Top
500°
6.5

Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Review | Cynical Reviews

Skyrim received countless hype across the board from major reviewers on it’s run up to release, for any of you “too cool to play games” types out there who don’t know about Skyrim, it’s the newest addition to the highly acclaimed Elder Scrolls series. However after the last game Oblivion was fairly underwhelming compared to its predecessor Morrowind and shunned by the “elite gaming community” how would the final release fair under the eyes of yours truly.

Read Full Story >>
cynicalreviews.net
The story is too old to be commented.
Benjamski1683d ago

I disagree with most of what you said, but it was still relatively well-written. Also, the reason there are no fat people in Skyrim is probably because in older civilizations, fat people die. We only have fat people because we cater to their needs and prolong their lives.

Biggest1682d ago

Yeah. . . Totally not true. Fat people didn't die. They were the wealthy. People were thin because of their inability to gorge on food. This point is completely irrelevant to the actual game, mind you. But fat people were cool throughout history.

MAJ0R1682d ago

I was thought he was referring to the really old civilizations, you know the hunter and gatherers and not people who lived 500 years ago like Henry VIII

papashango1682d ago

If we lived in a medieval fantasy where zombies, vampires, werewolves, giants, demons, and dragons existed. I wouldn't expect to see fat people

ZippyZapper1682d ago

Maybe they used magic to get rid of the fat

darksied1682d ago

Exactly. Watch the opening of Zombieland, it explains it all.

RedDragan1682d ago (Edited 1682d ago )

Actually Biggest... virtually nobody was fat.

Those rich folks you are talking about were Noble's, Lord's, Knight's and Royalty... all of which were battle prepared. The only person who could possibly get away with being a lard ass would be King because he would rarely enter battle but even then, Henry was a bit a rarity given his size.

Unlike today, the rich back then were warriors. Even people as rich and as high status as a Prince was forced into small skirmish battles on a fairly regular basis so that he was prepared for a truly monstrous invasion for a real rival.

For the poor, they either couldn't afford to get fat. For the rich, they couldn't afford to allow themselves to get fat. In Europe, military tradition has been in existence since the days of the Romans and even the highest of royalty had start with foot marching miles a day. It continues to the 21st Century, Prince William and Prince Harry have had to embrace hard work and sub zero arctic temperatures.

Not that I am a royalist or anything, I just give them fair do's for something I am not prepared to go through.

Benjamski1682d ago

True, they were the the wealthy. Obese people only survive if the society caters to them or they're rich enough to force that to happen.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1682d ago
MariaHelFutura1683d ago (Edited 1683d ago )

Society caters to everything thats weaker. But its for a good reason mind you....

Benjamski1682d ago

It CAN be for a good reason. Natural selection was doing just fine before we stepped. Sure, I see the point in keeping someone like Hawking alive, but that guy in Ohio ( http://articles.nydailynews... we shouldn't be prolonging the lives of people like that who consume, yet contribute nothing to society.

GroundsKeeperJimbo1683d ago

Kind Henry VIII? Plenty of kings were fat :] So I guess people are living a bit more like kings now-a-days.

Basjohn1682d ago

Which is precisely why he died at age 55. Had he not been a king he'd likely have died even younger. Furthermore back then it took extraoardinary circumstances to allow a non-noble to get fat in the first place as most had a hard time not dying of malnutrition.

"Late in life, Henry became obese (with a waist measurement of 54 inches/137 cm) and had to be moved about with the help of mechanical inventions. He was covered with painful, pus-filled boils and possibly suffered from gout."

Graey1683d ago

lol so true. kind of like people who smoke, do drugs and generally engage in risky endeavors only to want to be saved at the end.

back in those days, STDs, drugs, indulging would practically kill you. Not only that but getting bit, really bad wounds, infections, sick. There weren't many cures.

Obesity is a very serious problem. People really should watch what they eat or at the very least accept what is if they should so choose that path.

StraightPath1682d ago

worst review ever who ever reviewed this stop being a would be gaming journalist your a disgrace for writing this review.

HarryMasonHerpderp1682d ago

that is definitely the reason
why there are no fat people in skyrim!
lol seriously some people will make
any excuse to defend this games shortcomings.

Tr10wn1682d ago

How is even not having fat people a big factor? i said this reviewer invent that pathetic excuse to give a low score, still is not like it maters the game is doing well and got GOTY already so whats the reason to bash not having fat people in skyrim? a "excuse".

SpinalRemains1381682d ago

Partly true.

I would think the real resaon is because Tamriel doesn't profit from illness and obesity like we do in the West now.

Tamriel has no McDonalds or disgusting fat and sugar on everything.

Every barrel has potatoes, cabbage and carrots.
Think there might be a connection? I have yet to see a double quarter pounder in Riften.

QuodEratDemonstrandm1682d ago

Did we read the same review? This review, and other articles like it, do wonders for helping me get in touch with my inner Grammar Nazi.

Reviewer needs to learn that possessive and plural are NOT interchangeable. The difference between fair and fare really isn't that hard. And it's just..... sloppy. I would be ashamed to submit this review.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1682d ago
lelo2play1683d ago

6.5 !!!... looking for hits ?

RioKing1683d ago

Probably didn't even read the article...

LettingGo1682d ago

I read the article and I STILL think they're looking for hits.

Ashriel1682d ago

to give them more pageviews?

Tr10wn1682d ago

@RioKing I read the article too the real question have you play Skyrim? This guy is obviously trying to get hit on his site.

Lord_Sloth1682d ago

Or simply acknowledging the games many many MANY glaring flaws and glitches which can make it pretty unplayable.

fermcr1682d ago

The game is not unplayable !!! Finished the main quest with the X360 version, and it's a great game. Minor bugs, but nothing that makes the game unplayable, not even close.

So yes, the review author giving a 6.5 is clearly looking for hits.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1682d ago
CynicalReviews1683d ago (Edited 1683d ago )

Simply an opinion, if you read the review I do list positive points. I just don't think Skyrim is an incredible feat, it includes less features than the previous games and offers dragon combat in return (exageration). 6.5/10 is 65% and considering I class 70% as a good solid score, I see no problem with it.

RioKing1683d ago

Just curious...what game(s) would you list in the 75%-100% range?

CynicalReviews1683d ago

Releases that spring to mind are:

Dark Souls
Terraria
Marvel vs Capcom 3 (Ultimate)
Portal 2 (no reply value but still enjoyable)

About to start the Uncharted on PS3 and Dark Messiah on PC (similar to skyrim I hear)

Tr10wn1682d ago

I said there is the reason you are bashing Skyrim, "Dark Souls" i bet you are one of those little fanboys who don't like to see people playing anything else beside the game you like so you give lower score to satisfied your fanboyism, and by saying "it includes less" you are just making it more obvious there, and before you said anything i own every game you mention there except by MVC3U which is a ripoff and uncharted 3.

Now that i got that out of my system tell me what really satisfied you as a gamer, i really don't understand, heck i don't even care but still i want to know what game >Skyrim in your opinion and Dark Souls is not even close to Skyrim quality.

the game is not hard at all not really if you have played any ninja gaiden on hard you'll know what i mean, but if you call it hard because the difficulty is locked then you suck.

the game has little to absolutely no story.

the replay value of the game gets really boring after 4 hours into the ng+1.

The Coop sucks, at least when i was playing i heard it got fixed but then i sold it.

now tell me how a game like skyrim can be compare to dark souls? so the game has flaws like hmmmmmm every other game in the planet? some are pointless like that fat peoples you mention some are false like the 3rd person animation being bad and some are true like the game having framerates problem on the "ps3" not on 360 you can't say consoles like its in general because is not true, but hey you know what they say, is an opinion and everyone has one, the only fact is that there is a balance and is going toward skyrim not dark souls, facts are facts.

EmperorDalek1682d ago

@Tr10wn

Skyrim was/is my most anticipated GOTY (haven't played it yet), but Dark Souls is fantastic IMO.

"the game is not hard at all not really if you have played any ninja gaiden on hard you'll know what i mean"

It's a different kind of hard. Ninja Gaiden requires fast reflexes, whereas Dark Souls requires patience, and sometimes trial and error. Did you beat The Four Kings? That was pretty hard, especially with phantoms helping.

"the game has little to absolutely no story."

Yes it does. It just doesn't tell it to you. You have to look for it, or even look on the internet. The Witches of Izalith are a good example.

"the replay value of the game gets really boring after 4 hours into the ng+1."

I'm on NG++, and plan to play it through again after that. I guess it just depends if there's anything you want to do after the game ends.

"The Coop sucks, at least when i was playing i heard it got fixed but then i sold it."

It probably got fixed, but I didn't have it on day one so I wouldn't know. I would kind of agree when i'm spending a long time trying to be summoned, but it's fun when you're in an online game.

Oblivion is my top game on the PS3, so i'm guessing I will prefer Skyrim to Dark Souls (if I don't get glitched...), but that doesn't take away from the fact that Dark Souls is arguably the best RPG this gen.

TheComedian1682d ago

@Tr10wn
So you just write a whole paragraph bashing every other game he mentioned he enjoyed calling him a fanboy because he simply did not like Skyrim.Yeah I don't think he was the one upset with anyone having different tastes than him and he sure as hell isn't the fanboy here.Next time learn to comprehend the situation and don't let your own fanboyism blind you

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1682d ago
kevnb1682d ago

less than morrowind and oblivion, but oblivion was half broken.

adamant7151681d ago

@kevnb

Have you even played the game? lol

Graey1683d ago

CR are you the person who wrote the review? If so let me state that I have not read the article and thus am only replying to this particular statement based on my playtime with Skyrim.

This might be a bit of a long post.

I will say that I disagree with your actual score. I'd list Skyrim at at least 80%. Having played it since release and again I haven't read your article but I'm just basing it on my playtime.

However....and there is a big however. I can see based on me playing why it would get a lower score and a higher score.

1. Higher: when I first played Morrowind the complexity and depth to that game instantly shot it up there to one of my favorite RPG's. It was something very new to me, it wasn't as linear. So much armors, weapons, skills.

It reminded me of say GTA what 3 I think for the PS2. I would instantly give that a 8-9. Though now you won't catch me within 10ft of a GTA game. I'll probably give Elderscrolls one more time and see if they can break the mold because after playing 50-70+hrs or so it just seems stale. Dragons are really an afterthought. Armor and all that just seems trivial.

But...I can see why it gets high marks.

Low Scores: I can see why it would get low scores as well. Like yours I can see why people would not consider Skyrim to be all that good and rightly so. Hits aside, because that really doesn't matter there are fundamental flaws with the game but the game itself works. I could not give it less than an 80% but I would say there are things people should know going in. More so finer details of the game.

Personally...I'm waiting Kingdoms of Amalur. Hopefully that will fill the void.

Either way

V/R

synchroscheme1682d ago

You summed up my thoughts on the game nicely.

Most reviews seem to be an "at first glance" type of review, whereas when you spend some more time with the game its problems are much more noticeable. Not to say that reviewers didn't spend time with the game, but there are clearly some issues that weren't adequately addressed. The difficulty felt inconsistent as once you've reached a certain level, most anything dies within a few hits. Other times you could be in the very same dungeon killing enemies easily and suddenly you're up against an enemy that kills you in one lightning bolt and has massive amounts of health. Dragon fights are impressive at first but don't feel out of the ordinary after you've killed a few. Combat still feels wishy-washy especially with melee's "power attacks", followers need improving and the AI in general needs to be refined further. Dark Souls may not have as much content as Skyrim,(though there's plenty to be had) but its gameplay feels technically superior and just more solid compared to Skyrim. Many would disagree, but I felt your opinion was spot-on.

kevnb1682d ago

lets give dark souls a rest, its not even the same thing. Dark Souls has a ton of flaws as well, but what it actually does well stands out in 2011. Dark Souls reminds me of old action rpgs found on pc around 2001, which is actually not a bad thing.

SecludedBubbles1682d ago

I agree with you regarding less features, I miss the arena lol, and I don't know what it is but something about Skyrim just doesn't give me the same addiction Oblivion did. Also it kind of annoys me that the game is made for the Nord class basically, I feel my character is out of place in terms of the main story if they aren't a Nord. Still a brilliant game though, I would give it a 7/8 out of 10, the bugs on consoles really holds it back from being GOTY for me.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1681d ago
Unlimax1683d ago (Edited 1683d ago )

All the hype's doesn't make a good game .. you should try it by yourself , and then judge !

kramun1682d ago

I have and thought it was the best game I've played all year. Certainly not a 6.5, that score is for games that are average to above average games, which Skyrim is not.

I've played it on pc and I don't agree with this review at all. And the hype didn't sway me, my enjoyment of the game did.

But everyone is entitled to their opinion.