J'zargo is displeased that he is not memorable, but is conscious of the fact that many of my peers are very underwhelming.Jynthor said:
The World of Skyrim Means Nothing...
- Thread starter Emiscary
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yeah, the world feels dead and stagnant. The only character whose name I could remember died in the last game so... I really don't care.
If any I play it because I have like 3 characters who hang around diferent corners of the map and none of them discover they are dragonborn, so is fun to pretend they exist in they same universe. And yes, Skyrim's story is so boring that I had to make my own.
If any I play it because I have like 3 characters who hang around diferent corners of the map and none of them discover they are dragonborn, so is fun to pretend they exist in they same universe. And yes, Skyrim's story is so boring that I had to make my own.
Combat was better then Oblivion and Morrowind..... I would even prefer it over Fallout since fallout's entire combat design was based around the instant win button known as VATSAnthraxus said:
fallout's combat is so craptastic you might as well open the console, type TGM, and just run around, the difference between that and VATS in completely unnoticeable.
well, the thing about Skyrim is, that's certainly a way to play it, but there IS a deep rich setting there for you if you want to explore it. It's actually the first Elder Scrolls game I actually cared about the story for. In fact, it made me MORE interested in the other games' stories as well. So it not only had a decent story and great setting in its own right, it made other games better as well for providing a historian's eye to the events in those games.
Feel free to run around chopping off ALL the heads though, I wouldn't begrudge you that. It's great fun.
Feel free to run around chopping off ALL the heads though, I wouldn't begrudge you that. It's great fun.
The thing about Skyrim is that I just can't care about it.
I mean, it just seems like 90% of the characters that I meet are complete assholes. And the other 10% could still be assholes, I just can't confirm it because the game will only give me two options without giving me any context or options to confirm my suspicions. (In My Time Of Need: Saadia's Quest)
Not only that, they are BORING, POORLY WRITTEN assholes! I mean, sure, the game seemed fun; it was pretty, the combat was fun, and you get to fight FRIGGIN DRAGONS! But I shouldn't catch myself yawning when I'm playing a game.
I just recently re-installed Fallout New Vegas, and I've gotta say; New Vegas makes Skyrim look like shit. Sure, the graphics aren't as nice, the people do the whole 'soul stare' thing, and the combat isn't as good, but the people and places have character! New Vegas has it's fair share of assholes, but it also makes me kind of see where these "villains" are coming from too. Plus, you also have characters who are mostly good, or at least friendly towards you, like the companion characters you can get. This makes me care about what happens to these characters at the end of the game. I like Veronica's quirky attitude, I like cyber-dog Rex, I want to know what happens to these characters.
This makes New Vegas ten times better than Skyrim, in my opinion.
I mean, it just seems like 90% of the characters that I meet are complete assholes. And the other 10% could still be assholes, I just can't confirm it because the game will only give me two options without giving me any context or options to confirm my suspicions. (In My Time Of Need: Saadia's Quest)
Not only that, they are BORING, POORLY WRITTEN assholes! I mean, sure, the game seemed fun; it was pretty, the combat was fun, and you get to fight FRIGGIN DRAGONS! But I shouldn't catch myself yawning when I'm playing a game.
I just recently re-installed Fallout New Vegas, and I've gotta say; New Vegas makes Skyrim look like shit. Sure, the graphics aren't as nice, the people do the whole 'soul stare' thing, and the combat isn't as good, but the people and places have character! New Vegas has it's fair share of assholes, but it also makes me kind of see where these "villains" are coming from too. Plus, you also have characters who are mostly good, or at least friendly towards you, like the companion characters you can get. This makes me care about what happens to these characters at the end of the game. I like Veronica's quirky attitude, I like cyber-dog Rex, I want to know what happens to these characters.
This makes New Vegas ten times better than Skyrim, in my opinion.
VATs made it tolerable? a instant win button that makes you godlike regardless of difficulty setting is even remotely good combat to you?Anthraxus said:
Reads the rest of your post................ you seriously think turn based combat is good at all? wow that's............. kinda sad.
Turn based anything is up there with
-Dice-rolls
-Quick-time events
-Cutscenes
as the shittiest things one could possibly put in games
Its almost as silly as the Witcher's stupid "this type of sword doesn't work on monsters for.......... no explainable reason".
Skyrim is the first Elder Scrolls game that I haven't dumped a hundred plus hours into. It's also the only one wherein I only have one character who hasn't reached the level cap yet. The world just isn't engaging to me. The people are boring and unlike other Elder Scrolls games I've played, you have to wind and, crawl your way through every single dungeon instead of finding and exploiting their backdoor.
I know there are a lot of similarities between Skyrim, Oblivion and, Morrowind but on the other two I've clocked a couple hundred hours between several characters. Maybe I'm burned out from too much of the same thing, I dunno. It just seemed like Skyrim was really over-exaggerating its own plot.
"Hello, I am Imperial and I hate Stormcloak because I do!"
"Hello, I am Stormcloak and I hate Imperial because I do!"
"Hello, we ams at war but lets not fight until you attack first!"
Complained about this in another thread but you'd think Stormcloaks would be hostile towards an Imperial loving Dragonborn.
I know there are a lot of similarities between Skyrim, Oblivion and, Morrowind but on the other two I've clocked a couple hundred hours between several characters. Maybe I'm burned out from too much of the same thing, I dunno. It just seemed like Skyrim was really over-exaggerating its own plot.
"Hello, I am Imperial and I hate Stormcloak because I do!"
"Hello, I am Stormcloak and I hate Imperial because I do!"
"Hello, we ams at war but lets not fight until you attack first!"
Complained about this in another thread but you'd think Stormcloaks would be hostile towards an Imperial loving Dragonborn.
One word. Paarthurnax. That was a character that both was memorable for me, and threw me a fucking loop when I first met him.Tazzy da Devil said:
And when the Blades want you to kill him, you can go talk to him about it, and he gives remarkably candid comments about the situation, followed by the ultimate armor piercing question: "What is better, to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort?"
Skyrim is most definitely the most polarizing ES game released.Shoggoth2588 said:
I know many people who despised Oblivion yet love Skyrim, and may people who loved Oblivion yet hate Skyrim.
Its very odd given the similarities between Oblivion and Skyrim.
It is almost as polarizing as Fallout 3 and New vegas were, many people on both sides.
I take it he was saying that since combat was so bad in the first place, the VATS system made it better just by getting combat over with.SajuukKhar said:
The nice thing about playing FO3 on the PC, was able to removed the button that allowed VATS access. Thus, never used VATS. Personally, I didn't find VATS bad, as it just gave combat control back to stats, rather then on player skill, but it did allow making tough encounters too easy.
I miss my turn based combat games. XCOM -- Jagged Alliance -- Might and Magic.
I never used VATS, or Fast Travel, or did I turn on The Radio, hate all three of them.Murmillos said:
Also I never could stand turn based games, I always ended up walking away and making toast or something while I waited for the painfully slow and dumb enemy AI to make its attack.
It is just so.... non-interactive.
It is explained. Monsters have a much higher health then normal people do. You could use a standard steel sword, but since they have so much life -- you are going to be chopping for a while. Luckly, monsters of the world are subtable to silver. Thus, silver weapons work better against them.SajuukKhar said:
But here I am.. typing baffled, that as much as you defend the bullshit of The Elder Scrolls lore/gameplay/logic, you are unwilling to accept that the developers that it would be cool that logic of the world make it so that one has to use two different weapons. One for man, one for monsters....
Yea, the radio stations did get old. I wish they had more content to it. Replaying the same 15 40's music over and over was got old after a while.SajuukKhar said:
I use fast travel a good half of the time. Some days I'm willing to want to continue to explore and take encounters, other times I just want to get from point A to B back to A then onward to C.
What games are you playing that you can make toast waiting for the computers turn? I'll admit, X-Com did have annoying missions with 20+ aliens all needing to take turns... but myself, I grew up and enjoyed the turned based games. And of course, each game should be judged on its own. There have been painfully dumb turned-based games, and some fantastically awesome turned-based games. But I understand if you don't like them; you won't catch me playing sports games.
It comes down to imagination. How much can you, or how much are you willing and wanting to, spend the time to really roleplay and get into character? The world's there for you to live in, you just have to do it.
As an aside, I find Skyrim utterly pointless and it bored the pants off me after I killed the first dragon.
As an aside, I find Skyrim utterly pointless and it bored the pants off me after I killed the first dragon.