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

[Skin]

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

Strange. In another thread some guy was willing to live and die on the fact that MnB had a story... I tried to explain, but he managed to strawman his way through the argument.

One more thing: I see alot of people stating that by giving a TES style game good combat, it will somehow make it a great game (alot of people saying Skyrim with Dark Souls combat). I completely disagree.

The problem does not stem from having a poor combat system, but rather being completely unfocused - as is the problem with open world games. MnB is a combat game. You "can" go into a town and see what is what, but why would you want to? It's all about the visceral combat and the large scale battles and becoming something in the world. And that is the absolute extent of the game. Dark Souls also is completely focused on tough, gritty combat and trying to survive against all odds. Not once did the developers think to give players the option of catching butterflies or creating their own potions...

And as such, TES will never, ever be as engaging in one particular aspect as another game. There are better sim games, there are better adventure games, there are better combat games - open world games are a mixed bag and end up being the jack of all trades, master of none.

But if you remove what makes TES the game it is, people will be pissed. And that is the problem with pumping out sequel after sequel. The quality starts to dip and everything becomes stale, but people will still buy it because they liked the last game.

I am not saying they shouldn't improve the combat of TES games - infact I was furious that Bethesda were stupid enough not to do a straight rip-off of MnB's combat system. But it won't change things much.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

Roleplaying isn't always about the plot that is fed to you by the game designer.

I consider Skyrim to be one of the best roleplaying games ever because YOU play whatever role you want and the game follows suit.

For example, I played an Argonian. The game already has Argonian specific dialogue that explains how people feel about Argonians in general (as well as books on everything from Argonian phylogeny to natural habitat). From there, I decided my past would be a troubled one, where I was found as a child and raised by bandits. I joined the thieves guild and eventually became master of it. In doing so, the game changed in dozens of ways to reflect that I was master of the thieves guild.

Shaping the world around you through your actions is an incredibly powerful roleplaying mechanic, and to say that "Skyrim is definitely not the best RPG because there is a distinct lack of roleplaying" shows a relatively shallow understanding of what roleplaying truly is.

 

[Scars Unseen]

It's funny reading some of the recent posts... Story defines an RPG? Combat systems don't? You people obviously don't know your genre history. Role playing evolved from wargaming, and as such, the combat system - or more modernly put, the conflict resolution system - will always be the primary method of defining an RPG. Setting CRPGs aside(since I've already said my piece on how those are and aren't fully realized RPGs), RPGs are defined by one or two things. One of those is setting. Ravenloft, Forgotten Realms, the Jade Empire, World of Darkness, etc. The other defining characteristic is the system upon which it is built. Now the important thing to remember here is that you can completely strip away the setting, and it will still be an RPG. The same cannot be said of the system. Without a system of rules, an RPG is nothing. Just a smattering of barely coherent back story.

The closest thing in PnP to what some of you are going on about is an adventure(using D&D terminology... different systems call it different things). An adventure is neither setting, nor system, though it often relies on one or both. An adventure is basically the primary method by which we give players something to do. Stringing a series of adventures gives you a campaign(most similar to tightly knit series like Mass Effect and Baldur's Gate). But here's the rub: different groups(or even players within a single group) like different styles of adventuring. Some prefer highly structured adventures and campaigns with a deep story and continuity between adventures(there are obviously a lot of that sort commenting on this thread). Others just want a bare bones story(if even that) and a dungeon full of baddies to kill and loot. Still others want to be able to go wherever and do whatever(commonly referred to as player agency), which is pretty demanding on a DM, but can be fun when it works out.

Skyrim(and TES games in general) obviously caters more two the second two sorts of adventure types rather than the first. Not to everyone's liking, sure, but whether you like the game or not is irrelevant to determining whether the game is an RPG or not. Other arguments against it(especially those comparing it to previous TES games) is once again off base, because what you are really arguing is not a matter of definition, but rather of scope. And I don't think anyone is trying to claim that Skyrim is a deeper game than, say for example, Daggerfall. It isn't. More polished, certainly. With more enjoyable combat... well I personally say yes, but some people prefer the older system(there's that word again).

 

[Your Fearless Captain]

I need to stop reading these Skyrim threads. There ruining it for me.

 

[Draconalis]

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

Well said... I see that there are better people for arguing this than me. I don't think I could have said it so well had I spent an hour trying.

Bravo.

You people obviously don't know your genre history. Role playing evolved from wargaming

The key word here is "evolved". Combat might have been important when it first came out, but it moved passed that and defined what an RPG means.

 

[Dastardly]

snip

You're taking a very narrow definition of RPG in your post. While some of the things called "RPG elements" have nothing to do with roleplay, there are still many different elements on which to focus -- and different players disagree on which is the "most important."

A lot of what you're describing sounds to me like "a guided story." It's the job of the world to provide flavor and story to you, with a heavy emphasis on character interaction. But that's your personal preference on the flavor of an RPG -- and one could argue that character interaction isn't an essential part of the term.

Is Mass Effect an RPG? Yes. You are assuming the role of an existing character and playing it. The story is already spelled out ahead of time, and there are very limited paths, but you are indeed playing a role.

Is Skyrim an RPG? Absolutely. You are allowed to create a character of your own, play him or her as you see fit. Rather than being handed a role to play, you are deciding the role. And in this sort of game, many players often prefer that the game get out of their way. Instead of telling me who my character is, or what my story must be, I want to decide. In a sense, Skyrim is a more pure roleplaying game -- it's a tookit that allows you to play a role of your choosing.

Some people prefer more structure, some people prefer more freedom. It can never be purely both, and will nearly always be a mixture of the two. Just like with coffee, different people like it mixed differently.

Also, you seem to be asking every RPG to contain all the same elements, which is just impractical and unfair. I like chocolate, but not everything I eat needs to contain chocolate. Sometimes it makes sense, sometimes it doesn't, and sometimes it's just not there because they decided to put in something different. If every food had every flavor and texture in it every time, we'd all be barfing up the same, awful, gray paste.

 

[Draconalis]

In a sense, Skyrim is a more pure roleplaying game -- it's a tookit that allows you to play a role of your choosing.

I would agree if the world reacted to your choices in any real way, but as it stands, I see Role playing in Skyrim as akin to masturbation. It's self gratification that doesn't really accomplish anything. What's the point of pretending... excuse me, role playing all these things about your character when the world can't respond to it?

Hell, the next time I play a racing game, I can "role play" that the driver is being hunted by aliens, and his only escape is to hide in the world of racing... but what does that accomplish?

 

[Dastardly]

In a sense, Skyrim is a more pure roleplaying game -- it's a tookit that allows you to play a role of your choosing.

I would agree if the world reacted to your choices in any real way, but as it stands, I see Role playing in Skyrim as akin to masturbation. It's self gratification that doesn't really accomplish anything. What's the point of pretending... excuse me, role playing all these things about your character when the world can't respond to it?

Hell, the next time I play a racing game, I can "role play" that the driver is being hunted by aliens, and his only escape is to hide in the world of racing... but what does that accomplish?

Why does it have to "accomplish" anything? It's called RolePLAY, not RoleREALISTICALLY-SIMULATE. A five-year-old pretending to be a Ninja Turtle is more truly "roleplay" than anything we do in video games...

 

[Draconalis]

Why does it have to "accomplish" anything? It's called RolePLAY, not RoleREALISTICALLY-SIMULATE. A five-year-old pretending to be a Ninja Turtle is more truly "roleplay" than anything we do in video games...

Role Play is supposed to increase immersion, that's why it should accomplish something.

I agree with your latter statement though.

 

[SFMB]

Skyrim IS an action adventure. There are no RPG's for consoles or computers. This thread should have ended long ago.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

Role Playing Game.

Role Playing.

Depends what you mean by it, for me an RPG can be one of two things, one where YOU choose the role like Skyrim or one where you play a given role, like Dragon Age (let's use Origins).

Neither is inherently better in my view, on the one hand I like to see where devs will take us on their adventure, playing the grey warden, however limited to that role I am, is interesting and the RPG mechanics of weaponry, tactics, flexibility, teamwork and yes even inventory is a core component I enjoy about all RPG's.

Skyrim is a free role, I choose my character and I think I prefer that role in general, I like the flexibility, I have a vivid imagination and I like choosing what to do in situations, even if it means just walking away because that character just wouldn't play there.

So if you restrict RPG's to those with a given role then Skyrim is lacklustre, true enough, you have some guidance down the path of Dovahkiin but nothing beyond that. If you don't make such a distinction (and let's face it, it's a silly distinction) then it is a fantastic RPG, allowing you reams of choice in almost every encounter, sometimes to the point of insanity (or 'the devs thought of everything').

So eh, disagree with the false choices here, it's not a bad RPG because your definition of RPG is flawed.

 

[Gluzzbung]

The unfortunate thing about Skyrim (and all of the Elder Scrolls Games for that matter) Is that there isn't this overarching story that you can feel unfolding. Nad the even more unfortunate thing abotu Skyrim is that the Sidequests are woefully crapped out and, instead of the enticing reasons given in other Bethesda games on why I'm going here and killing this, it's just, "Oh, I want this sword because it was stolen," and "The big bad bandits are being bullys again, go and sort them out will you dragonborn?" No. No I bloody won't because I'm already level 81 and all I do is go around villages looking like Emporer Plapetine and shooting electicity from my fingers. I liked the Dark Brotherhood but that's about it for the quests and the only other thing I liked was the environment. Well, bits of it, if you've seen one snowy forest you;ve seen them all, and it would be really nice if I could see a decent holiday-worthy coastline in one of the TES games, btw, I've only played Oblivion and Skyrim, Morrowind made a sort of "bloo" sound when It crashed on a loading screen.

 

[DocBalance]

[

I would agree if the world reacted to your choices in any real way, but as it stands, I see Role playing in Skyrim as akin to masturbation. It's self gratification that doesn't really accomplish anything. What's the point of pretending... excuse me, role playing all these things about your character when the world can't respond to it?

Hell, the next time I play a racing game, I can "role play" that the driver is being hunted by aliens, and his only escape is to hide in the world of racing... but what does that accomplish?

The world does react to you, though. After I joined the Dark Brotherhood, I've had random guards whisper to me as I pass, "I know who you are. Hail Sithis!" In Whiterun, guards note my accomplishments with The Companions, or jest that my position as the new recruit means that I simply bring the mead. When I break into an Elven Stronghold, people will pull me aside and say things like "Word is that you're the one who gave the Thalmor a black eye. You know how to make enemies, don't you?" People talk about everything I do, they have comments on the shifting political structure, they respect, fear, or mock me all based on their own personal preferences. The world is very reactive, you just have to pay attention to the NPCs to notice it.

 

[Fappy]

DnD has three things:
1. Role-playing
2. Emphasis on freedom in character building and combat.
3. Finding ways to piss off the DM.
So yes, I'd say that it is fair to judge RPGs by the way they handle combat and character progression. And Skyrim gave you complete control over how you build your character, so I'd call it a RPG. And faulting the game for not being able to react to what you do in the world? Technical limitations. Play a tabletop game if you want that level of interaction.

Bingo. Said it better than I could.

I don't know why people try to make true RPGs out to be these amazing roleplaying "I can do whatever I want and have the world respond accordingly" experiences. Video Games are a limited interactive experience due to their very nature. Tabletop gaming = infinite possibilities.

 

[Scars Unseen]

You people obviously don't know your genre history. Role playing evolved from wargaming

The key word here is "evolved". Combat might have been important when it first came out, but it moved passed that and defined what an RPG means.

Not so much. Go look on RPG.net and look at the Tabletop Roleplaying Open forum. 90% of the threads are people asking about the rules systems. RPGs are defined by rules and, occasionally, genre. FATE is a rules light RPG that lends itself to fast play with little prior planning. D&D is more or less back to being a tactical wargame with stats. Legend of the Five Rings is defined mostly by genre(since Asian Fantasy isn't as crowded as Western Fantasy), but also by its fairly unique dice system(love Roll and Keep). Amber is a diceless system. World of Darkness pretty much made its living off of being "not D&D"(well that and catering to the Hot Topic crowd).

Moving back to CRPGs, D&D games are generally judged by how well they emulate their given system(Baldur's Gate has quite a few mods designed to bring it closer), One of the biggest initial complaints about Fallout 3 was that they tossed the SPECIAL system(paying only lip service to it with the stat names). The main reason people tolerated The Temple of Elemental Evil's mass of bugs is because it remains the closest emulation of the D&D system ever to find its way onto a screen. What's the biggest complaint from TES game to TES game? Changes to the rules system.

I had more, I think, but we just got called to a meeting and told that some us are probably getting laid off, so I have other things on my mind now...

 

[Joccaren]

Oh, man... people are starting to think that to be an RPG you have to have character development? XD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_(video_game)

Yeah, that's the sound of your argument shattering into pieces.

Umm. I do not get your point. Rogue is a 'Roguelike' Dungeon Crawler (See 'Genre' to the side).

Role Playing Game.

Role Playing.

Depends what you mean by it, for me an RPG can be one of two things, one where YOU choose the role like Skyrim or one where you play a given role, like Dragon Age (let's use Origins).

Big problem right here. By that definition, EVERY game is an RPG. Doesn't work that way. An RPG is a game in which RPG elements are displayed in their purest form. Not any old game where you assume the role of someone else, like I assume the role of Master Chief in Halo, or my soldier in BF3.

Neither is inherently better in my view, on the one hand I like to see where devs will take us on their adventure, playing the grey warden, however limited to that role I am, is interesting and the RPG mechanics of weaponry, tactics, flexibility, teamwork and yes even inventory is a core component I enjoy about all RPG's.

Now we're getting to some RPG elements. Having one or more of these alone does not make a game an RPG however. In Skyrim, you shoot bows and magic in first person. Does that make it a first person shooter?

Skyrim is a free role, I choose my character and I think I prefer that role in general, I like the flexibility, I have a vivid imagination and I like choosing what to do in situations, even if it means just walking away because that character just wouldn't play there.

One of the things Skyrim does right as an RPG. You are left alone to do what you will.

So if you restrict RPG's to those with a given role then Skyrim is lacklustre, true enough, you have some guidance down the path of Dovahkiin but nothing beyond that. If you don't make such a distinction (and let's face it, it's a silly distinction) then it is a fantastic RPG, allowing you reams of choice in almost every encounter, sometimes to the point of insanity (or 'the devs thought of everything').

From what I understand, its not that your not given a strict role - merely that the world isn't exactly a world. Its more of a painting. You can look at it in all sorts of different ways, but it still remains the same painting. You might notice a new detail or two, but its still the same painting. You also notice the painting is rather bland. The figures in it, even the main centerpiece, appear to be drawn in outlines. That is a very apt comparison of Skyrim IMO.
No matter what you do, the world doesn't change.
Guards might occasionally say a random line about one of your accomplishments, but there is no change to the world.
Your main character is purposefully left vague for you to discover, and that is an artistic choice, but 99% of other characters will be just as vague and empty of any depth.
The world doesn't feel alive - it feels static.

So eh, disagree with the false choices here, it's not a bad RPG because your definition of RPG is flawed.

Really, most people's definition of RPG is flawed, and it seems no-one can agree on a true definition.
Seeing as the point of these definitions is to communicate something, so long as the same definition means multiple things, its purpose is not being accomplished.
The simplest thing to do is go back to the old definition, rather than adding a million new exceptions to the rule to allow any game a Dev calls 'RPG' to be an RPG. For what I mean by the old definition, P&P RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons are RPGs. There is, as of yet, no successful copy of that into the gaming world. Some come closish, others fall far behind.
Most video games that call themselves RPGs actually are not. Mass Effect, Skyrim, Dragon Age 2 (I'm still debating about Origins. It has pretty much everything but the open world - Do I count it or exclude it?) - all 'Action Adventure' or 'Third Person Shooter' games with RPG elements.

The world does react to you, though. After I joined the Dark Brotherhood, I've had random guards whisper to me as I pass, "I know who you are. Hail Sithis!" In Whiterun, guards note my accomplishments with The Companions, or jest that my position as the new recruit means that I simply bring the mead. When I break into an Elven Stronghold, people will pull me aside and say things like "Word is that you're the one who gave the Thalmor a black eye. You know how to make enemies, don't you?" People talk about everything I do, they have comments on the shifting political structure, they respect, fear, or mock me all based on their own personal preferences. The world is very reactive, you just have to pay attention to the NPCs to notice it.

Perhaps you are misinterpreting 'reacts' to you. Go win WW3 all by yourself, then come home and have 1/50 people you bump into say one sentence to you about it, then walk off. And they all say the same sentence. You would feel as if no-one was really reacting to your accomplishment. It is the same with Skyrim.
What Skyrim could have done instead is fixed its radiant quest system a bit, and used your accomplishments as context. You're the leader of the Thieve's guild? Great, that lady over there had her ring stolen in the night by bandits, and would like you to steal it back.
Dark brotherhood you say? That guard knows a bandit leader planning an attack on the hold, but the Jarl won't waste the men to stop him.
Have your actions have a PURPOSE, not just be a purpose unto themselves.
Get back to that WW3 you get home analogy, what if those 1/50 people asked you to help them, instead of all saying the same sentence and walking off? What if they had a problem they couldn't fix, but they knew you could. You probably wouldn't help them -war is a traumatic thing and you wouldn't be ready for it - but you would feel as if the world was reacting more to what you'd done. That girl you always liked but she never noticed you? Now she's flirting with you because you won a war by yourself. In the 'Skyrim Scenario', she would walk up and say 'You won a war by yourself? Nice work' then walk off. Having a sentence or two said every now and then isn't reacting to you, it is a wasted opportunity.
That is one of many ways in which the 'reaction' the world has to you could be improved.

One final thing before I go: When I got the money from the general store keeper in Riften for the Thieves Guild quest, he wouldn't sell anything to me. I went back the next day - same thing. I went back a week later - same thing. I later found out that I was merely getting there 2 minutes too early, and that disappointed me although it should have made me happy I could keep selling. Why did it disappoint me? Because for a moment there, I thought that Skyrim had reacted to me. That because I had stolen from him, that shopkeeper was no longer going to sell to me due to me betraying his trust. Hell, I was considering reloading the save. An opportunity missed by Bethesda for the sake of convenience. Something that simple added depth not only to that character, but to the world as a whole.

Not so much. Go look on RPG.net and look at the Tabletop Roleplaying Open forum. 90% of the threads are people asking about the rules systems. RPGs are defined by rules and, occasionally, genre. FATE is a rules light RPG that lends itself to fast play with little prior planning. D&D is more or less back to being a tactical wargame with stats. Legend of the Five Rings is defined mostly by genre(since Asian Fantasy isn't as crowded as Western Fantasy), but also by its fairly unique dice system(love Roll and Keep). Amber is a diceless system. World of Darkness pretty much made its living off of being "not D&D"(well that and catering to the Hot Topic crowd).

Moving back to CRPGs, D&D games are generally judged by how well they emulate their given system(Baldur's Gate has quite a few mods designed to bring it closer), One of the biggest initial complaints about Fallout 3 was that they tossed the SPECIAL system(paying only lip service to it with the stat names). The main reason people tolerated The Temple of Elemental Evil's mass of bugs is because it remains the closest emulation of the D&D system ever to find its way onto a screen. What's the biggest complaint from TES game to TES game? Changes to the rules system.

I had more, I think, but we just got called to a meeting and told that some us are probably getting laid off, so I have other things on my mind now...

I will quote you here instead of your previous post 'cause its easier, but I feel you are both right and wrong.

You are saying that a defining factor of RPGs is their systems in place - And I'll agree with that, all the RPG elements working themselves into systems and forming what makes the RPG a game. In particular you mention the conflict resolution system. You also heavily imply that the conflict resolution system is a combat system. IMO, no.
In an RPG there are multiple ways to approach things - Killy Killy isn't the only option. You could do an awareness check and find out their's an army of Orcs nearby, then go around a different way, or sneak past them, or fight them, or maybe even try to talk to their leader. In all of these cases, you have been presented with a form of conflict, and you chose how to resolve it - the Conflict resolution system. Combat is a part of this, and dependent on the DM, a large part too. However, to elevate its importance above the rest of the conflict resolution system, and imply that it is the combat part of that system alone that defines RPGs, you turn it from an RPG into an action adventure game - likely with RPG elements. I do not know if that was intentional, and I'm thinking not, but combat isn't a defining factor of RPGs. Its the underlying systems that deal with combat and everything else in the world.

And I'll agree with you here somewhat. The statements somewhat imply that D&D is an RPG, CRPGs try to emulate it and others, and how well they do as an RPG is based off how well they stick to the rules system. I don't see Skyrim fitting appropriately into any P&P rules system because it relies on player skill instead of character skill.

Good luck with your meeting.

 

[Joccaren]

The roguelike is a sub-genre of role-playing video games

...what was your point again?

Rogue was pretty much the first RPG in video game form, and all that has is 'pick your class and raise your skills' - which Skyrim has too. What else do you want before it can be classified as an RPG?

Is Morrowind an RPG? Is Deus Ex an RPG? Is Final Fantasy an RPG? If the answer to any of those questions is 'yes', then so is Skyrim. If your answer to any of those questions is 'no'... you have pretty damn strict rules on what an RPG is.

Admittedly I did not click on the link and follow it.
As for my definition of an RPG, "Pick your class and raise your skills" is an RPG Element, not an RPG game. You can see the rest of my posts for me explaining RPG games.

 

[Keith Reedy]

McSnip with extra Cheese

I think you meant to quote someone else because this just proves my point that we have no good definition of what an rpg is considered and that he just doesn't consider skyrim to be an rpg, which is fine with me. I disagree but to have this argument we need a definition of what makes a game an rpg we don't have this and neither does he so simply put we're wasting time. Though since we're here we obviously have time to waste.

 

[RomanceIsDead]

Combat is the one thing that a game MUST get right this day in age. Skyrim's combat was horrible. HORRIBLE!