What if Skyrim is awful?
- Thread starter retyopy
- Start date
No doubt there'll be bugs (I take great enjoyment in witnessing them) and problems, but I have a feeling I'll enjoy it anyway. Especially if there's a nice big book shop I can just have my character sit in and read lots and lots of lore!
And I'm completely okay with that... it's like buying an old rickety mansion and having all of my friends come over and fix it up for me!DracoSuave said:
Then you must be a very, very sad person.Somonah said:
I know it's just a game, but I can see people being upset about Skyrim being a bad game. The previous TES games may have been a source of escapism (remember this is a site that angles towards those who enjoy games, and those who seek escapism from everyday news and life) to many, and for you to take joy from their disappointment and sorrow (whether you're serious or not), makes you seem like a very joyless, sad, individual.
I have a hard time imagining it will. Morrorwing, Oblivion and Fallout 3 were fantastic (I haven't played The Elder Scrolls 1and 2) and as long as they keep it on the Oblivion level of excellence, I'll be happy. Yes, some people did not like Oblivion and yes, it had its annoyances (like 10 voice actors), but all-in-all I thought it was a great game.
But if it was bad ... hmmm ... well, first, I would be highly disappointed at Bethesda. Then, I would probably gift it to someone on Steam. The way I see it, I don't like it, but somebody else might.
But I doubt the game will be terrible, so I doubt that's gonna be happening.
But if it was bad ... hmmm ... well, first, I would be highly disappointed at Bethesda. Then, I would probably gift it to someone on Steam. The way I see it, I don't like it, but somebody else might.
But I doubt the game will be terrible, so I doubt that's gonna be happening.
Considering how dire everything that has come out since about March has been, I'll not notice. Oh and its Bethesda, they haven't messed up the series yet...
That is the most realistic, believable self-assessment thing I read here so far.Varitel said:
It will be good as long as the modders will do their job right!
If it's awful... Well, to me, it just means I'll find mods to fix whatever is wrong with the game. One of the main reasons I love bethesda games so much is because of the ease to which they can be modded and the sheer size and dedication of the modding community. So if it's terrible, odds are someone in that huge community will release something to fix it up absolutely free. If you are a console gamer though... Yeah, you are fucked.
I'm not taking any credit away from their accomplishments. However, the point is not that the games are not enjoyable. Far from it.InterAirplay said:
The point is that The Game of The Year should be THE MOST PERFECT GAME OF THAT YEAR.
We're not looking at a list of 'Acceptably good games' or 'this was enjoyable and you'll have tun too despite its flaws'.
We're talking about the games that deserve perfect tens. These are the games that are the paragons on how a game should be.
I'll be blunt. Bugs are going to happen, but if your game has a single, solitary, 'game breaking' bug, then your game cannot be called perfect. It should NOT even be rated nine out of ten. And if your game is not worth nine out of ten, it is not a game of the year.
'Oh but they put out a patch...' No. Stop. That's a symptom of the 'PCification' of the console game market, where a game can be released with crippling bugs, and they'll just fix it later. Horrible enough on PC which has mutliple hardware configurations, and might not always be running equipment that's 'standard'... but it's OBSCENE on a console where the hardware config is constant among all units.
For a game to be Game of the Year, it -must be perfect on release- and if those who accept less are willing to hand the title out to companies' games, unproven, when said companies have yet to produce something even relatively bug-resistant... then said individuals have no fucking clue.
None. Zero. Bethesda cannot be talking about 'game of the year' until they produce a bona fide Game of the Year.
PS: Every Elder Scrolls game has been an ambitious and buggy mess. You're talking to someone who spent quite a bit of time on Daggerfall.
They are the only company attempting such huge games, how the fuck can you expect it to be bug free?malestrithe said:
I'm honestly not that interested in Skyrim. Oblivion bored me to death, and unless they've really tried to make the game more interesting than "Ooooh, pretty scenery", no amount of non scripted dragon fights could hold my interest.
If I'm going to play a game that's 100+ hours long, I need an interesting story to go with it. All I got in Oblivion was a bunch of walking and boredom. I guess Bethesda games just aren't my thing.
If I'm going to play a game that's 100+ hours long, I need an interesting story to go with it. All I got in Oblivion was a bunch of walking and boredom. I guess Bethesda games just aren't my thing.
I hate mods, people make out like the only way to play TES is with mods, its still awesome vanilla, I love vanilla its so much better than chocolate and strawberry
Bugs involving emergent behavior from hundreds of AI-scripted mods is expected in a large game.Macrobstar said:
The size of the game, however, has nothing to do with 'Save Games got erased whoops!' or 'Trophy support cause the frame rate to reduce to 1/sec' or 'how to level is fundamentally broken.'
Some bugs are systematic and should have been solved before the world-building phase, and have little to do with size.
Oblivion didn't have trophy support so I assume all of those examples are just speculating to prove a pointDracoSuave said: