I don't think any of Bethesda's games are as boring as Bioware games which are mainly built upon (imo, boring) b-dialogue and b-characters. I guess it depends on what you're after, i play because i love exploring and interacting with the world (the player should be able to swim, dive, climb, pick up basicly every object) + the game should feel like its a living world (Bioware fails big time here). Its the main reason i love Bethesda's games (and i practically hate all Bioware games).
The way i see it, games are competing with entertainment such as books and movies, and those mediums just do an incredible much better job in delivering story, dialogue/characters than any Bioware ever could do, in comarison they deliver a boring and linear b-movie experience with a few choices that most of the time doesnt really matter (especially if you just play through the game once anyways).
Exploring and interacting with the world though is something books and movies cant give me, so there's where games comes into the picture and, mostly, why i play them to give me a very different experience.
Morrowind has less loading screens than Oblivion, so i dont know what your talking about. Morrowind even had open cities whilst Oblivion has to load all the citites (if you dont use the mod "open cities").
The defenintion of "open world", to me is a game that doesnt load games into levels, where there's a lot of backtracking, where you can swim, climb etc.. I prefer when I, the player, and my interactions and adventures in the game is the "story", not when the developer holds my hand thoughout the whole experinece saying "oh, now we are going to show you this spectacular view when you cross the bridge over here".. too boring, too linear and too much like a movie (only with worse effects/photo/characters/dialogue/story)..
), so i doubt Bioware would bother. Bioware wants to make it easy for themselves. An open world means a _lot_ more testing for bugs, exploits etc.
