RPGWatch Forums - View Single Post - Why is there no challenger for Skyrim?
View Single Post


December 23rd, 2012, 22:16
TheWharfMaster -

I disagree about your exploration complaint. For me, exploration is simply finding a ruin, or enemy encampment, or remains of something w/ a cryptic message. It's a string of experiences. It's running around a virtual environment, feeling like I'm there. It doesnt have to conclude with "finding" something grand or epic. It doesnt have to have a "point". Sometimes the greatest explorations are simply the immersion into the mundane, the non-spectacular that make something feel 'realistic'. That's what I'm looking for when I am exploring the worlds of these "bum games", as you call them.

If you "cannot stand" the concept of looting a dungeon, then youre not playing the right kind of game. That's like saying you cannot stand the concept of building/conquering in a traditional real time strategy game.

You can acquire money if you hoard and sell items, and the extent to which you take part in this sort of mercantile simulation is completely up to you. Some like to roleplay a thief that steals everything that isnt nailed down, some are content to simply use their quest rewards and valuables they may find. Some like hauling around silverware and shit, and that may be what you need to do at first. I think it's a minigame in itself, figuring out what's worth it's space in your pack as opposed to something else. It's totally up to you, if you want to be a junk hauler go ahead, if not then dont. Having that choice is a good thing, depending on your playstyle. Ive found there's plenty of things to spend money on, in my experience, as someone in the latter category I've found myself wanting for money. Like most games, yes you can become insanely rich eventually, but again that's up to you and how you wish to play.

I disagree that the taverns and locations have no interesting characters (not even one?), but that's a matter of opinion. If youre looking for a gravelly voiced Snake Plisskin, youre looking for Snake Plisskin, and youre not going to be satisfied w/ what you find otherwise.

Why arent there meaningful "magical items" like a named, sentient sword, all over the place in the game? Why are we risking our asses time and time again, for trinkets? Where's the "real" magical treasure? Well the truth of the matter is that there are several such named artifacts in the game. I guess youre lamenting the fact you dont just stumble upon them around every corner. Such things were supposed to be rare, or they mean nothing. Your wish to have them do "several different things" is interesting, to have a super-item as treasure is ambitious. Maybe you should contact Bethsoft w/ this revolutionary idea, as of now they end up in games being unique end-game items you dont just come upon in everyday questing.

Quality is a relative term. Some people think that a lot of time spent and expansive areas is the way to go, thus you see people agonizing over "how much game time a DLC offers" before purchase. Some people would prefer a shorter game, a smaller world w/ more concentration of content. Me personally, i take more content and expansive spaces to explore. They have to strike a balance between the two, and I can see how that would be a struggle. I think they do a good job for the most part.

Now when you start talking about Oblivion having better flavor, to Skyrim being a better game - that's when you start losing lucidity. On one hand, you seem to be arguing against generality, against the generic, now all of a sudden youre praising the "general" nature of Oblivion. I dont know what youre getting at, but i must say that i consider Skyrim the better game.

I disagree on the lore, I've always loved the lore of the ES games and continuity throughout the entire series. Exploring the culture and religions of the different races and factions in the game is one of the best things about the games. I have the "books of skyrim" on my Iphone, so I can read them if bored, standing in line somwhere. So i must disagree w/ you, I think the lore of the games are top-notch.

You have a problem w/ the beast races mixed in w/ the rest, again i must disagree as i think it adds to the flavor of the population. It allows players to take part in the struggles of these groups to integrate with human society. So you just want humans? I think that's fucking boring, and I'll bet that most people would rather have a diverse population to interact and play with, then simply being stuck w/ humans.

Then you start ranting and raving on a half-baked screed about a nation of cat-folk if we want (even tho it's not "cool enough"), and making a broad appeal and general game that everyone will love (which i thought you said was a good thing before?) or a more specialist hard-core game that will make less money but be more… hard core. I dont know. I know what youre getting at, but it's incoherant at best.

There, happy?

PS: Dont expect me to go back and forth with you on this in multiple, moronically long-winded posts. I'd rather play games than sit here beating a dead horse, trying to convince you that my opinion of what's 'good' is correct.
xSamhainx is offline


xSamhainx's Avatar
Paws of Doom
Original Sin Donor


Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Diego, Ca
Posts: 4,997
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)