Why Skyrim sucked for me and how i could have enjoyed it more.

[RionP]

SajuukKhar, try to read up on this study: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/.

Now try to imagine how your discussion with someone who for some reason hates Bethesda (presumably because Fallout 3 wasn't very good and he holds a grudge against the company as a whole for that. I don't know).

No fact you can bring up can convince him Bethesda aren't horrible. TES aren't on the same level as Citizen Kane, doesn't mean I can't sum up the plot in such a way it's reduced to meaningless drivel.

The guy has a love affair with the word "cliche" and has no understanding of what "Tolkienesque" means, neither with regards to what Tolkien actually wrote, or what the type of worlds (which are immensely different from Tolkien's) the word is used to refer to now.

Maybe he dislikes Fantasy, I don't know who he is or what he likes and enjoys. Only that with regards to a Fantasy world created by Bethesda he shows a denseness and unwillingness to understand what the "opposition" (rather than just the other side of the argument) actually says rivaling that Creationists arguing evolution.

Facts can't reach people who respond by saying the same thing only louder.

 

[RionP]

SajuukKhar, try to read up on this study: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/.

Now try to imagine how your discussion with someone who for some reason hates Bethesda (presumably because Fallout 3 wasn't very good and he holds a grudge against the company as a whole for that. I don't know).

No fact you can bring up can convince him Bethesda aren't horrible. TES aren't on the same level as Citizen Kane, doesn't mean I can't sum up the plot in such a way it's reduced to meaningless drivel.

The guy has a love affair with the word "cliche" and has no understanding of what "Tolkienesque" means, neither with regards to what Tolkien actually wrote, or what the type of worlds (which are immensely different from Tolkien's) the word is used to refer to now.

Maybe he dislikes Fantasy, I don't know who he is or what he likes and enjoys. Only that with regards to a Fantasy world created by Bethesda he shows a denseness and unwillingness to understand what the "opposition" (rather than just the other side of the argument) actually says rivaling that Creationists arguing evolution.

Facts can't reach people who respond by saying the same thing only louder.

SajuukKhar started this by saying Bethesda are above cliches, and on top of that is better written than other RPG "garbage."

He isn't new. He's been going around talking about how Bethesda are the best writers ever and will defend it until the universe ends.

I argued with him before for years, and its the same crap in every Bethesda thread, about how "above the medium" they are. He quotes everyone in every Bethesda thread and defends Bethesda against anyone who finds any aspect of the franchise lacking.

He. Quotes. Everyone. in. the. entire. thread. His love for Bethesda is almost as dogmatic as the most religious fundamentalist.

He even went as far as to pretend to be an expert on Fallout lore the very moment Fallout 3 came out. Went to every Fallout thread to extol Bethesda and only Bethesda, even the threads about the old ones.

He got destroyed and got called out on it every time he did. He had the gall to proclaim himself the king of fallout lore just because he played Fallout 3, and fallout veterans didn't like it.

"It doesn't matter if you played the franchise for 20 years, I played a single spin off game so now I am king of lore!"

You can kinda see the problem there.

But the fact of the matter is TES is not some exemplary narrative. Its the same bog standard RPG story that's been going around for decades. Merely there to justify the gameplay that Bethesda puts over story, like all popular RPGs do.

But don't let facts stop you from jumping into the middle of an argument with no understanding of whats going on. Really makes you look good.

TLDR: He goes to every thread about Bethesda, quotes everyone, and proselytizes like a preacher about how genius Bethesda is. SajuukKhar intentionally goes around to start fights with everyone in the entire thread.

When you do argue with him, he can't comprehend your argument so he kneejerks every time. And then drags out the argument because you have to repeat yourself an upteenth billion time.

and frankly, I am getting sick of being constantly hounded by him because I won't accept his "one true god" of RPGs and that I dare modify an elder scrolls game.

That's another thing, this started because he was offended I used a mod that *gasp* didn't fit with his interpretation of the lore. God forbid my unwashed peasant hands touch "literary genius."

I didn't think I jumped into the middle of argument. I've read this thread since the beginning.

With that clarified, does SajuukKhar judge Bethesda too highly? Yes, they are not the second coming of Christ and I prefer the time I do spend with the Witcher series to the time I spent with TES. However, I spend much less time with the WItcher than I do with TES.

This post of yours seems somewhat reasonable, so I guess it's this continuing discussion you have that made you seem so unreasonable in your other posts in this thread.

There are flaws with TES games, but many of them are due to the raison d'etre of them, to be as close to total freedom as can be accomplished in a videogame with current technology. I would love for Skyrim to have been deeper, to have better writing and followers who are more like Bioware's. However, to do so at the expense of everyone being able to be a different race and a different class, to have different followers without even encountering the followers other's choose, for everyone wo plays to be able to follow their own path, that would destroy TES reason to exist.

TES can be better, but it must not come at your expense to say: "An evil wizard is destroying the land and I'm the one chosen by the Gods to stop him? *** that[/I}, I'm going the complete opposite direction until I reach a shore and then I'm going to be a pirate instead".

What caused me to enter thread was how you simply handwaved everything that made TES unique as not really unique. The fact you did so to annoy and piss off SajuukKhar rather than that actually being an honest attempt at a discussion makes sense, though be aware that no matter the temptation to take the low road in discussions, others (or at least any rational others) observing the discussion will side with the one that takes the "least low" road.

Regarding your point that "But the fact of the matter is TES is not some exemplary narrative. Its the same bog standard RPG story that's been going around for decades. Merely there to justify the gameplay that Bethesda puts over story, like all popular RPGs do."
That's where I disagree. The main story of any ES game is not unique by any means I will grant you that. And noone sane can question that Bethesda has a tendancy to "tell not not show". However, the bulk of the originality and what sets TES apart from other RPGs is not in the main narrative, but behind the scenes in the setting and lore. Because the lore and setting of TES is unique. The background of the Khajiit and Argonians are very much unlike most Tolkienesque fantasy, the Dwemer are completely unlike the bogstandard Dwarves of other fantasy and the lore of the Hist network and Chim also sets TES apart from other Fantasy worlds.

Does any of this actually show up in the games as something other than books and symbolism in windows and statues? Not really, and that is a flaw of Bethesdas, that they hide what makes TES unique, presumably because they don't have too fond thoughts about the majority of their audience and believe it would drive the dudebros away. Of course Skyrim was much better in at least showing it and mentioning what makes TES unique compared to Oblivion.

As a side note, what mod was you used that didn't fit with his interpretation of the lore?

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

Well, I recently picked up Skyrim again with all the DLC, and im having a total blast with it, the mods ive installed are rather minimal, mainly just changing up dialogue and a slight alteration to the Magic System (Mighty Magic i think the mod was, just does some things like makes Destruction spells get stronger with your increasing destruction level etc) and im having a total blast with it again. I love the feeling of adventure in the game, and contrary to what a lot of people think, I really like the levelling system in the game. Oblivion's system was obtuse at times, and while the new system isnt perfect, I like how much freedom it gives you in making your character, I dont have to decide off the bat that my character will strictly adhere to these skills, he can grow organically as I need, you think people who like to Role Play would appreciate a feature like that. The world is full of all these little details that I just absolutely love, and while the combat isnt amazing by any means, its functional and doesnt hinder my enjoyment of the game at all.

I dont mind the quest markers because it really just makes things convenient, the only time it slightly bothers me is when you have to talk to a specific person and it instantly singles them out, but even then its not really a deal breaker. Skyrim is one of those games that just gives me so much freedom and I love the shit out of it.

That being said I think moving forward the Elder Scrolls could take a few lessons from Fallout, New Vegas specifically, give more factions to be involved with, make speech a more viable option, in New Vegas there were a lot of encounters I could settle with words, in Skyrim, not so much, I could just pay a few hundred gold to get the same result. Some more followers with personality also. Serana was a step in the right direction, I'd love more followers like her.
Theres too much negativity surrounding Skyrim really, its more accessable sure than Morrowind or Oblivion, but thats not a bad thing, if you want to play a game like Morrowind, just go play Morrowind, anything that happened in Skyrim wont take away from that enjoyment

 

[Ranorak]

You know what? here is a list of all the cliches in the entire franchise:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Franchise/TheElderscrolls

There are plenty.

Tropes are not Clichés

Just because something's been used before doesn't mean it's a cliché, and stories often gain something by having ties to other works. That said, there certainly is such thing as too derivative, but there's a difference between playing a trope straight and utter Cliché Storm (and even those aren't necessarily bad).

In fact, most of TES lore are aversions of tropes.
Orcs are not chaotic evil
Dwarves are not short
Elves are not hippies.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

You know what? here is a list of all the cliches in the entire franchise:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Franchise/TheElderscrolls

There are plenty.

Tropes are not Clichés

Just because something's been used before doesn't mean it's a cliché, and stories often gain something by having ties to other works. That said, there certainly is such thing as too derivative, but there's a difference between playing a trope straight and utter Cliché Storm (and even those aren't necessarily bad).

In fact, most of TES lore are aversions of tropes.
Orcs are not chaotic evil
Dwarves are not short
Elves are not hippies.

You can argue that averting those kinds of tropes has almost become a cliche itself. Which is kind of a dumb outlook to have, you have elves, dwarves etc you get slammed for having a generic fantasy. You try to make those things different from the norm and you get slammed anyway by people who just like to hate on "cliches". Theres no winning

 

[Wasted]

I personally found Oblivion and Skyrim (never played Morrowind) to be incredibly boring for many of the same reasons as the OP stated. While I can see the appeal, I could not manage to get past a few hours into it every time I tried to complete the campaign, even when I heavily modded the game to fix many of said issues. The combat, the story, the setting, the mechanics are just so shallow and uninteresting.

Having said that I played and beat Fallout 3 multiple times. I think the setting enthralled me and made me love the world because all other aspects of that game are similar in dullness to The Elder Scrolls series.

 

[Thyunda]

Crossbows were more popular than bows, and replaced them. Not that all bows dropped off the face of the earth. Another thing you fail to grasp. Crossbows became dominant because they were easy, and cheap. "feels" get no say in the matter.

You have literally no idea how wrong you are. The crossbow was never dominant - in fact, the French abandoned the use of the crossbow after suffering at the hands of the Welsh longbowmen, and the only picked it up again well after the war once they realised the training it took to match the longbowmen. Fact is, crossbows malfunctioned. A lot. They required a team of three to operate properly, which meant you were paying three mercenaries per crossbow, compared to the much cheaper bowmen.

Crossbows had only one advantage, and that's the amount of time it took to train a crossbowman compared to a longbowman. Longbows took years to master, crossbows only weeks. Everything else you stated is totally false.

 

[RionP]

You know what? here is a list of all the cliches in the entire franchise:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Franchise/TheElderscrolls

There are plenty.

Tropes are not Clichés

Just because something's been used before doesn't mean it's a cliché, and stories often gain something by having ties to other works. That said, there certainly is such thing as too derivative, but there's a difference between playing a trope straight and utter Cliché Storm (and even those aren't necessarily bad).

In fact, most of TES lore are aversions of tropes.
Orcs are not chaotic evil
Dwarves are not short
Elves are not hippies.

You can argue that averting those kinds of tropes has almost become a cliche itself. Which is kind of a dumb outlook to have, you have elves, dwarves etc you get slammed for having a generic fantasy. You try to make those things different from the norm and you get slammed anyway by people who just like to hate on "cliches". Theres no winning

While the TES Orcs aren't terribly far from cliche (though they don't fit perfectly in either of the two main orc cliches, Warhammer/Tolkien Chaotic Hordes and Warcraft Noble Savages), to claim that TES dwarves are cliche is flat out wrong.

Cliche Dwarves: Short, greedy, drunks, master stoneworkers, master smiths, scottish, stubborn, likes axes and hammers, hates magic and elves.

The real world culture TES dwarves draw from however, is Ancient Mesopotamia (complete with Assyrian levels of douchebaggery); they are not short (but called so by the uneducated because the Dwemer were first encountered by Giants, for whom they were the first other sentient race encountered); they are not particularly greed; they are not particularly drunk, they are not master stoneworkers, instead they are good metalworkers; they are quite xenophobic; they hate gods; they are master mages, and the single best race to grace Tamriel with regards to Enchantment. Every single robot you encounter is primarily powered by magical enchants. That's why they work flawlessly after all these yearrs, the metal is infused with magic so such an extent it doesn't rust or decay. TES Dwarves are elves themselves, though their xenophobic nature causes them to hate other elves. That's also why you don't mine Dwarven metal ingots, they are alloys of metal heavily infused with magic.

If TES Dwarves are like any other Dwarves, they are far, far closer to the Dark Elves/Deep Elves/Dwarves of Norse and Germanic mythology than any other type of Dwarf in popular culture.

Crossbows were more popular than bows, and replaced them. Not that all bows dropped off the face of the earth. Another thing you fail to grasp. Crossbows became dominant because they were easy, and cheap. "feels" get no say in the matter.

You have literally no idea how wrong you are. The crossbow was never dominant - in fact, the French abandoned the use of the crossbow after suffering at the hands of the Welsh longbowmen, and the only picked it up again well after the war once they realised the training it took to match the longbowmen. Fact is, crossbows malfunctioned. A lot. They required a team of three to operate properly, which meant you were paying three mercenaries per crossbow, compared to the much cheaper bowmen.

Crossbows had only one advantage, and that's the amount of time it took to train a crossbowman compared to a longbowman. Longbows took years to master, crossbows only weeks. Everything else you stated is totally false.

You shouldn't correct others knowledge of History when you don't know anything yourself.

The crossbow was common throughout mainland Europe (The French, Iberians, Italians and Germans all preferred it to the bow), it didn't require teams of three (have NO idea where you got that), the French DID attempt to form longbow regiments in the form of the Franc-archers, but they never performed well and were latter disbanded while crossbows remained a staple in French armies as late as 1540.

Crossbows were not significantly easier to use. The main reason longbows required dedicated archers was because there was an immense strength requirement to pull the bow, not because using the bow once you had the required strength took a lot of training.

Crossbows had many advantages of over bows. The 15th century arbalest for example, shot farther and could penetrate better plate armour at longer distances than even the heavist Warbows at 200+ draw weight.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

You know what? here is a list of all the cliches in the entire franchise:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Franchise/TheElderscrolls

There are plenty.

Tropes are not Clichés

Just because something's been used before doesn't mean it's a cliché, and stories often gain something by having ties to other works. That said, there certainly is such thing as too derivative, but there's a difference between playing a trope straight and utter Cliché Storm (and even those aren't necessarily bad).

In fact, most of TES lore are aversions of tropes.
Orcs are not chaotic evil
Dwarves are not short
Elves are not hippies.

You can argue that averting those kinds of tropes has almost become a cliche itself. Which is kind of a dumb outlook to have, you have elves, dwarves etc you get slammed for having a generic fantasy. You try to make those things different from the norm and you get slammed anyway by people who just like to hate on "cliches". Theres no winning

While the TES Orcs aren't terribly far from cliche (though they don't fit perfectly in either of the two main orc cliches, Warhammer/Tolkien Chaotic Hordes and Warcraft Noble Savages), to claim that TES dwarves are cliche is flat out wrong.

Cliche Dwarves: Short, greedy, drunks, master stoneworkers, master smiths, scottish, stubborn, likes axes and hammers, hates magic and elves.

The real world culture TES dwarves draw from however, is Ancient Mesopotamia (complete with Assyrian levels of douchebaggery); they are not short (but called so by the uneducated because the Dwemer were first encountered by Giants, for whom they were the first other sentient race encountered); they are not particularly greed; they are not particularly drunk, they are not master stoneworkers, instead they are good metalworkers; they are quite xenophobic; they hate gods; they are master mages, and the single best race to grace Tamriel with regards to Enchantment. Every single robot you encounter is primarily powered by magical enchants. That's why they work flawlessly after all these yearrs, the metal is infused with magic so such an extent it doesn't rust or decay. TES Dwarves are elves themselves, though their xenophobic nature causes them to hate other elves. That's also why you don't mine Dwarven metal ingots, they are alloys of metal heavily infused with magic.

If TES Dwarves are like any other Dwarves, they are far, far closer to the Dark Elves/Deep Elves/Dwarves of Norse and Germanic mythology than any other type of Dwarf in popular culture.

Oh dont get me wrong, I love all the races in TES, (except Imperials, goddamn sissies surrendering to the Thalmor) and the Dwemer are one of my favourite parts of the games. I was just commenting on the fact that no matter what you do say Dwarves, there will be a vocal group of complainers

 

[RionP]

Oh dont get me wrong, I love all the races in TES, (except Imperials, goddamn sissies surrendering to the Thalmor) and the Dwemer are one of my favourite parts of the games. I was just commenting on the fact that no matter what you do say Dwarves, there will be a vocal group of complainers

Yeah, I'm just pointing out that TES Dwarves are one the least cliche races in modern fantasy.

 

[prpshrt]

The stormcloaks and imperials quest lines were boring. I was also getting really bored with skyrim until I started the college of Winterhold quests. The dark brotherhood and the thieves guild questlines were also really cool imo. Maybe try doing those and see if it does it for you.

 

[bug_of_war]

You win because prophecy demands it. Its already been written.

You didn't win because you fought better, or because you were smarter. You won because god says so. That isn't a victory, that's just god jerking you off on how "awesome" you are.

No matter what pops out, you win. And that kills the exploration and accomplishments in the game. There is no challenge, even from the most fearsome soldiers of the gods themselves.

Unkillable super soldier? 2 swipes, dead.

Regenerating monstrosity? 1 swipe, dead.

...but it hasn't. Well at least not in the in game lore. The Elder Scroll just says that when Alduin returns there is only one hope left, and that the Last Dragonborn can (<--Important word in this context) stop him. There's no guarantee that he will, but there's a chance, and to be fair, Alduin did take effort to bring down, even with the skill you used most at level 100 with all the perks.

Also, there is no, "Unkillable super soldier" or, "Regenerating monstrosity" in Skyrim. Sure there is the Ebony Knight (I think that's his name) and Trolls, but neither of them are given those titles, and whilst I can say the Ebony Knight takes a helluva lot more hits than 2, Trolls make sense for being taken down easier the higher level you are. If the bastard can take down a fuckin' Dragon, I'm sure as hell as simple Troll wouldn't be too hard to kill.

 

[Schadrach]

Even if locations are locked up, why does that have to stop the player from exploring them?

Because we're presumably dubbing something "locked up" if it is not accessible to the player, and not being accessible to the player necessarily means that the player cannot explore it.

Why punish the player for exploring in general?

When does this happen? And no, "some things aren't wholly accessible whenever you happen upon them" is not being punished for exploration.

Why settle for being dragged around by the map marker when you could be having your own adventures, making your own path? The OP's complaint was that the game leads you around by the nose and does not reward you for exploring, isn't that what we should be focusing on instead of your rabid fanboy grip on Skyrim's "flawlessness"?

There are mods that both improve quest descriptions and remove quest markers. Combined, they give you a more "Morrowind" feel as far as navigation and exploration are concerned and cover basically everything but radiant quests.

The stormcloaks and imperials quest lines were boring.

There's a mod for that too, called "Civil War Overhaul." It replaces the civil war questlines with something resembling actual battle over territory, with repercussions for winning or losing a battle, and how many troops each side lost in the process.

 

[Vern5]

Snip

Yeah... I should have been more clear by what I meant by "locked up". Technically, you can access any location in Skyrim by default but there are specific locations that are obviously blocked off because they are associated with a specific quest. Sarthaal is a good example and the first Draugr crypt you enter for the Companions quest line (Dustman's Cairn?). If you try to access these locations before doing the quests then you are greeted with a very important looking door, a location marker, and then a dungeon that stops at the first room. The Quest is what "locks" the area and the way Bethesda did it was just so obvious and sort of weird when you compare it to something like Bleak Falls Barrow.

With Bleak Falls Barrow, you can collect the Golden claw and the Dragonstone without picking up their associated quests first. Then, once you've collected the Claw and read Arvel's journal, your quest marker will actually point you towards the Claw's owner in Riverwood, specifically because the owner's name is listed in Arvel's Journal. This is all very organic and shows that the Bethesda devs know how to make quests that can be completed in any order and include in-game pointers back to the quest sources. Basically, Bleak Falls Barrow's quest elements were designed for both the questing player (who picked up the quest in Riverwood) or the exploring player (who was just checking out a tomb). Impressive in its simplicity.

That's why it's so jarring later on when I started coming across locations that were obviously locked for some reason. It seemed to go against everything else I had learned in the game and in previous TES games. This is the "punishing" I mentioned; psychological punishment. I was rewarded and even lauded by the NPC quest givers for getting both the Golden Claw and the Dragonstone purely by accident so I was "rewarded" for my curious nature. However, I went out of my way to check out other cool looking locations only to have them completely locked down. Some people would call this immersion-breaking.

And while I know that mods improve a lot of Skyrim's problems that shouldn't excuse the devs for being so lazy. They know how to do clever, organic, freeform quest design with minimal effort involved but they chose not to and we, as fans and consumers, shouldn't just let them get away with bullshit like that if it can be helped.

Off-Topic: The Immersive Patrols mod does wonders for bringing the Civil War to life. Squads of Stormcloaks and Imperials wandering the roads inevitably clash in hectic combat. Use Immediate Dragons to ensure that Dragons can swoop down on these conflicts during any phase of the Main Quest and Skyrim's atmosphere improves exponentially.

 

[Thyunda]

Crossbows were more popular than bows, and replaced them. Not that all bows dropped off the face of the earth. Another thing you fail to grasp. Crossbows became dominant because they were easy, and cheap. "feels" get no say in the matter.

You have literally no idea how wrong you are. The crossbow was never dominant - in fact, the French abandoned the use of the crossbow after suffering at the hands of the Welsh longbowmen, and the only picked it up again well after the war once they realised the training it took to match the longbowmen. Fact is, crossbows malfunctioned. A lot. They required a team of three to operate properly, which meant you were paying three mercenaries per crossbow, compared to the much cheaper bowmen.

Crossbows had only one advantage, and that's the amount of time it took to train a crossbowman compared to a longbowman. Longbows took years to master, crossbows only weeks. Everything else you stated is totally false.

Bows required a child to be trained from birth to adulthood for mastery. Crossbows didn't need that much time, so crossbows replaced bows. Its history traces all the way back to Rome and Ancient Greece.

I even mentioned its problems, but at the end of the day easy replacement won.

The same reason early muskets, even though they were inferior to a bow at the time, replaced bows because of how easy it was to replace a casualty compared to waiting for little timmy to grow up. Losing an archer was much more devastating. So after that was realized, crossbows became dominant. It was a major weapon in a lot of European, and even Asian warfare.

And its funny you mention welsh Longbowmen, the best longbow archers of the era who used mass volleys. The best is an exception, not the standard. You even said the French abandoned the longbow and went back to crossbows for the same reason I stated.

Crossbows had widespread use, and there were crossbow guilds all over Europe in the majority of the cities. Crossbows won in the end, and later muskets won. Regardless of how effective bows were, the cheaper alternative won.

Crossbows, as I said, also required more support staff and were more expensive to maintain. And they broke down a lot. The French ditched the crossbow during the war to try and replicate the longbow's victories.

As you might notice, too, I kept specifying the longbow took a long time to train. Longbow. Specialist weapon. Other bows did not require the same level of dedication and training.

So...out of curiousity, you say that the crossbow's history goes back to Rome (which is totally true), so why exactly did the crossbow suffer defeats at the hands of bows over a thousand years later? Could it...possibly be...that the crossbow is simply not the all-round superior weapon you're trying to claim it to be?