eyes onto your penis and chase the cat around the house with it. I don't think the latter would really be less fulfilling, artistically.

The Casual Gamer might not really have much to complain about since, when the game needed to compromise or choose, the spinner always landed on The Casual Gamer's side. Don't really wanna pick a class? Well, your class is "blah" You're a level "meh" "blah" who "so-sos" in everything. Have fun doing or not doing whatever. Thing is, they made the game too daunting for The Casual Gamer. Causal Gamer doesn't want to spend 180 hours getting attacked by frostspider and sassy nord at random. Casual gamer wants to put the controller down after an hour to check on his laundry before House starts.
 

Scars Unseen

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
Two-step said:
Scars Unseen said:
Any other role playing experience you've had is you stepping outside of the bounds of the game and using your imagination to make up for the deficiencies of the game you were playing. Which is pretty much what role playing is all about. So guess what? Everything I just said? Comeplete and utter bullshit. If you believe you had a role playing experience, you did. I don't get to decide, and neither does the OP.
So everything is a Role-playing game, meaning nothing is. Equal parts deep and meaningless.
In theory, I suppose. In practice, however, how many people actually go into Madden with the intention of role playing as a football coach?

Since we've decided that Skyrim isn't an RPG any more/less than Joust is an RPG, I suppose it's up to us to figure out what Skyrim truly is, at its core.
Are you engaging in majestic plural now? I'm fairly certain this viewpoint is far from unanimous. But continue.

I believe that Skyrim is a Bigfoot pizza from Pizza Hut. Do you remember that pile? It was a massive pizza, like the size of a bathtub, made with the cheapest ingredients anyone has ever dared use in a consumable product. But, this Skyrim pizza, you eat it alone, in a room, for hours and days. Every piece of it sustains you, only so that you can continue on to eat the next piece. Every piece tastes bland, and offers you almost noting in the way of nourishment, but it's still pizza, so you're not upset to be eating it. Pizza is inherently good, but, god damn, the more you eat this pizza, the more you come to hate the taste of it. After a time, it becomes a punishment. "Oh god, not another slice of that same stale-ass shit. There's so much of it, and none of it makes me happy! All this time and not once have I felt satisfied!"

This is the experience of playing Skyrim. It is an exercise in tedium that leaves you numbly continuing forward not for any meretricious reason, but only for its essential nature. TES games are always good in their nature, if not for what they offer. You will never feel as content to remain unsatisfied as you feel playing an Elder Scrolls game.
This is less a failed analogy than it is misdirected hyperbole on both accounts. The Big Foot was made from the same ingredients as any other Pizza Hut pizza, and many people enjoy Pizza Hut(else they would be out of business). Like Skyrim, the Big Foot was quite popular in its time. Like Skyrim, you can add things to it if you want a different flavor(cheese and red pepper vs mods). Your descriptions pretty much fail, or at least you are in the minority on this opinion of yours. Anyway, moving on.

But, let's look to how and where it failed each gamers primary impulse so that such tragedies can be avoided.
Skyrim is a tragedy now? Now I know you're trolling. Or firmly entrenched in Hyperbole Valley. One or the other.


The Storyteller is unsatisfied because there is no evidence growth or meaningful change, so there is no story. The hero does not change. The world does not change. The world-eater is banished, and the game continues on with little more than 7 extra lines of dialogue. There are no revelations or revolutions. You snuff the empire/rebellion and the new boss is the same as the old boss. Every now and then you'll get a piece of dialogue where someone will comment on how they don't care who's in charge. That's your revolution. And how they tried to make it "a world" is an insult. Just because the quest-and-money dispensers go to sleep for 8 hours a day, that does not make it any less robotic. They are just robots that are programmed to be unhelpful.
I didn't even read this section. If you bought Skyrim for its story, then you haven't been paying attention. Hi! Welcome to The Elder Scrolls! Home of many things, but certainly not any sort of well told storyline. This game is more of a palette for you to write your own story. That's something we like to call role playing in some parts. Player agency: it's what's for dinner.

The Power Gamer is unsatisfied because the system is too simple and broad. There is a single perfect path, as obvious as can be. Max out all crafting skills and make unstoppable weapons, accessories, and armor. Grind BS until every skill is maxed. Every character can be perfect given enough time, regardless of skill or expertise. But there are no rewards worth having, no powers worth acquiring, and no one who gives a crap that you've done either. If you concentrate on a few key skills, you can top out in effectiveness so early on that you will spend the next 90% of the game wearing the same armor and using the same weapons to 1-hit kill every enemy in the game, and only bother with other crap to break up the tedium of being a perfect killing machine.
You know what's funny? I didn't do that at all. I just started exploring and found that as I did things, I got better at them! So I must not have been maximizing my potential, right? Well you see, that's the problem with this one. There is a difference between power gaming and min-maxing. One is a style of play, and the other is an exercise in extreme micromanagement. There's plenty of variety here. You're just ignoring what isn't optimal(one of the dirtiest words in the role playing lexicon).

The Butt-Kicker is unsatisfied, because the combat is crap. Here's how bad the combat is. Adept, the "normal" difficulty setting that the game starts on, has enemies taking 70% of the damage that your weapons are advertised to do and dealing 130% of the damage you would with an equivalent weapon/spell. That's how they decided to challenge you, by making you half as effective as your enemies. So, that spell you have that does 60 damage, really does 42 damage when you cast it, and 78 damage when you get hit by it. Beating a bear to death with a nerf bat is not the key to The Butt-Kicker's happy place.
First you're a perfect killing machine that can 1-hit kill everything in the game and now you're an ineffectual nerf bat wielding wimp? And you say this game has no variety! Point discounted on account of internal inconsistency.

The Tactician runs into the same problem as The Power Gamer. Every situation is best solved by a sneak attack with a Daedric bow for 3000 damage. That's the best way to clear every dungeon and win every fight, as well as the most realistic way for a person to survive.
And if you are playing a character with skill in neither archery nor sneak? Sneak attacks with a Daedric bow do crap damage when you hold your bow backwards and can be spotted by a sleeping bear. Also, did you actually bring in the realism argument? Really? Irrelevance aside, there are no Deadric bows in real life.

The Specialist is out of luck, because while he can totally create that character that he plays in every game, even if that character is a catman acrobat, he still can't play that character. Or, more accurately, the world doesn't give a shit who or what his character is. Race and gender barely even matter for fluff. Can you really play a character when the essential nature of who your character is has no impact on anything?
I could almost agree with you here, except that this is pretty much one of those limitations I was talking about in my previous post. There are precious few CRPGs where how you do things matters at all, and the ones that do are far more limited than Skyrim in other aspects. Even then, it's less "you can do anything, and we notice," and more "we took into account a few different play styles... hope you like one of them." If you want freedom of choice with measurable impact, go play PnP RPGs.

The Method Actor has no audience and {multiple choice - same outcome} syndrome. It's "But thou must!" from here to eternity. Nothing to play off of and minor amusement only within the confines of what's possible. You could role-play a schizo-prophetic thief who believes that he exists in a boring world full of useless automatons and he must steal all their keys in order to turn them all off. You could even have a decent time of it. You could also glue silly eyes onto your penis and chase the cat around the house with it. I don't think the latter would really be less fulfilling, artistically.
You're complaining about a single player game not having other players. Even games with branching choices eventually come down to the same few possible endings. The only contemporary game series I can think of that does better isn't an RPG at all(Way of the Samurai). Go play PnP or perhaps an MMO if you want an audience.

The Casual Gamer might not really have much to complain about since, when the game needed to compromise or choose, the spinner always landed on The Casual Gamer's side. Don't really wanna pick a class? Well, your class is "blah" You're a level "meh" "blah" who "so-sos" in everything. Have fun doing or not doing whatever. Thing is, they made the game too daunting for The Casual Gamer. Causal Gamer doesn't want to spend 180 hours getting attacked by frostspider and sassy nord at random. Casual gamer wants to put the controller down after an hour to check on his laundry before House starts.
Way to bash the casuals. It makes you look smart. No, really, it does. Also? Classless RPGs: they exist. Most of them offer far more freedom than traditional class based game systems. And TES has always been a class based system by only the most tenuous of definitions, so this is hardly a drastic or even surprising development.
 

Phlakes

Elite Member
Mar 25, 2010
4,282
0
41
No one told me it was an RPG, here I was thinking it was an action-adventure-RPG mix, like things don't have to be restricted to a dozen or less rule sets. Silly me.
 

geK0

New member
Jun 24, 2011
1,846
0
0
Legendsmith said:
a little off topic.

Could you refer me to some good RPG games? the one in the OP sounds pretty damn awesome and Id like to try more games like that.

edit: nevermind dumb question... assumed these were really oldschool games you were talking about.

Definitely going to pick up warband when I have some money, it looks pretty kick ass.
 

UsefulPlayer 1

New member
Feb 22, 2008
1,776
0
0
burningdragoon said:
The short version: there are a lot of ingredients in RPG stew, and if you get enough people together you'll be able endlessly argue which one is the Main IngredientTM.

Skyrim succeeds greatly in some aspects of RPGdom and fails greatly in some others.
This.

Of course some games are gonna have some RPG elements that are done better than Skyrim. I doesn't have to beat every game in every possible arena to be the best. It just has to beat every game individually.

Do I believe Skyrim is better than Fable 2? Yes.

And so on.