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

[Russell47]

Here's a thought: who cares?

 

[Russell47]

Here's a thought: who cares?

 

[Two-step]

snip

Now we're judging others intentions? I thought we weren't allowed to do that.
RPG is a meaningless moniker, as you have said. When I play UNO, I am Captain Javier Tremolito, a man of shrewd cunning and temperate demeanor, whiling away an evening before he must return to his ship, the light schooner Santa Selina. I have said this and now UNO is a role playing game. Forever.

What I say about how Skyrim needlessly fails to satisfy the appetites of different gamers this is based in both personal experience and dialogue with others. (The thing about the pizzas is also based in fact. Talking out of your ass is a thing for you, eh?) Perhaps you should learn more about these different play styles so that you can understand what is being discussed? If you can't figure out why two players who have different play styles and emphasize different things in play might suffer the opposite problem from the same mechanic, then it's been a waste of time responding to you.

 

[DocBalance]

(Original Thread title: Skyrim shouldn't be classified as an RPG: Discuss)



Skyrim is definitely not the best RPG because there is a distinct lack of roleplaying and well, character to the characters. Lydia is a prime example. She has no real character to speak of. At no point can I speak to lydia about what she thinks of what's going on or any subject. She just blindly accepts, points out that there's a cave when you pass by one and seems resigned to carry the player's burden.
She's not a follower, companion or anything. She's like a pet, doing exactly what she's told.
That's not a character. As far as I know, most of the companions are like this.

Lydia is what is known as a Housecarl. She's essentially a combination butler/bodyguard. She has been raised and trained to treat you, as her thane, as merely a superior whose commands she is supposed to carry out without question. She is a truly poor example of a companion, especially considering there is a group literally called "The Companions" that accompany you for several quests once you join them that have both compelling dialogue, character arcs, and commentary on the events of the world.

If Skyrim was a tabletop RPG all the players would be complaining of the extreme railroadingRailroading definition: When a Game master of a tabletop or Pen & Paper RPG restricts the players to a narrowly defined, planned path, much like how a train is restricted to its rails. Any attempt by the players to deviate from these rails is met by immovable resistance, pretty much like the invisible wall in video games.

Really? I've played through a good 80 hours of Skyrim and I've yet to get past a few steps in the main quest, because the game isn't forcing me to. Instead, I've explored the very enticing side stories, such as the Dark Brotherhood, the Thieves Guild, and The Companions to name a few of the longer and more lasting quest lines. I have yet to feel rail-roaded at all, to be honest. If I don't care for this dragon business, I can bugger it all for a lark and ignore it while they attack cities. If I decide I want to go explore caves, hunt bandits, rescue a kidnapped noble from a foreign power, or anything of the like, I can without so much as a disapproving cluck from the game. If Skyrim were a tabletop RPG, my GM would have outright hate-killed me by now for me complete disregard for the main quest line.

In Skyrim, there are very few or no consequences for your actions. For example, assume a player kills a shopkeeper. Their relatives inherit the shop, but they'll still sell you stuff and even give quests. The different dialogue options are a joke. 3 or 4 is the usual amount, but they have no real impact on anything. Older RPGs have had far, far more. I've seen one that had 18 options to start with. There is very little choice in skyrim.

Yes, if you kill a shopkeeper with no witnesses, then their descendants who have absolutely no idea that you are the murderer will continue to sell you, the paying customer, items. This is literally how the world works: If people don't know you killed someone, they won't treat you like you did.

Indeed, Very few quests have any kind of choice either. The ones I have encountered that do are side quests with no impact on the main story; they just earn the player some money/items, just like all the other quests, bar those that earn you a companion. The quests in skyrim have loot as their reward, which is pretty much expected, but it's no more than that. That is not expected of an RPG.

I must question whether you pay any attention to the NPCs in this world. After nearly every quest I've done that has any impact on the world, I've heard mention of it throughout the game by guards and NPCs in passing conversation. The Dark Brotherhood line is especially good about this. I killed a woman in Riften, and then a day later they were talking about it in Solitude, halfway across the continent! It was a big deal too, the guards boasted about how it would never happen in their city, the NPCs wept for the children she left behind, I was genuinely taken aback by the response I received from the world because of my actions.

You say there is very little choice, but just about every one of the sidequests gives you an abundance of choice. For the Dark Brotherhood, they capture you after the afore-mentioned kill and offer to let you join them, for a price. You can do that, if you choose. You can also simply walk away after you've paid your dues to them, or you can kill the leader and take up arms against the entire murderous society. Each choice is supported by the game, and it's just the beginning of the decisions you will make along the way. All the side-factions offer similar circumstances, and it's a real shame that you apparently haven't pursued them.

The only thing I found memorable about characters in skyrim was that they were not memorable at all. A role playing game has you play the role of a character, a role where you interact with other characters. But there is no character to the other characters in Skyrim.

I have, over the course of my time, met an orphan boy looking to hire an assassin, a coven of werewolf adventures with mixed feelings about their blessing/curse, an eccentric jester serial killer, an Emperor who had come to terms with the fact that I was going to kill him, and a thousand other interesting, varied characters. I'm beginning to suspect that you just aren't looking very hard.

 

[Keith Reedy]

This is all demonstrably false.

Thank you!
You understand.

He does not understand he just agrees, you don't have some great knowledge or understanding of what an rpg is. People consider different things rpgs. You think M&B is an RPG but can you prove it without using opinion. No because you have not truly factual definition to go by. I like skyrim I Role-play in it and consider it a role play game.

The only thing you have proven so far is that you dislike current RPGs

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Huh? Whatchu talking 'bout, Willis?

I've roleplayed more in Skyrim than I have in years. If I could enter my own dialogue in conversations and command my Argonian to mutter "Damn mammals" every once in awhile, I don't think I could roleplay more. He has tastes in food. He has preferences in race of mammal he doesn't mind, and those he despises. He has opinions on the empire, the rebels, hammerfell, Dwemer ruins, the Thalmor, and all kinds of things. He's unnerved by things. He has combat strategies that play to his biological abilities.

It's the best possible use of a blank slate, that I can draw whatever I'd like on it. Combat is entirely up to me. Cross-classing odd combinations is up to me. If I want to be a heavily armored illusionist, I can do that. Yes, the choices in dialog are pathetic. That's Bioware's thing, and this is Bethesda, king of large open (mildly glitchy) worlds and pristine slate characters that long for you to edify them.

And that you even thought to compare Just Cause 2 to an RPG is laughable. Just Cause 2 is an action game with RPG elemets, like damn near any action game these days. But you play no real role. Rico Rodriguez? Really? Don't make me laugh even harder.

 

[Draconalis]

Man... I hate that this thread is so far in... I concur with the OP wholeheartedly... but the first reply mentions D&D's freedom to build characters and combat. This is not the case of old school AD&D 2nd ed. It was the freedom to do anything, regardless of combat... and the consequences that come with doing those things.

I've played Skyrim for 3 or 4 hours... and it was enough to know I'm not impressed with the game at all.

I think it's an over-hyped, and overrated PoS.

 

[Draconalis]

What's with these new generation of "RPG" players coming here to enlighten us about how Role Playing is being able to dress your character up and go anywhere you want in some crappy 3D gameworld with shitty twitch gameplay, and the rest is UP TO YOU - is getting rather sickening.

I blame 3rd edition D&D personally... Lets you do whatever the hell you want, at the expense of limitations, creativity, and story.

 

[Jetsetneo]

I blame 3rd edition D&D personally... Lets you do whatever the hell you want, at the expense of limitations, creativity, and story.

I sincerely doubt you've play much of any modern PnP RPG to actually mean that. Its full of hyperbole.

 

[Draconalis]

I sincerely doubt you've play much of any modern PnP RPG to actually mean that. Its full of hyperbole.

I played enough of it to note the shift to a heavily combat oriented system at the expense of noncombat information. Regardless of my supposed exaggerations, I do mean it.

 

[A Free Man]

snip.

I'll be honest I didn't read your post in it's entirety so ignore my comments and call me ignorant if you wish but I'll go on anyway. I think I understand what you are saying and I completely disagree with you. The car metaphor you used is just plain wrong. Open world's and good combat systems are two of my most important factors when determining how good an RPG is. On the other hand the seats in cars are of almost no importance at all so to group the decisions together is nonsensical. I understand that we may differ in opinion there and you might value other aspects of a game more but that is certainly how I see it. Hell one of the best things about M&B and the reason I loved the first couple of games was it's relatively open world and combat system. As far as I'm concerned there is a lot of choice in Skyrim, clearly it is limited as are many games in the sense that to make a 100% choice based game would be near impossible and just not viable.

My reaction to your post my be slightly warped however as I am very against genres in general. I don't like grouping games (or movies or books) and then judging them in their groups. Perhaps you are right and Skyrim shouldn't be classified as an RPG but it is. So in my opinion it is an RPG and is a good game, and is therefore a good RPG regardless of it's contents.

 

[Jetsetneo]

I sincerely doubt you've play much of any modern PnP RPG to actually mean that. Its full of hyperbole.

I played enough of it to note the shift to a heavily combat oriented system at the expense of noncombat information. Regardless of my supposed exaggerations, I do mean it.

lol!

And I don't mean that lol in a mocking way, I just find it hilarious that in other boards (where pnp RPGs are the focus) that is the same exact line people use to express their rage at the shift from 3/3.5 to 4th ed.

Everybody's arguing in circles I swear.

 

[Draconalis]

lol!

And I don't mean that lol in a mocking way, I just find it hilarious that in other boards (where pnp RPGs are the focus) that is the same exact line people use to express their rage at the shift from 3/3.5 to 4th ed.

Everybody's arguing in circles I swear.

Yes... recent D&D articles on the escapist have brought this to my attention as well. These were my comments in said articles.

It's funny really. Most of the complaints on page one were complaints I had when 3rd edition first rolled around.

2nd edition fo life nigz!

"When 2nd edition really got focused on story [in 1989], we had what I call the first era of RPG decadence and it was based on story. The idea that the DM is going to tell you a story, and you go from point A to point B to point C. The narrative is linear and [the DM is a] storyteller going to tell you a static story, and you would just get to roll dice occasionally. 3rd edition came out and said 'To Hell with that,'

That... and the d20 system... are what I hate about 3rd edition.

Giving people the power to make whatever they want leads to people trying to be creative, but end up being dumb. I have always found that working within the confines of limitations brings about true creativity. Sure my Dwarf can't be a pally, but he can be a fighter/priest that aspires to be as like the paladins he witness in his youth.

Ugh... all these articles are doing for me is making me miss, and hate all the editions that aren't 2nd... all the more.

 

[Thaius]

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

Looks like someone's only been playing shitty Bethesda WRPGs.

Well, am I not correct that this is the majority of Western RPGs? Most of them allow you to create your own character, meaning the protagonist has no personality except what you make (basically eliminating him/her as a story character). You can of course name off a few that defy this, but almost all of them will be made by Bioware. Unless I've just really, really missed out on some good RPGs, I'm pretty sure this can be said of most Western RPGs.

 

[Joccaren]

I'll be honest I didn't read your post in it's entirety so ignore my comments and call me ignorant if you wish but I'll go on anyway. I think I understand what you are saying and I completely disagree with you. The car metaphor you used is just plain wrong. Open world's and good combat systems are two of my most important factors when determining how good an RPG is. On the other hand the seats in cars are of almost no importance at all so to group the decisions together is nonsensical. I understand that we may differ in opinion there and you might value other aspects of a game more but that is certainly how I see it. Hell one of the best things about M&B and the reason I loved the first couple of games was it's relatively open world and combat system. As far as I'm concerned there is a lot of choice in Skyrim, clearly it is limited as are many games in the sense that to make a 100% choice based game would be near impossible and just not viable.

My reaction to your post my be slightly warped however as I am very against genres in general. I don't like grouping games (or movies or books) and then judging them in their groups. Perhaps you are right and Skyrim shouldn't be classified as an RPG but it is. So in my opinion it is an RPG and is a good game, and is therefore a good RPG regardless of it's contents.

I'll disagree with you right from the bat here.

Combat systems and open worlds are not the defining factors in an RPG.

If so, BF3 scores well as an RPG as it has large open levels, and a good combat system. Nevermind that its not an RPG at all.

What matters in RPGs is not the combat system - Most certainly not the random chance to kill someone within that combat system - nor the open world element. As was stated earlier, in an RP you can roleplay a guard guarding a castle, you aren't going to get a lot of open world experience out of that. You'll get basically none. Combat is likewise not massively important - though it has been given more emphasis recently - as it should be 100% possible to make it through a lot of an RP experience without fighting. Sneaking, hiring thugs, talking and learning about what's ahead, finding out where traps are and luring your enemies onto them - all alternative ways to get away from combat.

What are the important parts of an RPG are the characters and the world, the players ability within that world and the playing of a role, not being that role.

Skyrim succeeds in the latter, but fails in the former, and here is why:
In Skyrim, the player can do anything they want really. They are free to play as they will. The main problem with this, however, is that nothing responds to that. What is the point in levelling up to max level? There is none. Honestly, it just makes the game harder due to level scaling. Why complete the thieves guild questline? So Brynjolf will stop talking to you? That's about it, otherwise its simply that you get loot and money. Why do anything in the world, when all that will happen is a guard will have one more random line of dialogue, that they MIGHT say based off a random answer.
The world does not respond to you. A very popular example is the Companions. Join them later in the game, after you have killed Alduin. After everyone knows you are Dovahkiin. After you've become Archmage of the College of Winterhold, assassinated the Emperor, finished the thieves guild. Do everything else that the game has to offer - absolutely everything - then talk to the companions for the first time. This is what will be said somewhere in the conversation: "Are you sure you want to let him join? I've never even heard of him!".
That is poor, and just lazy really. All that would have been needed is a few extra voice files and some if/then/elses and variables, and he could have acknowledged who you were. "Are you sure you want to let him join? He's a mage, not a warrior!".
Likewise, I greatly doubt that the College of Winterhold is actually for mages my warrior went in there, and completed the entire story with his sword. No-one asked "Why aren't you using magic?", and when fighting with the companions, using magic only, no-one thought it was dishonerable, and that I should fight like a Nord should. The world didn't care. Everything in Skyrim is there for the express purpose of you satisfying your want to kill something in some exotic way. The choices mean bugger all, since very little happens to deal with them. You can kill an entire towns worth of guards, pay your way out of it or get sent to jail, and you know what? No-one cares.
Playing a role not being a role may sound odd, but it is important. In an RPG, you should play your role, and not be able to be your role. An example if you will:
In Skyrim, I am able to aim my bow and kill a giant at level 1.
What should happen is that I tell my character to aim their bow, and their aim decides whether they hit or miss.
In Skyrim, I override my character's skill with MY skill, making the role become me instead of me become the role. My character could be the worst shot in all of Tamriel, level 1 archery and unable to hit that tree that the bow is right next to, but I can override that and become the best bowman in Tamriel in an instant.
This should not be possible. It forces the role to play the player, instead of the player play the role. It is why no RPG should ever let you take control of aim or any other combat related action. If you do, you are not role playing, you are making that role play you (In Soviet Russia...). The pickpocket system does this correct. Combat systems here do it incorrect. Lockpicking does it incorrect, ect.


Good Combat (Proper RPG style system, which most don't think of as a 'Good' system, hence my disagreement with you right from the start) and an Open world are not so important to an RPG. The world itself, and how it reacts to you, and whether you play a role or that role plays you, are all far more important, and some of the defining features of an RPG. For having fun in an RPG Combat might be important, as might Open-Worldeness for some, but that is not important for it being an RPG.

 

[Odinsson]

It brings me great joy to see someone referencing the great game that is Mount and Blade. Despite having no story to speak of, it has interesting characters and probably the best sword combat engine I've ever seen.
What I'd love to see is a big-budget, Skyrim-esque game that used Mount and Blade's combat system and had actually interesting companions, but also had an engaging quest to keep it tied together