Ways that Oblivion is superior to Skyrim

[michael87cn]

I have found Skyrim to be a step down from Oblivion in a few ways:

- No athletics or acrobatics. Really, I want to run faster and jump further as I progress in the game.

- The character creator is worse than the one in Oblivion (which was pretty bad too)

- The UI is ugly compared to the one in Oblivion. It looks like it just has a white/gray frame.

- The UI was designed for looks (that's a failed attempt) rather than functionality. You can't sort your inventory, you can't view your character when equipping stuff.

- Oblivion performs better at it's worst than Skyrim does at it's worst, both compared on the PS3.

Well, there are a few and I know there are more because I have read about them on the Bethesda forums. What say you?

1) The ability to sprint did away with the need for athletics. I agree with acrobatics being cool, but really it didn't do anything for you in Oblivion. Now, it was useful in Morrowind... as was levitation, but I see why they did away with both of these abilities. (difficult to design a game around players that can fly and jump like super heroes)

2) I don't see a difference, it uses slider bars. The characters look a lot better than ever before... don't see a problem here.

3) Matter of opinion, I like the new interface.

4) Your inventory is already sorted into small categories by alphabetical order. You shouldn't ever need to look through a list longer than maybe 15 things in any category. Also, that's what finding a home\place to store your treasure is for, losing all the clutter. Also, you're not supposed to be a walking supply depot anyway. And on your other point, all you have to do is press a button two times to view your actual character with difference armor on. The lack of a character being visible in the UI is a good thing, it allows room for you to view all the glorious 3D items...

5) This is downright biased falsehood, you're fooling yourself if you believe this. Oblivion had to make the infamous "loading..." every few yards... Skyrim doesn't suffer from this at all.

6) You're a bored troll aren'tcha -.-

 

[Epona]

You don't need dragons to do any of those things and why is it that you think that dragons are the be all, end all of enemies? Maybe I have been playing video games too long but I just can't be impressed because they made dragons for this game. What do dragons do in this game that we haven't seen before in other games? Those shouts are just relabeled magic powers, for example, that first set of shouts lets you do a force push. It's fun, it was fun in Lego Star Wars too but it's nothing new.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't expect originality in Skyrim so it doesn't bother me that dragons don't do anything we haven't seen before in other games but I can't understand why everyone acts like they are the second coming of Christ.

One might argue that giant mosquitos could fill the role of flying monsters that can spew fire and land on houses, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who prefers them to the current choice.

I never said anything about a be all end all. I merely outlined their usefulness as a game mechanic. If you want to talk about it from a sentimental point of view, tell me one more game that does dragons this way. Sure, a lot of games *have* dragons, but there's precious few who can render the conflict between them and main character in such a personal and non-scripted nature. In Skyrim, killing a dragon is satisfying and rewarding, much more than killing your average mob. It's not the fact that there be dragons in Skyrim, it's the fact that you can personally engage one in a direct fight of pure strength, anywhere, at any level and you're guarranteed at least a little diversity from fight to fight.

From a storyline perspective, you are the Dovahkiin. The game makes it clear that you're the only one who can permanently kill the things and that it's your responsibility to smack them whenever they engage you. It gets the level of conflict down to a more personal nature, something only you can do, something that sets your character apart, without being a pointless demoninator like Spectre or Grey Warden that only serves a purpose in scripted plot events. The impact is akin to the Pocket Plane ability in Throne of Bhaal: you could use it at any time, and it made your character feel truly special as it gave it a measure of power.

Shouts are magic that everyone can use and that cost nothing. More importantly, shouts are rewards. Rewards for exploration, rewards for completing difficult dungeons, rewards for killing dragons. From a game design perspective, this puts them on a completely different level to spells. Spells are things you buy that you shoot at enemies. Shouts are things you earn.

Understand now why Skyrim's dragons make the game better?

I'd also like to add that (while not some stunningly new original concept) dragons are a trope rather than a cliche in this instance. Arguably Skyrim is the most advanced game to feature them, as well. Also, I'd agree that while shouts could be considered relabeled magic abilities, it's about the value the game attributes to them, in your gaining of them, how the shouts function in conjunction with the actual magic within the game and how they're fleshed out with the in game lore. I mean really you can make that argument about any form of flashy special ability in a game. That's never an automatic deal breaker.

Well, I never said it was a deal breaker. They could have given me shouts in a treasure chest or as a quest reward or even as a level up bonus and it wouldn't have mattered, they would still do the same thing. The method of delivery isn't really all that important.

I was playing a platform game as a dragon 15 years ago and it wasn't that special then either. It was like Mario 64, only with a purple dragon. In fact, the controls weren't as tight as Mario so it was less fun than Mario.

Anyway, is the lack of spells in Skyrim due to the fact that they got split up into perks and shouts? If so then it becomes a matter of "which is a better delivery method?".

 

[Preacher zer0]

Hm...


Just a few points, if your menu takes a couple of seconds to 'kick in' before you can use it...
It's autosaving, check your options and set it to how often/never, I have it set to 15 minutes, I experience a 1 second delay at this point (my choice) but it's instant every other time.

Seeing your character while in the menu?
The sliding page system... you slide back the second page after selecting and you can see your character wearing the equip without leaving the menu... DUH!

"Oh but it's not fully rotational 3d".
Well if that is really so important to you pressing one more button to leave the menu and examine the equip in the "real" game space is hardly game breaking.

I'm happy with the UI, it's crisp, clean and minimal and well suited to the games tone.
I'm fine with the increased accessibility, or "dumbing down" as you would prolly say.
Bethesda want as many people as possible to enjoy this world they've created... I guess you can only please some of the peeps some of the time eh?
Crunching numbers is not why I play... I play to escape into a fantasy world where I kill dragons with a very big sword, so do the majority of gamers playing ti right now... majority rules.

"Dragons might as well be mudcrabs/wolves..."
Talking about "enemy avatars".
This I don't get... Maybe you'd be better off playing a text based game?
I'm sorry if you don't find the dragons exciting, it's a shame... You're missing out on a great feeling, I love hearing the beat of those wings, the panic among the people, the guards rallying to my side as we try to draw the beast away from civilians.

Warrior Vs Dragon... that most ancient of mythical confrontations, realised beautifully... God, how cynical must you be not to feel exhilaration as the thing slams to earth and roars in your face.

The character creation is a million times better than Oblivion, I don't even understand how you can say it's worse...
"a bunch of presets"???
That is just untrue... I think maybe you have overlooked a lot of features.

Skyrim is a massive leap forward from Oblivion for me.
I feel sorry for the folks who don't think so, as I said, you're missing out on a great feeling.

tl;dr: Fus Do motherfucking Ra!

 

[Robert Ewing]

I agree with OP. The lack of the ol' timey skills really disappointed me. And it's really been my one and only bugbear in the entire game. Seriously, when I found there was no such thing as most of the older minor skills, I pulled a sad face.

Not really the major skills, such as strength, intelligence, luck etc. But those minor skills, they were the awesome skills that visually made your game more exciting. And you genuinely felt happy that you advanced your skill in that area.

Plus, level 255 acrobatics would be awesome if you're a werewolf.

 

[chstens]

Number of dragons in Oblivion: 0
Number of dragons in Skyrim: infinity

I don't care and I have never cared about the inclusion of dragons. They're pretty weak anyway but let's be clear that dragons could be replaced with any other creature not present in previous TES games and I would have cared the same, none. To be even clearer, a rat is a wolf is a lion to me and a dragon is a giant is a mammoth to me. High level enemies and low level enemies are the only two types I see.

That everyone was so hyped that there were dragons in this game, I just never understood.

So games are strictly numbers to you?

No of course not but the numbers determine what you can and cannot do. For example, whether or not I can jump on a house in Bruma is determined by my acrobatics skill.

True, but only caring about an enemy being high or low level and ignoring the size, sounds, looks and animations of an enemy is just caring about the numbers. Would Oblivion be the same if the enemies were replaced with mute, square boxes with a number on them to represent their "power level" ?

 

[Epona]

Are you shitting me?

Oblivion's character creation was fucking dire, Skyrim's absolutely destroys it.

Ok, what can you do in the character creator for Skyrim that you couldn't do in Oblivion?

 

[Epona]

Number of dragons in Oblivion: 0
Number of dragons in Skyrim: infinity

I don't care and I have never cared about the inclusion of dragons. They're pretty weak anyway but let's be clear that dragons could be replaced with any other creature not present in previous TES games and I would have cared the same, none. To be even clearer, a rat is a wolf is a lion to me and a dragon is a giant is a mammoth to me. High level enemies and low level enemies are the only two types I see.

That everyone was so hyped that there were dragons in this game, I just never understood.

So games are strictly numbers to you?

No of course not but the numbers determine what you can and cannot do. For example, whether or not I can jump on a house in Bruma is determined by my acrobatics skill.

True, but only caring about an enemy being high or low level and ignoring the size, sounds, looks and animations of an enemy is just caring about the numbers. Would Oblivion be the same if the enemies were replaced with mute, square boxes with a number on them to represent their "power level" ?

I don't play TES games for the combat, I care about building my character far more than I care if I am fighting a wolf or a rat. If you can't understand that, sorry.

 

[Denamic]

I have found Skyrim to be a step down from Oblivion in a few ways:

- No athletics or acrobatics. Really, I want to run faster and jump further as I progress in the game.

Sprint.
Or buy a horse.
Also, you can now roll while sneaking, letting you move quickly while being stealthy.
Oblivion didn't have that.
What do you say to that? Hm? HM?!

- The character creator is worse than the one in Oblivion (which was pretty bad too)

This makes no sense at all.
The oblivion character creator was terrible.
It had a million options, but no matter what, you ended up ugly.
Unless you were a Khajiit or Argonian, in which case the uncanny valley is less of an issue.

- The UI is ugly compared to the one in Oblivion. It looks like it just has a white/gray frame.

It looks like it has what?
"It looks like it just has a white/gray frame" makes absolutely no sense in the way you're using it.
I assume it's supposed to be some kind of negative comment from the context, but in of itself, it's no more than an off-hand remark.
Anyway, I'm not overly fond of the Skyrim UI and its issues, but I have to say it is not ugly.

- The UI was designed for looks (that's a failed attempt) rather than functionality. You can't sort your inventory, you can't view your character when equipping stuff.

The inventory is sorted by category and alphabetical order by default, and why does it matter?

- Oblivion performs better at it's worst than Skyrim does at it's worst, both compared on the PS3.

Obviously.
Skyrim is superior in its graphical fidelity in every respect.
It stands to reason it'll need more resources.
I play on PC and max out the framerate at all times anyway, so it doesn't affect me.

Well, there are a few and I know there are more because I have read about them on the Bethesda forums. What say you?

I say you troll.
Or you're a slave to the hate bandwagon.
I bet that if I go through your posts, I'd doubtlessly find you nay-saying on other games too.
I'm too lazy for that though, and I shall now go to sleep.

 

[chstens]

Number of dragons in Oblivion: 0
Number of dragons in Skyrim: infinity

I don't care and I have never cared about the inclusion of dragons. They're pretty weak anyway but let's be clear that dragons could be replaced with any other creature not present in previous TES games and I would have cared the same, none. To be even clearer, a rat is a wolf is a lion to me and a dragon is a giant is a mammoth to me. High level enemies and low level enemies are the only two types I see.

That everyone was so hyped that there were dragons in this game, I just never understood.

So games are strictly numbers to you?

No of course not but the numbers determine what you can and cannot do. For example, whether or not I can jump on a house in Bruma is determined by my acrobatics skill.

True, but only caring about an enemy being high or low level and ignoring the size, sounds, looks and animations of an enemy is just caring about the numbers. Would Oblivion be the same if the enemies were replaced with mute, square boxes with a number on them to represent their "power level" ?

I don't play TES game for the combat, I care about building my character far more than I care if I am fighting a wolf or a rat. If you can't understand that, sorry.

You care about the numbers of your character, if I'm getting this right. Would Elder Scrolls be the same if you were only playing a shapeless, grey blob in a shapeless, colourless area that could creep around and accumulate numbers?

 

[Lazy Kitty]

Number of dragons in Oblivion: 0
Number of dragons in Skyrim: infinity

Actually...
Number of dragons in Oblivion: 1 (Martin Septim as the Avatar of Akatosh)

OT: Currently less mods available for Skyrim.
Time will change that.

 

[ATRAYA]

Why do people always do this? As soon as a sequel comes out, people hate on it and say the prequel was better. They did the same thing with "Fable 2" and "Fable 3"; everyone complained about how terrible "Fable 2"'s features were, and how the story sucked, but Lionhead listened to what people's problems were and fixed them in the sequel, only to have the EXACT same people, who were complaining earlier, ***** about how terrible "Fable 3" is, and how GREAT "Fable 2" is. What the hell, people!?

The facts are, "Skyrim" is bigger, more interesting, and I enjoy it way more than "Oblivion" - which I didn't even finish the last forty percent of the game, because I was bored, and did not enjoy it.
Why do people have to hate on sequels?

I'm sorry for flying off the handle, but this kind of thing REALLY bugs me... Developers try to make a great game, and people piss all over it, then they try and fix the things most people had a problem with, and suddenly that's not good enough!? Maybe YOU should start making games then, "master".
God, I'm sore about this...

There have been so many topics praising Skyrim since it came out on this forum, why is it that the opposite view can't be spoken? BTW, I don't hate Skyrim but I think there were some things Oblivion did better. Does it hurt your pride that I am not pissing myself over Skyrim?

I will be defending "Skyrim" - an action I did not think I would do - because it has, surprisingly, captured my heart. I mostly bought "Skyrim" to see the A.I. of the unscripted dragons, because as a game developer, I find that fascinating. I figured it would be about as interesting as "Oblivion"; but I found it to be vastly greater, and am enjoying it for the game, as well as the A.I.
I came to this forum thread because I wanted to see if anyone had any reasonable argument for why they dislike "Skyrim", but I found it to be filled with those type of people who feel it is their duty to spit on sequels. Other than the U.I., I haven't found any aforementioned reasonable arguments on here... One person said they didn't like it because they don't like dragons. Seriously?
There is nothing wrong with sequels - as long as they are true to the story, a new experience ("Call of Duty"...), and aren't overdone, because the developer wants to milk the I.P. for everything it's worth.

 

[The Funslinger]

You don't need dragons to do any of those things and why is it that you think that dragons are the be all, end all of enemies? Maybe I have been playing video games too long but I just can't be impressed because they made dragons for this game. What do dragons do in this game that we haven't seen before in other games? Those shouts are just relabeled magic powers, for example, that first set of shouts lets you do a force push. It's fun, it was fun in Lego Star Wars too but it's nothing new.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't expect originality in Skyrim so it doesn't bother me that dragons don't do anything we haven't seen before in other games but I can't understand why everyone acts like they are the second coming of Christ.

One might argue that giant mosquitos could fill the role of flying monsters that can spew fire and land on houses, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who prefers them to the current choice.

I never said anything about a be all end all. I merely outlined their usefulness as a game mechanic. If you want to talk about it from a sentimental point of view, tell me one more game that does dragons this way. Sure, a lot of games *have* dragons, but there's precious few who can render the conflict between them and main character in such a personal and non-scripted nature. In Skyrim, killing a dragon is satisfying and rewarding, much more than killing your average mob. It's not the fact that there be dragons in Skyrim, it's the fact that you can personally engage one in a direct fight of pure strength, anywhere, at any level and you're guarranteed at least a little diversity from fight to fight.

From a storyline perspective, you are the Dovahkiin. The game makes it clear that you're the only one who can permanently kill the things and that it's your responsibility to smack them whenever they engage you. It gets the level of conflict down to a more personal nature, something only you can do, something that sets your character apart, without being a pointless demoninator like Spectre or Grey Warden that only serves a purpose in scripted plot events. The impact is akin to the Pocket Plane ability in Throne of Bhaal: you could use it at any time, and it made your character feel truly special as it gave it a measure of power.

Shouts are magic that everyone can use and that cost nothing. More importantly, shouts are rewards. Rewards for exploration, rewards for completing difficult dungeons, rewards for killing dragons. From a game design perspective, this puts them on a completely different level to spells. Spells are things you buy that you shoot at enemies. Shouts are things you earn.

Understand now why Skyrim's dragons make the game better?

I'd also like to add that (while not some stunningly new original concept) dragons are a trope rather than a cliche in this instance. Arguably Skyrim is the most advanced game to feature them, as well. Also, I'd agree that while shouts could be considered relabeled magic abilities, it's about the value the game attributes to them, in your gaining of them, how the shouts function in conjunction with the actual magic within the game and how they're fleshed out with the in game lore. I mean really you can make that argument about any form of flashy special ability in a game. That's never an automatic deal breaker.

Well, I never said it was a deal breaker. They could have given me shouts in a treasure chest or as a quest reward or even as a level up bonus and it wouldn't have mattered, they would still do the same thing. The method of delivery isn't really all that important.

I was playing a platform game as a dragon 15 years ago and it wasn't that special then either. It was like Mario 64, only with a purple dragon. In fact, the controls weren't as tight as Mario so it was less fun than Mario.

Anyway, is the lack of spells in Skyrim due to the fact that they got split up into perks and shouts? If so then it becomes a matter of "which is a better delivery method?".

It would be nice if there were more spells. However, I feel that the ones they do have function better, as opposed to just pelting different coloured lemons or glows at people in Oblivion. So there's that.

 

[sumanoskae]

Not much more to say then I wholeheartedly disagree on every point.

 

[Frostbite3789]

The only thing i dont like is how the friggin loadiing times are goddamn long!!!! jesus could come back, blow up the world with a hippo, become emporer of the universe then get defeated by bob barker and optimus prime by the time loading is only half done, seriously to me that is poor optimization. also the third person seems F'ed, over the shoulder non combat, behind the back so you cant see any thing in combat. see a problem?

I never saw the point in playing a TES game in third person. Especially not the combat. Occasionally I'll run around in 3rd person, but to actually do anything is a huge hassle.

As for loading times, on the PC they're fine.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

Patrick Stewart as a voice actor? I don't know, I haven't even played Skyrim yet so I can't say.

 

[Foxpack1]

The music. Oblivion had some great tracks topped off with Auriel's Ascencion wheras Skyrim just has a great main theme.

 

[Radeonx]

The only thing i dont like is how the friggin loadiing times are goddamn long!!!! jesus could come back, blow up the world with a hippo, become emporer of the universe then get defeated by bob barker and optimus prime by the time loading is only half done, seriously to me that is poor optimization. also the third person seems F'ed, over the shoulder non combat, behind the back so you cant see any thing in combat. see a problem?

I never saw the point in playing a TES game in third person. Especially not the combat. Occasionally I'll run around in 3rd person, but to actually do anything is a huge hassle.

As for loading times, on the PC they're fine.

Skyrim's third person view is actually pretty nice, but to me it just feels awkward for the sole reason that I've been playing it in first person the entire time. It is better than the other third person modes, at least.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

Are you shitting me?

Oblivion's character creation was fucking dire, Skyrim's absolutely destroys it.

Ok, what can you do in the character creator for Skyrim that you couldn't do in Oblivion?

Make characters of the same race that are genuinely distinguishable from one another. Oblivion's could recolour them and all that but honestly, they all looked basically the same and facial structure for every member of each respective race looked identical. Skyrim's allows you to actually customise your character easily and coherently.