First Person: Skyrim is Soulless

[Denizen]

This was one among many problems I had with skyrim. The first was the sheer ease of the game. Oblivion on the hardest difficulty required planning, strategy, and your build gave you the tools to overcome it yet there was always a way out of the most demanding and confounding confrontations.

In skyrim set to highest difficulty, you need none of that, dragons are soloable after a few levels and their novelty not-withstanding a level more, melee gives you a headstart and magic removes all difficulty in the later quests, and the guild quests are over and done with in a few hours. Even the dragonshout destroys would-be obstacles once you learn the one that knocks over and paralyzes foes for several seconds.

Oblivion before and after the game-enhancing mods gave me the challenge and open-world rpg experience I craved and still crave, many playthroughs had and completed. They should've took a look at what they had done and the mods that enhanced it and sought to make a game that exceeded that combined level of excellence but instead seemed to have felt out-done and under-shot what could've been a great opportunity. It'll take a long time before the skyrim mods catch up to the years of creating that oblivion spawned and is still spawning. I see the amount of things that came from it as reciprocity, bethesda gave so much and in return, the community gave back more, almost like a thank you . With what skyrim added... I don't know if that encourages anything more than the basic things modded bethesda games are given i.e. mod manager and fixes.

I could go on making this a blog-esque tear down of skyrim and seeing how disliking this game is "unpopular," usually warrants bashing but this gives me the opportunity to say the above and one last thing, I no longer believe bethesda brings challenge and substance that the previous games had. Elder scrolls is now the call of duty for rpgs and bethesda seems to be $atisfied with that.

 

[RJ 17]

I was completely disinterested in the story and only cared about killing things and taking their stuff was my first clue that something was off about Skyrim,

Sounds to me that you simply don't like the game as it is, and there's your reasoning right there. I can understand your wanting to RP in the game and expect it to be fluidly conducive for doing so, however coming out and saying that you're utterly disinterested in the story and that all you really want to do is clear out dungeons and sell the loot kinda says that you have a very simplistic view of the game. If all you want to do is go around killing NPCs, why not give Saints Row 3 a try? I hear there's plenty of mindless NPC slaughter in there.

The point I'm trying to make is that if you don't like the story behind a game to the point that you can easily say "I was completely disinterested in the story and only cared about taking their stuff was my first clue that something was off about Skyrim." I suggest that deep down you never liked Skyrim in the first place...and if you're playing a game that deep down you don't like, of course you're going to feel that there's something wrong with it.

There's so much to do in Skyrim, all sorts of interesting and fun quests and storylines to get involved with, and yet you boiled your experience down to just dungeon clearing? Of course you're gonna think the game his hollow and souless, you haven't ACTUALLY been playing it! If you give up on the story(ies) presented in an RPG then you've given up on the game itself and as such are officially killing more time than NPCs. I'm certain any one of us who thoroughly enjoy the game would feel as bored as you do if we just said "Screw the story, I'm doing nothing but dungeon crawling." Skyrim is BUILT around the stories within it, if you ignore/avoid them then there is absolutely no point to be playing it. The same would be true about Oblivion if you just ignored its story, just as it would be true about the Fallout games or any other RPG for that matter.

That said, I will admit it's a bit iritating that after having won the Civil War for the Empire, people still talk about the Storm-Cloak leader as though he were still alive when I ask them what they think of the war.

 

[eNTi]

warning, contains spoilers:


the most fun thing that happened to me, was when i finished that quest where you get the little girl for the temple of dibella. the little girl saw me steal something and ran around crying. she even followed me upstairs, where the priestess took out a dagger and ran screaming and slashing after the little girl!

this game is so disconnected from it's own reality it becomes a parody in and on itself.

 

[Draconalis]

I suspected that nothing I did would ever matter, and that has been my experience as I've progressed through the game.

This is exactly why I don't even like the idea of Elder Scrolls games.

What's the point of Role Playing in a single player game like this?

At least when I play D&D, I'm role playing with others. Single player role playing just kinda reminds me of Text based role playing by yourself...

 

[justnotcricket]

I think this is why that idea of a 'Skyrim-Dragon Age baby' came up. It would be awesome to have the openness and options and freedom of Skyrim with the story and character development and consequences of a Bioware game.

I enjoy playing Skyrim very much, but it is totally lacking in story. I mean, the best they could come up with was a ripoff of Romans vs Celts/Picts/Germans/northern tribespeople?
I know, I know, it's a fraction more complicated than that, but really, it's pretty bland. I can't actually even care enough about one side or the other to decide whether I should join the Stormcloaks or the Imperials yet...

In Dragon Age, on the other hand, although the world is more limited, I actually *felt* the injustice of the way Mages were treated (even though my character wasn't one), and I genuinely raged when

Spoiler

Anders blew up the Chantry, because I understood why he did it, but terrorism is never the way and he'd managed to kill the one woman in the Chantry who actually seemed to have a functioning brain *and* a chance of making a difference to the mess that was going on...I actually had to really stop and think whether I wanted to kill Anders where he stood or give him a second chance

So, yeah. Skyrim is a great and entertaining series of diversions, and some very beautifully presented grind, but it would need a huge injection of story to become what *I* would consider the perfect WRPG. I still enjoy it very much, though, the same way I loved Dragon Age 2 but would have killed for a bit more variety in the dungeons!!

 

[antipunt]

See, when I met Agnis... I had the complete opposite reaction.


Here was the perfect character to exemplify how the game has a soul. It's self aware. She knew even before the bandits were killed at her feet that someone else was going to come along anyways, and it didn't matter in the least. She'd seen it before. She'd see it again.

What this story is describing? That's the limitations of a game that strives to be massive.

You can't have it both ways. You can't have a world TEEMING with infinite dialogue and interesting characters while also being enormous and filled with random interesting things to do. It's just one of the many little signs that say:

"Even though we were busy designing this big, beautiful world... we haven't forgotten the people who make it up."

She has a personality. It's a limited personality, because Agnis is NOBODY... but it's a personality. It's a mindset. It's a character. You can't develop EVERY character, but you -can- give minor set-piece characters a little flair.

I also agree with the F/b comments. The article is legit, but Skyrim (and similar games) are like a skeleton waiting for your own flesh to be added on it. Everything is made up by you; it's like a table-top, with a massive canvas. For example, I used my own imagination to explain who the hero was; why this was happening. Why he was going here next. Etc.

This is a contrast to the other RPGs that hold your hand and deliver things in a much more linear fashion and define most of the elements for you. Both game types have their flaws and strengths.

Edit: on a note, however, it is kind of annoying when NPCs repeat the same line 3,000 times. They start becoming defined by that one and single line

 

[Jagji56]

I know exactly the dungeon you are taking about. But you seem to have missed a VERY impotent thing.

IF you had covered her again, for a third time, she would have told you that she comes with the place.

The fort is her home, and she is a stubborn old coot who wont move, so when someone moves in she tells them she is not going any ware. THAT'S why she was not bothered by the bodys. She is used of it happening. In fact, I think she has more soul than any other NPC in the game, simply due to her stubborn-no-fuss attitude to the things going on around her.

 

[Vault101]

He has got a point; hints of a souless experience without any real recognition of your efforts or decisions.

My own examples:
-Became Harbinger of the Companions and the guards still ask if I "fetch the mead" and I'm still talked down to by guild members.

-The info I found at the Thalmore Embassy shows it doesn't matter which faction I decide to help win the war, which I was really debating with myself on.

-I have no option when dealing with the gods' demands, I either accept or leave the quests unfinished, but if I do comply, it doesn't show in the world anyway beyond an artifact that I've advanced beyond using anyway.

-I can't play a "good guy" and take down the thieves guild if I feel like it; I have to frame a guy that I just helped and called me a friend, but if I do to progress the story, he doesn't act any differently.

-A whole town watches me kill a dragon and absorb its soul, but then goes back to making smart-ass remarks "Let me guess, someone stole your sweetroll"

-Same goes for being a thane; I punch someone for disrespecting my position and suddenly I'm getting my ass kicked by the whole damn town.

NPC's actually say "somone stoel your sweet roll?"

reference to fallout 3?

 

[Vault101]

By the time I had logged as many hours into New Vegas as I have in Skyrim, I felt like I had big decisions to make that were really going to change the world of New Vegas.


That's how I felt. Preparing for the big battle, preparing for taking over New Vegas.
Bam, end, finish, a nice powerpoint shows how everything has changed.

That's it, not stop playing the game or make a new characer.

*Sigh*

HUGE disappointment. Really, I loved the game, but I was so disappointed in the end that I have never touched the game since I've seen the end credits.

to be fair I think there was a reason for that...there were so many different outcomes for everything that doing anything after the "endgame" would have been too hard..I think anyway, I think they mentioned it in regards to not having any DLC that takes place "after"

that said my memory may be hazy

if that was the case then I would prefer that, rather than them "overiding" what ever decisions you made just so you could keep playing (and personally I dont often find any reason to continue playing anyway)

I think with fallout 3 there were less outcomes....good...bad...neutral, you were always going to go down a similar path

 

[ThunderCavalier]

After what you mentioned, I do have to agree that the biggest flaw with Bethesda sandbox RPGs is that the actions you take, quest decisions you make, and people you slaughter will seldom faze the world you live in, and aside from a few key decisions, almost nothing will ever change if you do a certain thing or not. I hadn't really noticed it, though, since the thing you pointed out in Skyrim, the trend of going into places, killing everything that hates you, and hauling the loot back to sell again, was the main reason I (or frankly anyone) plays a Bethesda game in the first place.

I do agree that Obsidian took the Fallout 3 game and made it into something unique. While Bethesda is certainly better at crafting a world in general, Obsidian is good in making it feel like you have a reason to be there, and that you have some impact in it. A Bethesda game is a walking build that is constantly looking to add to that immensely broken DPS and reduce the time it takes to kill an orc from 5 seconds to 1 second. An Obsidian game makes you feel like the actions you take could very well change the entire damn world you live in, even if said world is kinda bland.

Although, as an extra thing to note, maybe Agnis was a bit of a fourth-wall meta joke to this fallacy of Bethesda, they pointing out the fact that their games often lack a 'reaction' to your 'action', as she clearly states that the residents of the fort aren't temporary and she's just faded into the background, completely unnoticed.

 

[Zom-B]

Skyrim is Soulless

Skyrim doesn't seem to care about you or what you do.

Read Full Article

You know what other world doesn't seem to care about you or what you do? The real world.

As for wandering around, looting various dungeons and hoarding the items, that's the choice you've made. If you've neglected or decided not to follow parts of the main storyline and become the Dragonborn of legend, I suppose the world won't care much for you. And really, in a world where there's no phones, no radios, no carrier pigeons (presumably) the only way to transmit information is by horseback or psychic guards. So if the guards got nothing to say about you, maybe that's why no one else does either.

I don't know, maybe Skyrim is soulless. Maybe it comes down to the player to inject some soul into the world, and not expect "soul" from code stored on a disc.

 

[Wolfram23]

I think I'd like to recant my previous statement. I've had several things happen today where NPCs were definitely acknowledging my accomplishments.

In particular, I was in Radiant Rayment and they were being total bitches to me. I decided to FUS at their inventory, sending it everywhere.

Then I went and talked to the Jarl for them, and when I left the palace, a naked courier ran up with a note.

The note said someone saw me use the Thu'um at Radiant Rayment, and then said I should investigate some location. Sincerely, a friend.

I think that's awesome!

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

And this is why Skyrim doesn't get my vote for GOTY. There's sadly more soul in a game like Saints Row the Third, which is something for Bethesda to consider.

there is NO soul in SR3, and all the choices in that are just as meaningless, if not more so. the only one that matters is the ending. add to that you really CANT make your character look however you want anymore and the general scaling down of everything in the game, and it just becomes hollow. Yeah, I CAN beat this luchador with a floppy dick, but why? and the last bit pisses me off. You win! now the city is in permanent riot mode! good luck trying to drive around when all the bridges are up, jackass! thanks for the money!

SR3 is the biggest disappointment i've ever had when it comes to a game

as for the article, this is like complaining about M'aiq the Liar. Just enjoy the little fourth wall joke and move on. quit bitching

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Speaking of half-naked bodies, I haven't played skyrim, played a bit of oblivion but do they ever clean up the bodies? Dead bandits and robbers just lying in the streets, in shops, at the docks. You'd think they would disappear at some point. Why not have an undertaker guy come out and load them up. When people are wandering around doing their thing and there's some dead guy on the ground and they stroll right by it breaks immersion. It doens't sound like they've fixed this with Skyrim either

I dump the random thieves and such in riften in the river so they dont get in the way.

on my last playthrough, i also started assassinating all the town guards wherever i went

 

[TheMatsjo]

Something to think about:

There's an old RPG, you can get it for the NDS, which is called Chrono Trigger. It's about time travel and you warp around time with a group of adventurers having adventures, solving mysteries etc. There is an extremely impressive part where *SPOILERS* you get arrested and put on trial. At the trial, the prosecution is trying to establish that you're a bastard and a cad, and you should be thrown into jail. Now, at this point (as a player), you're wondering how they're going to do this, as there've been no real "bad karma moments" in the game. Then the game has the balls to start talking about how you stole somebody's sandwich, and declined to rescue a little girl's cat and stuff like that. These were casual acts with no indicator that they would EVER matter (and in other games they wouldn't), but here, at least for that scene, your actions had consequences that you couldn't have foreseen and you are forced to ask yourself: "if I had behaved differently, might I not have ended up in this mess?"*SPOILERS END*

That's something Skyrim could've easily done many times over. And there are many more examples of these kinds of choices woven into the fabric of the entire narrative. And this is an OLD game.

But honestly, I have issues with the games feeling of progression beyond story and NPC response; the simple fact that enemies level up (and that some mechanics are broken) with you means you never really advance. Coming across an enemy that you couldn't beat before, but are now ready to give is come-uppance to comes up far less than it should. If it doesn't lead to overcoming new challenges, gathering stuff is just a hobby for hoarders.

I think that's why we like the giants and trolls so much, because there's an actual point at which they're just too tough to take on. And I think it's why many of us are disappointed with the dragons.

 

[samsonguy920]

Everyone is so impressed with Skyrim, but I can't help thinking about another open-world role-playing game published by Bethesda last year, Fallout: New Vegas. By the time I had logged as many hours into New Vegas as I have in Skyrim, I felt like I had big decisions to make that were really going to change the world of New Vegas.

While I don't entirely agree with your conclusions, I can't help but agree with this point. In Skyrim you never really feel like your decisions are making any differences. With my current character I've won the civil war for the Empire, and nobody seems that fussed. One or two NPCs have additional lines of dialogue and there are more Legion soldiers around the place, but considering that a major event has been resolved there's been remarkably little fanfare. The same goes for the destruction of the Dark Brotherhood. The guy who asked me to do it seemed pleased and gave me a fat wedge of cash, but beyond that nobody seems to give a shit that an ancient and once greatly feared society of assassins has been destroyed.

I think some kind of faction mechanic like Fallout:NV had would have worked well in Skyrim. Maybe not in major towns, but in villages and forts it'd be nice to be associated with a certain group and hated, feared or loved because of it.

Perhaps I haven't arrived at that point yet in Skyrim, but I'm finding it difficult to continue caring about a world that feels completely indifferent to me and what I'm doing.

And here's where we disagree. I still care about the world even if it doesn't care too much for me or my mighty deeds. I don't know why, but I have certain NPCs I like and others who annoy me. Favoured shopkeepers, a preferred house, although I'm much less a roleplayer and more a "play the game as a game" type of guy.

There's a certain symmetry to the real world to be shown here. How many people contributed more than their lion's share to: defeating Napoleon, marching with Alexander, fighting in the American, Chilean, or Mexican revolutionary wars, or participated in the French Resistance during World War 2, yet didn't receive any recognition for their efforts?
I can imagine there are many circumstances behind that. The most likely being the main leader taking all the credit(ever see Dragonslayer?) and if that soldier even made a peep about the effort he/she made, they would probably end up missing. The second most likely? The soldier could care less about getting any credit because they achieved what they wanted and would just as soon not be held in the limelight. Hell, George Washington could have been king with more power over Americans than what King George had over the English across the pond, but it was more his choice to make sure that what the Continental Congress was working for was put into action. Then there is the third: obscurity. Nothing is happily ever after when the dust settles after a revolutionary or civil war. There is a lot of work to be done, especially towards making sure that the new state of affairs doesn't appear weak, inviting reprisals. Then infrastructure making sure that the people are fed, clothed, and housed so they don't start thinking that what all happened was a big mistake. In all that, the soldiers and the leaders have too much on their plate to care about who gets recognition for what.
Take the Napoleonic War, for example. During his time, Napoleon did more to upset the state of Europe since when Rome fell to the Visigoths. After he finally was sent to St. Helena, those leaders left in Europe had to get things pretty much back to where they were before it all went to hell. There were some changes. The Holy Roman Empire was no more, replaced by a German Confederation that put Austria in a poor position. Poland got handed back to the Russians after a short time of being a sovereign country again under Napoleon's administration. England ended up top dog for the first time, ending up in a position where it could dominate many parts of European commerce and diplomacy that it was only tasting over in the New World before this. And the seeds were sown for Germany and Italy to become actual nations as opposed to a bunch of different little kingdoms and sovereignties which changed loyalties to other countries every five years.
Anyway, it should never be expected that your hero is going to end up in a ticker-tape parade when the game is over. More than likely, it will be back to the farmstead for your hero, and when you really come to think about it, isn't that what you'd really want?
As a certain heroine once said at the end of her adventure, 'There's no place like home.'

 

[awdrifter]

I feel like the example described in the article is down to hardware or engine limitations. This game has hundreds of quests, can you imagine "one more line" or "one more reaction" would do to the over size and complexity of the game? I'm willing to accept these as technical limitations, but not as laziness or oversight of the developer. I actually really enjoy doing the side quests and there are a few times where I didn't do the side quests because I don't want to screw over certain characters.

 

[purf]

Agnis... I remember her.

I could have known this woman, but then she took an arrow to her head.

 

[Right Hook]

Skyrim doesn't seem to care about you or what you do.

I think you have addressed a really important problem here and I agree with you, although I don't think New Vegas exactly did it right either. I think this is more of an ongoing issue, giving a game a "soul" is tough, especially a game that offers such a wide and varied experience. Other than glitches, I think this is the biggest problem facing these grand open world games and if one is to ever be truly great, it needs to find a way to solve that problem, make things seem real, instead of just endless fetch quest and inhuman NPCs. Here's to hoping Fallout 4 can bring us a step closer to that reality.

I actually had a completely different experience with Agnis, I had to kill her for a side quest, I ran in past everyone, stabbed her in her bed and ran back out without killing a single person, other than her.

 

[gideonkain]

Ironically, reading this made me impressed that Skyrim automatically creates a new batch of inhabitants for the Fort, titling the article "Skyrim is Souless" seems really cold since it's at this moment in history the most intricately fleshed out open world ever created.

Your actions have more repercussions in this game than any other piece of software ever developed.