Originally Posted by holeraw
I think we should be looking things under a different context here. Sometimes it's not a matter of a writer of an article not knowing enough about the subject he writes but a matter of us knowing too much.
People who aren't interested in investing the time and effort to master these games require a certain level of 'comfort' in order start enjoying them. For us this is unnecessary (and, sometimes, even unwelcome), our devotion to the genre makes us very demanding when it comes to genre-specific features but very tolerant when it comes to that comfort - we've played ugly, buggy games with uncomfortable controls, sadistic amounts of challenge and vague goals and we enjoyed them because we have put the effort to train ourselves to recognize the ideas hidden below the rough surface. So we can deal with discomfort, we're going to get to the bottom of it anyway, we don't need the game make things easy for us.
But that's a choice we made, one can't devote oneself to everything, it's just not possible. And that's where I think Oblivion excelled: I can't think of a game with more depth and complexity even being so accessible to those that don't have the intention to learn the genre - call them console-kids or casuals or 'retards' or whatever else demeaning name you want but they have no obligation to be as knowledgeable as we are about this thing as we have no obligation to be as knowledgeable as they are about what they enjoy most. I even know people that don't play games at all and still enjoy this one immensely - for me it was a mostly uninteresting game that did the things I care about worse that many others before it, but for them it was an magical experience being able to roam freely in such a large and detailed world.
And for that, regardless of how we feel about it, I think it really was a 'game changer'.