The Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim is an ambitious and deeply flawed title. Unfortunately, the game fails on several levels at maintaining forward momentum.
As The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Remastered takes up 125GB, original designer Bruce Nesmith recalls fitting Skyrim into a tiny file size.
Skyrim is still my favorite ES game. I’m playing through it again right now since I never finished it.
That judicious lack of oversight permeated everything in Bethesda's RPGs, in a positive fashion.
I much prefer a left alone Obsidian and Larian Studios. Bethesda's formula has grown old for me.
Skyrim blew my mind when it released. That game took me to the gaming, promisedland. Going back to it when it was updated for the PS5, it felt slightly rough around the edges, but great for its time
We should leave Obsidian alone. Bethesda on the other hand should be kept under constant psychiatric observation.
Big Bethesda Nintendo Switch eShop sale now live with lowest prices ever for The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, Doom (2016), and more.
People seem to love Skyrim (my friends, at least), but I just don't have 100+ hours to invest in just one title anymore. Unless that game is Mass Effect 3....
There is many more problems with Skyrim than just progress. The game is a mess and from developers who can't code worth a shit and are too lazy to fix their mistakes.
I also haven't had a ton of time to devote to Skyrim (only about 30 hours into it), but all I can say is wow.
Depth of games is something that's hard to define, let alone develop in a video game.
Depth can be character development, or a strong sense of origin. It can be the illusion of choice in a linear game, or the overwhelming aspect of it in a sandbox game.
What Skyrim does well is give the player an actual "world" to live in. It does not cater to fans of games where linearity guides the player from the start of his journey to an ending with a cutscene and then credits.
I really enjoyed this article, because it begs to question how progress can be translated into a title as vast as Skyrim. How best can a developer convey "reward" and "success" while not ending the game entirely? side quests. But what games need to make sure to include is a mission path to the ending point, something done so extremely well in "Mass Effect 2".
What I enjoy about Skyrim is the shear abundance of things to do. But will holding my breath through it and waiting for an end lesson my enjoyment of it? no. You get what you put in, and if completing activities for that person and traveling to speak to this person isn't your way to have fun or feel rewarded. You are playing the wrong game.
I think it's incredibly important that Skyrim exists and games like it. I also think that linear titles that give you a wham bam introduction, then conflict and resolution in a nice tidy package are also important. Both cater to different players, who value different playstyles.
Skyrim's devs aren't lazy. A game like TES probably wouldn't even be possible by lazy devs. If these things were easy all problems would have been fixed by now. Game development is probably more than most of us do on a day-to-day basis.
Edit: @admiralthrawn87
Something's up here. Either you're calling me wrong, or you're wrong.
Ha, I have this problem with most RPGs. I have this nagging need to finish all sidequests and/or explore every aspect of the world/game before I even touch the main quest. The problem is, by the time that is done, I am so exhausted and I lose interest in the game. I know... it's pretty bad.
I've stopped playing Skyrim for awhile now, but I'll get back to it some day...