GB Skyrim Review

[Tricky]

Thank you, Steven, for writing it. I thought it delivered an excellent critique: harsh but absolutely fair. I haven't touched Skyrim so far and do not plan to do so for some time. Nevertheless, the GB review was the one thing I was looking forward to the most this month. And it turned out to be a real treat.

Hopefully it reaches the confines of Bethesda Softworks, they stand to learn a lot more from it than many popular reviews bound together.

[galraen]

I enjoyed reading the review as well, well done SWC, nice to see you're mainaining your excellent standards.

It certainly reinforced my decision to wait until the mods get to work, although I nearly weakened before Yuletide, but then found out that Bethesda haven't brought out a CS yet.

However, it seems from the revuew and comments written in GB's Forum, that Bethesda still haven't figured out what RPG actually means, and have basically stuck to their broken chracter progression system. In other words I gather you're still better off, in terms of level progression, using a blunt butter knife when fighting enemies than the vorpal Daedric mega blade of death that you keep in your back pack!

PS How come the review section isn't actually part of GB and requires you to register with someone else? Something I for one, and evidently Tricky, wasn't interested in doing.

[TAKR86]

"I thought it delivered an excellent critique: harsh but absolutely fair. I haven't touched Skyrim so far and do not plan to do so for some time."

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me like you haven't played the game and if that's true how can you determine whether the review is fair or not?

"In other words I gather you're still better off, in terms of level progression, using a blunt butter knife when fighting enemies than the vorpal Daedric mega blade of death that you keep in your back pack!"

No you're not! Higher lvls and better equipment equals a more powerfull character. The level-scaling works different and better than in Oblivion. You will meet better foes and they will sometimes have better equipment than the lower lvl foes. FX. you'll meet better bandit foes as you progress, but not on an equal lvl with you. The God-like character is possible, but sometimes he or she will meet a foe that needs more than two sword swings or destruction spells before it dies. It all depends on the character you make. My mage is extremely powerfull in terms of dealing damage, but if a Draugr Overlord actually manages to get close (which is difficult with my two dremora lord servants and as mentioned death dealing magic) and lands 4-5 blows with a two-handed weapon then I'm dead.

I thought the review was overly harsh and not very fair. I was looking forward to the GB review even though I already had the feeling that it would be treated harshly, because maybe the criticism would be interesting and have a lot of good points (of which the GB review definitely have some, I won't deny that). Instead it ultimately came down to the matter of the reviewer's personal preference for story-driven linear RPGs and his dislike of the kind of RPGs Bethesda makes, with that perspective Skyrim could only disapoint. Skyrim like any game deserves the minimum fairness of taking it's specific context (genre/subgenre, part of a series etc.) into account and considering it's merits within that context.

[swcarter]

In other words I gather you're still better off, in terms of level progression, using a blunt butter knife when fighting enemies than the vorpal Daedric mega blade of death that you keep in your back pack!

I'm pretty sure you get credit for the amount of damage you do rather than the number of hits you make, so better weapons are actually better.

"Skyrim like any game deserves the minimum fairness of taking it's specific context (genre/subgenre, part of a series etc.) into account and considering it's merits within that context.

Really, regardless of your preferences, I don't see how anybody can play Skyrim and not get bored with all of the repetition. Bethesda wants you to go out and explore a huge world, but then they didn't fill it up with nearly enough stuff.

SWC

[galraen]

I'm pretty sure you get credit for the amount of damage you do rather than the number of hits you make, so better weapons are actually better.
SWC

That's a major improvement on Oblivion and Morrowind, thanks for the info.

[Tricky]

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me like you haven't played the game and if that's true how can you determine whether the review is fair or not?

Intuïtion.

[galraen]

the kind of RPGs Bethesda makes

Bethesda doesn't make RPGs, it makes Doom clones, good, enhanced Doom clones usually, but not RPGs. Nothing wrong with that, but if they promote their games as RPGs then they are going to be judged accordingly, with inevitable results from those who know what an RPG is.

[TAKR86]

Really, regardless of your preferences, I don't see how anybody can play Skyrim and not get bored with all of the repetition. Bethesda wants you to go out and explore a huge world, but then they didn't fill it up with nearly enough stuff.

SWC

In the end it all comes down to personal preference. I've played 100s of hours of the game and I'm still not getting bored only intrigued by the possibilities for new and different characters to play and there's tons of stuff to do imo.

Despite what some people might think I'm not a Bethesda or sandbox game fanboy (I enjoy story-driven RPGs as well), I just like Skyrim and would have preferred to see it get a fair treatment by the story-driven people around here. Other people might enjoy some of Bethesda games (I fx. liked Morrowind, but didn't particularly like Oblivion) and it would have been nice if you had also considered it in comparison to them fx. Oblivion, because there are so many improvements. Even if you don't like the game I think it would have created a more balanced review if you had considered such aspects as the game's relation to its predecessors. Skyrim is not a perfect game, it has flaws some of which you pointed out, but imo your review was a bit too harsh and could have used some more balanced elements.

[GawainBS]

I found it the first serious Skyrim review on the net. As I pointed out earlier: if Obsidian released this game, people would scream for Faergus' head.

[dragon wench]

I somewhat agree with TAKR86.

I'm going to preamble my post by saying:
Personally, I prefer story-driven games. I've never been a Bethsoft junkie, and I find that overall their titles require a lot of modding to be interesting.
I'm currently working my way through yet another playthrough of PS:T and Witcher 2 is next on my gaming agenda. But, I enjoy dipping periodically into a heavily modded Morowind, Oblivion and vanilla Skyrim (don't want to push it, adding SK mods to my system).

Nonetheless, when comparing all three games at a purely vanilla level, I do think Skyrim is the most playable out of the box because there is a feeling of life and a greater sense of story.
This isn't to say I don't have some problems with Skyrim, I do, most of which I mention in my blog here. One thing I didn't mention there (because I had not really used alchemy much at that point) is that they have taken away the ability to name your own potions.. this really annoys me because it is impractical (along with the horrendous inventory) and because it is more evidence of too much streamlining.

All of this streamlining might be less of an issue if Bethesda started billing Elderscrolls as a hybrid Adventure/RPG experience, because that would be honest.. but they don't...

However,
all of the above aside, I do think the GB Review was perhaps on the unfair side in some aspects. I say this because you quite clearly state that sandbox RPGs are not your preference, and quite a lot of your critique is of that particular subgenre... I think it might be a bit more balanced to compare Skyrim to similar games, such as the Gothic series or even its ES predecessors.

Also, You say Skyrim feels empty, and yes, to a point it does. Remember, though, it isn't exactly a warm, volcanic island.. or an evenly temperate Cyrodiil... It's a mountainous province. I live in British Columbia, Canada; only the more southern and coastal areas have a relatively dense population.. go into the mountains and it really does not feel much different to Skyrim.

Your criticism of the game mechanics and lack of consequence after making a decision are very fair. There are some acts that should have *far* more impact on the game world than they do (those who have played through SKyrim's DB will know what I mean).

But, even if a particular genre, or sub genre, isn't your fancy, you still need to evaluate it on its own terms.

p.s And to certain people who shall remain nameless,
With all due respect,
over the years many of us here at GB have savagely attacked game reviewers for writing a pile of ill-informed gush that results from having sat with a title for just a couple of hours... and rightly so. *cough, cough*

[Nymie_the_Pooh]

While I feel the review may be bit bit overly critical in some areas I think it brings up weak points that other reviewers seem to ignore. I hope Bethesda takes a serious look at some of the things brought up. If they can address the issues discussed in the review while keeping to the same overall path then it can only mean good things for the future.

[GawainBS]

While I feel the review may be bit bit overly critical in some areas I think it brings up weak points that other reviewers seem to ignore. I hope Bethesda takes a serious look at some of the things brought up. If they can address the issues discussed in the review while keeping to the same overall path then it can only mean good things for the future.

Exactly. More over, most of Skyrim's weak points only become apparent after 20+ hours of gameplay. It was also tested on PC, which is a noticably worse way to experience it than on console, I've been assured. Like Steven, I gnashed my teeth on the interface and (lack of) keyboard/mouse controls.

[dragon wench]

While I feel the review may be bit bit overly critical in some areas I think it brings up weak points that other reviewers seem to ignore. I hope Bethesda takes a serious look at some of the things brought up. If they can address the issues discussed in the review while keeping to the same overall path then it can only mean good things for the future.

I actually agree 100 percent with this.

Gaming reviews generally fall into one of two camps. The first and most prevalent category consist of IGN-style gush fests written by people (mostly men) who, upon seeing a woman simply naked would be immediately rendered incapable of doing anything about it. The second category of reviewers reside at extremely independent websites where the atmosphere can be roughly summed up as "I'm so cool, hip and indy because I hate everything mainstream." These are the same types of people who will like a band when they are unheard of, but the moment said band becomes popular they accuse the group of having "sold out." This occurs even if none of their music has actually changed.
I have no use for either type of reviewer; they both entirely lack intelligence and objectivity.
So, on that score, SW Carter's review is definitely one of the best I have seen, it does a good job of approaching a much needed middle ground.
However, that does not stop me from calling out a spade when I see it.

[swcarter]

Also, You say Skyrim feels empty, and yes, to a point it does. Remember, though, it isn't exactly a warm, volcanic island.. or an evenly temperate Cyrodiil... It's a mountainous province. I live in British Columbia, Canada; only the more southern and coastal areas have a relatively dense population.. go into the mountains and it really does not feel much different to Skyrim.

I didn't say Skyrim feels empty. The closest thing I said is that Skyrim doesn't have enough content in it, but that was in reference to the number of unique entities in the game rather than to how full it is. Bethesda squeezed a bunch of stuff into their world, but they used way too many draugr and bandits and dragons.

SWC

[GawainBS]

I shudder when I read this "End of Years" lists where Skyrim ends up as "best RPG of 2011." Wasn't 2011 also the year that The Witcher 2 & Deus Ex: Human Revolution came out?
One of the worst things I've read of the review in a local newspaper. "Skyrim has sharp dialogues and ...." Sharp what now?

[galraen]

It's Oblivion all over again Gawain, the publishers have their eyes firmly on the advertising revenue they get from Bethesda, and have instructed their reviewers to write their reviews accordingly!

[GawainBS]

I'm more than inclined to believe you.

[Stworca]

It's Oblivion all over again Gawain, the publishers have their eyes firmly on the advertising revenue they get from Bethesda, and have instructed their reviewers to write their reviews accordingly!

Wrong.

"I thought it delivered an excellent critique: harsh but absolutely fair. I haven't touched Skyrim so far and do not plan to do so for some time."

... :laugh:

Let's get some things straight : Oblivion was the very worst game released under the "RPG" banner in a long time.
Skyrim, while being a game where you are the prophet / chosen one / god of every singly religion and faction from mission 2 onward, is NOT Oblivion.

Let me - who liked Skyrim, and had fun with it, but was annoyed by it, and stopped playing - point out a few things about it :

The melee combat system is - so far - the best of all TES games.
Magic is reduced to but a handful of spells, and mages lead rather unimpressive lives. Magic is NOT underpowered though, and anyone who claims so, obviously didn't stick to it long enough. Elder Dragons shocked to death in 10 seconds anyone?
The main storyline isn't better nor worse than any other TES storyline. Don't start the bull**** of "Ohh, how Daggerfall was better in that department". ALL TES games are about a generic prisoner who becomes a <overpowered demi-god> and fights <generic evil> which only he can stop.
With this being said, aside from Thieves guild, faction quests were not worth remembering, and you progressed through them, and the "ranks" too fast.
Ohh yes, ranks. You get to "Leader-Guy" in record time in this game. Because You turn out to be the chosen of / champion of / listener of / visitor of dreams of / douchetard of something, and are special.
Still, Thieves Guild are the new "DB" of Oblivion, with the storyline being great and actually "chosen-free".
Level scalling is still present, but if you just pay some (expletive deleted) attention, you can overcome adversities. It's no longer the 10000000 click fest of Oblivion.
The new "traits" are actually a welcome change, without them the game would be too "actioney".

What annoys is the very little influence that your actions have on this and that, and the generic Imperial vs Stormcloak war that is made very, VERY poorly. There are great battles, amazing moments of epicness, but it's all rushed, and not worth much attention. Because in the end, it does not matter.

The game has some amazing locations, Silent City cavern to name one, and the atmosphere IS there.
Oblivion was all too shiney and grindey (and broken)
Here, the world lives, and you can hold the breath while exploring this or that.

Puzzles are decent, but too repetitive.
Dungeons are all fun, mostly for sneaking characters though. If you want to get the most out of the game, jam the sneak button and move like that. You'll have a much better time.

With this being said, while the AI is decent in melee, and magic, they have absolutely no idea how to effectively hunt down sneaking enemies. Ohh, if only the relentless guards from Thief 2 (the "I WILL find you" guys from VH) were added..

Overall, if you can ignore the generic, stupid main storyline and just embark on a random journey, which would take you whenever YOU decide to go, the game deserves extremely high praise in that aspect. "I'll just clear out one more dungeon.."

But if you expect a Metal-Gear-Solid like storyline, your actions to have an impact, and world to change drastically, Skyrim is just another Oblivion.

Lastly : Prejudice based on a review, any review, is a mistake. But judging a game from a second hand post, is just...

[galraen]

I was referring to the way magazines have reviewed the games Stworca, not comparing the games themselves. I can't do the latter having not played Skyrim, but the way reviews are dictated by the weight of advertising income has bedevilled reviews for many years now. Which makes relying on reviews to decide which games to purchase an exercise in futility.

[Nymie_the_Pooh]

I think part of the problem with many Skyrim reviews is that it really does take twenty to forty hours worth of playing to have it hit home how little impact your character has on the world at large. It still offers a lot. I just wish there was a bit more of a lasting impact based on my character's decisions and it took me a while to realize that was missing.

As an example, I was reading up on IGN's review for SWtOR. They had one reviewer who was in it from the friends and family beta days. The next longest play time after that said she had fifteen hours, but only reached level thirteen which takes less than half that amount of time for someone stumbling along to reach unless you spend most of your time RPing in a cantina or some similar activity. The other reviewers all spent one to two hours each and some of that time was split between different characters.

Skyrim is similar to an MMO in regards to scale of at least the single player PvE portions. If they spent a similar amount of time and effort with Skyrim then there is no way they could produce an accurate review. I hope they aren't being paid by game companies to put out positive reviews, but not putting in the time for a proper play through of a game is just as big of a problem when it comes to how dependable a game review is.