Print

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

This only gave grief

3 (6.1%)

Grakelin is not stupid

6 (12.2%)

Are you happier now?

1 (2%)

------ Haiku, the encore -----

17 (34.7%)

Disagreeing, Fine

0 (0%)

Why you make a fuzz 'bout it?

3 (6.1%)

Lets just be happy

19 (38.8%)

Total Members Voted: 48

[fenrif]

The main problem with oblivion is that the leveling of the character and the autoleveling of everything else makes it quite easy to break the game if you dont know what you're doing.

Level up your guy a few times using the wrong skills and you'll be unable to kill anything.

Not to mention how immersion breaking it is that everything is always a challenge to you. You SHOULD be able to wade through level 1 bandits at end game like a field of flowers. Its things like that which make the game world feel alive, which is what bethesda seemed to be aiming for.

[Micro102]

And that's where distance=dangerous gameplay comes in....which the developers completely forgot.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

Man, I want to get into this discussion, but I know that if I do I'm going to end up making a massive wall of text explaining in detail everything I hated about Oblivion, and it's going to take me at least an hour to write and anyone who liked Oblivion is just going to ignore most of it except for a few key points which they'll misunderstand in some bizarre way and make flawed arguments against.   I guess I'll just wait until someone comes along with a specific point I can comment on.

[The Architect]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I forgot to mention this earlier: Some bandits do wear Daedric. Some wear light armor, and some wear heavy. It was based on their class. Leaders in particular come to mind as wearers of heavy armor. I don't remember what the classes were, exactly.

A huge flaw in Oblivion was that leveling up broke the main storyline. Having leveled some before going through the main quest, you'd face large gangs of insanely strong Daedra with extremely weak, death-prone allies who were originally supposed to help you with the large numbers of enemies. The whole leveling to scale experiment was a failure in planning, in my opinion. I doubt we will see a very similar system in the next Elder Scrolls incarnation.

...ignore most of it except for a few key points which they'll misunderstand in some bizarre way and make flawed arguments against.

Or, as we've seen, post some nonsensical arguments disputing points no one has brought up here at all.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

To be completely accurate, I believe the Bandits never wore Heavy Armor, that was the Marauders.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I wasn't quite that adverse to Oblivion's autolevelling (indeed, I frequently failed to notice it), though the fact that I couldn't adequately play it anyway had an effect on that. What irritated me the most was the omnipresent fake freedom. Morrowind was ridiculously freeform, and it was a good thing. Even though crafty people found ways to sequence-break its story mode, it still provided a rather detailed playground the size of an island for normal play. It was a lot more enjoyable overall. In Morrowind, I had the most fun when I was infiltrating some guardhouse with a few self-crafted potions of invisibility. In Oblivion, the most fun I had was abusing the "paralyze NPC" console command to throw people off high places (Especially fun in the Oblivion itself. Killing the daedra lord or whoever it was at the top of the tower by paralyzing him on the narrow ledge inside the tall tower so he falls to his death - in retrospect, quite a dwarfy method). Oblivion was all bells and whistles, and quite mediocre as a game.

[sproingie]

I do not like games by a particular vendor so I am going to nail my 95 theses to the door that states in detail how everyone who likes these games is deficient and basically lacking in human qualities.  Exclamation points and all-caps will abound, for they reinforce the objective superiority of my view.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

I do not like games by a particular vendor so I am going to nail my 95 theses to the door that states in detail how everyone who likes these games is deficient and basically lacking in human qualities.  Exclamation points and all-caps will abound, for they reinforce the objective superiority of my view.

Amen brother!  Fight the imaginary oppressor!  Show them that no mere words or so called reasoned arguments will sway you from the one true path of willful ignorance! 

Seriously man, what are you talking about?  Are you seriously taking personal offense to the fact that someone has allot of things they don't like about something you like?  What purpose does that post serve?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I wasn't quite that adverse to Oblivion's autolevelling (indeed, I frequently failed to notice it), though the fact that I couldn't adequately play it anyway had an effect on that. What irritated me the most was the omnipresent fake freedom. Morrowind was ridiculously freeform, and it was a good thing. Even though crafty people found ways to sequence-break its story mode, it still provided a rather detailed playground the size of an island for normal play. It was a lot more enjoyable overall. In Morrowind, I had the most fun when I was infiltrating some guardhouse with a few self-crafted potions of invisibility. In Oblivion, the most fun I had was abusing the "paralyze NPC" console command to throw people off high places (Especially fun in the Oblivion itself. Killing the daedra lord or whoever it was at the top of the tower by paralyzing him on the narrow ledge inside the tall tower so he falls to his death - in retrospect, quite a dwarfy method). Oblivion was all bells and whistles, and quite mediocre as a game.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Well yeah, that's another thing.  Something interesting I've found is that there are just so many things wrong with Oblvion that you can talk to several different people and they'll all have a different main grievance with it, yes they rarely seem to put them all together.  That's what I mean about being able to talk for over an hour about it's flaws.  Because it really would take that long to put together an extensive list of all the things wrong with it.

[3]

Is it wrong to allow a person to change how hard the game is? I don't think so.

Spoiler: Derail (click to show/hide)

That wasn't what I was trying to say.

I was trying to say that there should be some system (that is, a properly-balanced difficulty curve) in place which sets the game's difficulty up properly - any difficulty changes made by the player should be secondary to that; not of any importance.

Design fails when you've got a difficulty curve (if I could even call it that) wherein the player is almost forced to change it themselves in order for the required effect to manifest - it's no longer an option of the player, it's an obligation. Quests, for example, should, ideally, be balanced at release. If a quest exists which is far easier than it should be, you can't say "well, it's up to the player to change the difficulty setting until it feels right". The devs should've got it right in the first place.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

I doubt we will see a very similar system in the next Elder Scrolls incarnation.

Well, TES V: Fallout 3 seemed quite a bit better in that respect. :3

[Siquo]

Well, I kinda liked Oblivion. And Fallout3. And I hated Morrowind.

The games I can't stand anymore are the GTA-Clone-Games. All of these games have the same story and the same gameplay, except a different theme and graphics.
You may add to this list, btw:

• All GTA's, starting with 1
• Far Cry 2
• The Saboteur
• Assassins' Creed
• Spiderman (the one with Venom)
• Prototype
• Red Faction: Guerilla
  

Really. EXACTLY the same. I'm Sick And Tired of them, and vow to never play another one of them again.

[dogstile]

Red faction was a GTA clone? Far cry two was a GTA clone? Seriously? How?

I mean, red faction was a game about blowing up buildings, and far cry was about driving for half an hour to /get/ a mission. GTA was vastly different to both of those games in terms of gameplay mechanics.

[Cthulhu]

Seriously, those are all very different, the only real thing they have in common is they're free roaming and have side-missions.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

A lot of the games you mentioned don't even have Autos to Grand Theft Siquo.

[JoshuaFH]

The first and second GTA's aren't even similar to the current GTA's in any way.

Plus, it's unusual to list GTA 1 as a 'clone', since I don't think it's possible to copy yourself.