Joystiq: Last week's column on changes in role-playing combat systems through history ruffled a few feathers, so I thought it would be a good idea to discuss what, in my opinion, makes for good RPG combat systems. I had no intention of sounding like I hated turn-based combat (since my two favorite RPGs use it!), or that every new game was better than old.
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.
Specifically with those Infinity Engine games it was more because all the elements of the game held it together well.
The combat was good. It had a depth and learning curve to it. Plus there was replayability due tot he fact of there being a multitude of classes and races.
But like I said, BG, Icewind Dale and Planescape; they were held together by a mixture of their stories, music and gameplay to diferent degrees depending on the game.
e.g most seem to think Planescapes combat wasn't as good.
It wasn't 'as good' but it still used that same style of mechanics which had a depth to it. Only it was held together well by it's story and music. tbh, I don't mind planescapes combat.