Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mr. Strange]

What happens if you cast Arrow To The Knee on something completely lacking knees?

Are there such beasts?!

Ice Wraths come to mind first, and they get the default "knock-back" effect if they were "running" with chance of stunning, just like all targets (except dragons). "Gate" is fun spell too, it makes you and target creature switch places after short delay. Use with magma.

[Darvi]

Role Playing Game game

The mollusc raises a good point. I think we may have been misled with the premise of the discussion.

The op wasn't talking abotu RPGs, he was talking about games about RGPs.

[Max White]

If you look at the fanbase in Morrowind and Skyrim you'll notice there's major difference between them. People who liked Morrowind remember it from it's story and world more than anything (epic abuses notwithstanding). Oblivion was dumbed down Morrowind with better graphics and combat system, made easier to get into at the expense of story and complexity of character developement. Skyrim turns that up to eleven, with story shorter than Morrowind side quest, in paper thin world, played with characters identical to one another. "Casual" is the word of the day here, and yes it sells. Just like CoD and Battlefield sequels and WoW clones sell year after year, but don't confuse these with earlier TES games and their fans. Their reasons for liking these games are completely different.

Ok, so what? It is appealing to an audience that isn't you, so it is bad? The reason for liking the games might be different, but what does that matter, people still do like it.
Look, if you are allowed to like things then other people are too, and shouldn't be dismissed as just "Casuals" for enjoying something you don't.

TL;DR: Skyrim is more hack and slash than RPG and great example of how not to do storytelling in RPG.

Your initial complaint was that it favored structured story telling over unstructured! You are literally just flailing around looking for any reason to complain, and justify why people shouldn't like something you don't like. "Look at all these mods I need to enjoy this game!", so what? How does that lessen the experience, the carefully constructed, structured and guided experience, enjoyed by other players?

[alexandertnt]

I wish people would stop using the term "dumbed down" when a game doesnt meet their expectations, it sounds snobbish. I dont think it was "dumbed down", just changed. I thought that the later games were better than the earlier ones.

I also dont think its right at all to call Skyrim a hack-and-slash. A hack-and-slash game generally provides a thin excuse-plot and the focus of the game is not at all the story, but on the action. But for Skyrim, even if you dont think very highly of the plot, it was more than an excuse plot, and many people did indeed play the game primarily for the plot and the sensation that they were playing a role.

[nenjin]

I don't find Skyrim's story orders of magnitude worse than Morrowind's. Nostalgia is strong with that game.

Now, mechanically, they're as different as night and day. And the trend from Morrowind --> Oblivion --> Skyrim is to a more casual game. But in terms of the story, I think people prefer Morrowind to the others most because it's different. Its tone (with zero voice acting) and it's setting (not being surrounded by white dudes in positions of authority all the time) really makes the difference. TBH, I do not have overwhelmingly awesome memories of Morrowind stories. Good! But not so amazing that Skyrim looked terrible in comparison.

It's only when I start paying attention to mechanics and what it did to the sandbox nature of the game that I start seeing red. Mods have always saved every single ES game. Including Morrowind.

[Mr. Strange]

Ok, so what? It is appealing to an audience that isn't you, so it is bad?

You are the one that brought out the reputation of TES, I pointed out that it was built on earlier games that had completely different approach to game design than later games, and that the fans of first don't generally like the second and vice versa. This is not about me, this is about 80% of fans of the earlier part series that hate the current direction of the games. Casualization of the series means that it's becomming more and more like every other game series and thus, less unique. See TESO and it's Tolkien elves (Do note that this is not complaining against Tolkien and his elves. But Tamriel is not Middle-Earth).

Your initial complaint was that it favored structured story telling over unstructured!

No, no and no. It is sub-bar because it doesn't allow any variation on the story based on player actions. Something that has been done for decades in other RPGs with good success and has no technical issues in implementing in current ones either. Except focus on voice acting in every spoken line, which requires not just writing diverging stories but purchacing acting time. It's just lot cheaper to make linear non-branching stories and fill them with special effects. Casual players don't complain, it's what they are used to and expect. Morrowing era fans (that's more than just me, if you didn't pay attention) are dissapointed when they lose large portion of the gameplay they liked.

"Look at all these mods I need to enjoy this game!"

Again, it was you who brought "all powerful god mode stuff like flying and ultimate weapons and all that bullshit" in to this discussion. That mod list was to show the opposite to be true, that Skyrim needs more challenge and choices, because "the carefully constructed, structured and guided experience, enjoyed by other players" is shallow piece of shit. Even when compared to Oblivion, Skyrim character developement is barebones, story handholding on *Archivement Unlocked: You Have Access Your Inventory* level. And player enjoyment? Then tell me why are there so many mods? Why is every aspect of the game overhauled ten times and each downloaded several thousand times on nexus alone? I think it's because after the first ten or twenty hours vanilla Skyrim doesn't offer anything new, you've seen it all. It's that fucking shallow.

Now please, stop misinterpreting and put some effort into reading comprehension. I understand that you might enjoy game where featureless mannequin walks down empty corridor while handheld by dev team avatar that tells you what button (singular intended) you need to press to progress in the story, but some of us like some challenge in our games. Not just for our characters stats, but for our own creativity as well.

[Criptfeind]

So. The Stanly Parable. Better or worse then Skyrim?

[Mr. Strange]

Never heard. Is this a good thing?

Wiki calls it "interactive fiction". From the homepage:
"The Stanley Parable is a first person exploration game. You will play as Stanley, and you will not play as Stanley. You will follow a story, you will not follow a story. You will have a choice, you will have no choice. The game will end, the game will never end. Contradiction follows contradiction, the rules of how games should work are broken, then broken again. This world was not made for you to understand."
Is it a game? Is it not a game? $15 on steam, but I don't use steam...

[Max White]

Again, it was you who brought "all powerful god mode stuff like flying and ultimate weapons and all that bullshit" in to this discussion. That mod list was to show the opposite to be true, that Skyrim needs more challenge and choices, because "the carefully constructed, structured and guided experience, enjoyed by other players" is shallow piece of shit. Even when compared to Oblivion, Skyrim character developement is barebones, story handholding on *Archivement Unlocked: You Have Access Your Inventory* level. And player enjoyment? Then tell me why are there so many mods? Why is every aspect of the game overhauled ten times and each downloaded several thousand times on nexus alone? I think it's because after the first ten or twenty hours vanilla Skyrim doesn't offer anything new, you've seen it all. It's that fucking shallow.

Now please, stop misinterpreting and put some effort into reading comprehension. I understand that you might enjoy game where featureless mannequin walks down empty corridor while handheld by dev team avatar that tells you what button (singular intended) you need to press to progress in the story, but some of us like some challenge in our games. Not just for our characters stats, but for our own creativity as well.

No, this is wrong. What you mean is it needs more challenge and choices for you to enjoy it, but so what? Who the fuck cares if you don't enjoy a game? Woop-de-fucking-do! Just because you don't like a game and need to change it to enjoy it, doesn't make it a bad game. Just because the audience isn't the same as for prequels doesn't mean it needs to change. Yea, there are mods out there, because that audience exists, but so what? Just because one audience exists doesn't mean another does not. Just because you feel like changing the game doesn't mean everybody does. Just because people like what you don't doesn't make it a shallow piece of shit.

If you want to talk about reading comprehension, tell me where I even said I enjoyed skyrim, despite your implications. I never did, because I don't but it doesn't matter. Who the fuck am I? I am one man, just because I didn't enjoy a game does not make it shit. Skyrim was a good game, just not for me, or yourself apparently.

So. The Stanly Parable. Better or worse then Skyrim?

As a game? better, but for satire rather than gameplay. Had the narration not worked it would have been a failure. That game was carried on wit, in the same way a Monty Python movie might lack any narrative structure, but still be great.
As an RPG? Fuck that is a hard one...

[Mr. Strange]

snip

Oh, fuck this. I never claimed there isn't people who like Skyrim or that they are wrong. I was pointing out why so many long time TES fans are pissed, that Bethesda is chopping away RPG elements they liked with chainsaw to make it more easily digestible to larger audience. This is why Oblivion and Skyrim were brought out in thread discussing "what "Is" an RPG", the argument being that RPG is everything TES games have less and less with each passing title.

[Max White]

"the carefully constructed, structured and guided experience, enjoyed by other players" is shallow piece of shit.

Is a very, very different statement from

I was pointing out why so many long time TES fans are pissed, that Bethesda is chopping away RPG elements they liked with chainsaw to make it more easily digestible to larger audience.

No you were not pointing out that they are removing some aspects to appeal to a larger audience, you were making ridicules claims about how sandboxes shouldn't have linear story aspects and removing conflicting features is just appealing to the devs emotions.
If I could backpedal like that, I would never get off my bike.

[nenjin]

So. The Stanly Parable. Better or worse then Skyrim?

Depends. Are you playing with the crouch mod?

[alexandertnt]

I understand that you might enjoy game where featureless mannequin walks down empty corridor while handheld by dev team avatar that tells you what button (singular intended) you need to press to progress in the story, but some of us like some challenge in our games. Not just for our characters stats, but for our own creativity as well.

I found that the later games allowed me to exercise more imagination because they were less detailed. They are closer to a blank slate, and thus allow me to fill in the gaps with my own imagination. Do that, and they are no longer featureless mannequins.

[Mr. Strange]

LEARN. TO. READ.

Why not have several ways to deal with dungeon as well? Even if I haven't played any D&D I think this kind of thing is called railroading and it's not much liked. There is obvious difference in which mage, warrior or thief character would deal with obstacles and yes, mage could just choose to fly over them and slowly BBQ the monsters if there is room for it. Or thief could just sneak straight for the room where McGuffin is hidden in and pick the lock, without searching and defeating mid boss from across the level. And warrior could just ME STRONK, ME SMASH! and carve bloody path trough every single enemy.

And

TES games are formed of linear quest lines in sandbox setting, meaning you can go almost anywhere to complete almost any part of any quest in almost any order you want, but the quest themself are still linear in design. And shallow. I swear, Fallout was bublished in 1997 and it had better writing and quest design than Skyrim.

This is what I said. Nothing about sandboxes not having have linear stories, nothing about conflicting features, nothing about devs emotions. Nothing.

I said (and I'll use short sentances so you can follow) that Skyrim lacked branching story line other games had done earlier, and that each TES games were simplifying their character developement further. Do not confuse me with someone else. Do not make up stuff. And vanilla Skyrim quest and story writing sucking is an opinion I still stand by, even if we go by 1995 standards.

@alexandertnt
True, but I was talking about overall quest structure, about having multiple ways to solve quests. You can do better RP on plank slate, but when the system doesn't allow you to do something you would like to do, like search for diplomatic solution instead of just killing everyone, it's hard without "cheating" with console commands to get the game where your imagination would lead.

[Max White]

Ok, so in response to that first quote: The reason they don't have several ways to get through each dungeon is because why would they? Because you want it? So what? For the effort it takes for them to implement all those features, they could do other things that appeal to their audience. Just because it doesn't offer the options you want it to, doesn't make it bad. Devs need to make choices about what they implement, this is just a fact of life. Those that just want to do everything either end up with a very mixed and convoluted game, or stuck in development hell forever. I assure you if you read the docs for any good game there will be long lists of features they wanted, but never did, because it would have had little impact on their target market.

Second: I don't see a problem with the linear quest design. This is a problem that you seem to have with the game, not a problem the game has. As for 'shallow', that is subjective, your own opinion, not fact.