Will Skyrim be remembered?

[Silvianoshei]

I would be very surprised if it was, just because of the type of game that it is. Games that are considered classics usually tend to have iconic characters and stories that everyone can share, or make some really innovative design change. Skyrim is a massive open world game where every person has their own character(s), so the first part is absolutely not happening, and while I have no personal interest in Skyrim after getting bored with Oblivion a few hours in, I'm not aware of any revolutionary new mechanic that Skyrim has that people will keep talking about.

10-15 years from now, games will have better graphics and more open-world adventuring possibilities, and Skyrim won't be able to compete with those. Unlike Nintendo's three flagship franchises, to use just a few examples, Skyrim won't be able to bring back our love for a character or story, because everything that Skyrim has now will be several orders of magnitude better.

I have to agree with this. Skyrim is amazing fun for me, but I just see it as a natural progression from Morrowind and Oblivion (sort of). Games that are remembered don't just have amazing stories and interesting characters. They are genre-changing games. They set standards. Skyrim did not do that. It took the excellent and popular elder scrolls formula, and made it better. Skyward Sword is better than Ocarina of Time (imho), but OoT is still going to be remembered much farther down the line because it set the tone, scope, mechanics, and level of fun for the Legend of Zelda series as a 3D franchise. I think Morrowind did this moreso than Skyrim. I also think that FFVII did this for Final Fantasy games even though I liked VIII, X, and XII (Balthier FTW) better. Games are considered classics because other games take after them in mechanics, story, setting, tone, and scope. There are plenty of great games that follow GTA3's model of doing things, and do it better, (Like Saints Row), but GTA3 is still considered the classic game. So many more examples, but I think I've made my point.

 

[CobraX]

People are still gushing over Oblivion. Hell, even Morrowind. So yes. Because it's fucking amazing. And I'll probably still be playing it.

This. Everytime RPGs are talked about here on the Escapist there's at least 12 people who go on about Morrowind and 10 other people who go on about Oblivion, plus 20 other people who go on about both of them. Skyrim will be remembered as an awesome game for a long time and as Phlakes said I'll probably still be playing it.

 

[ryanthemadman]

for skyrim, its not the characters, the main character is the world. and i've had oblivion for years and STILL play it here and there and LOVE it still. skyrim will be no different

 

[irishda]

Let me stop you there. The biggest complaint isn't that it doesn't have deep or involving characters (I don't know about that one, this is the first I've heard of it) or the bugs/glitches. Those are just the icing. The core complaint of this game's detractors is that this isn't anything new. This is Modern Warfare 3 for fantasy RPG games. Dark Souls had better combat. Deus Ex had the better story, and Witcher 2 had better graphics. This game didn't bring anything new to the table except for gamers breathlessly whispering "It's so big!" like a bunch of pornstars, and even that's no different from Bethesda's other games.

I mean, this game changed how you played video games? Are you fucking serious? Even if I had a matching Skyrim avatar like yours I wouldn't agree with you there. The only way a game changes the way you play games is if you now have to wear a diaper because you refuse to stop playing it. Christ, remember how annoying it was when everyone said Avatar was gonna change movies forever? I didn't hate Skyrim when it was released. I actually played it a little. But if people like you are gonna put it up on the throne and call it the second coming of dragon-christ then I grow more and more bitter with each passing day.

I can't wait for Diablo 3, Mass Effect 3, Bioshock 3, or even SWTOR to be released so we can get past this and a different set of fanboys can come out of the woodwork.

I agree, it's not full of innovation, but it is something new. Its a game that has enough of the puzzle pieces right that I can put myself in the picture thoroughly enough that for the first time in a video game, I actually feel like I'm role-playing.

And yes, it changed the way I play video games. Or, to be more precise, it changed what I expect out of videogames. RPG's to be more exact. And I disagree with your criteria for 'changing games'. Although, I love how nearly everyone who counters (or attempts to counter) my opinion cites my avatar as some end-all-, be-all mark of fanboyism. It's a friggin image. I had it before Skyrim launched. I'll have it for long time still, I'm sure. But does it in anyway serve any purpose other than a silly, childish contention point for anti-Skyrim haters? Sure. But that's stupid.

And I hope you've got enough sugar around to balance out the bitter, because this games going to leave a bad taste in your mouth for quite a while if you have enough of a problem with it to argue against it on a gaming forum where it's dominating even classics like OoT, Portal and Kotor in a fan poll.

As for the hype passing, sure, it will, and then when other games come out, let's see how adamantly I rally against them (I won't), then remember this moment in time, shall we?

Firstly, I'm glad that you feel this is a more complete roleplaying experience, more power to you for it. But that's a matter of opinion. And I just cannot accept that this is the game that does that to people specifically because, as you admitted, it doesn't do anything differently. It added dragons. It just blows my mind that this was the missing piece that was keeping people from calling Oblivion the game of the year (none of the major publications awarded oblivion 2006's GOTY, mostly losing to either Gears of War or Zelda: TP). This is a good game, and I can give it that, because it is fun and there is a lot to do in this game. But for us to slap labels on it like "instant classic that'll be remembered forever" or "Game of the Year right now" is ludicrous for something that didn't do anything particularly new or particularly well. To me it doesn't have any right to dominate OoT, Portal, or KOTOR.

Secondly, your avatar tells people that you've got a very personal connection to Skyrim (I know they used that logo for Morrowind too but that particular scheme is skyrim's). And the fact that you had it before Skyrim was released is even worse because now that means that you had this very personal tie to this game before it was even playable. Without even playing the game, you were ready to say, "this is going to be awesome." And when someone becomes so dependent on something succeeding like that, their very ego gets entangled with it. But the ego does everything to protect itself in everyone, including putting flaws in your blind spot. So in essence, your avatar, right off the bat it tells people that you are such a huge fan of this game that you might not be able to step back and look at this with an objective eye. You've shown you can when you said that this game isn't very innovative. But then you still take two steps back when you say things in your original post like "All these awesome reviews (professional opinions) means this game will be remembered (speculation). That's not bragging that's a fact."

And finally, if this magazine touts Mass Effect 3 or something else, are you really not gonna call bullshit and fight for Skyrim?

TL;DR: You agreed that it's not innovative, just new. So why should it be put over something that DID take a chance with something new?
And, if you're gonna present yourself as a fanboy, people are gonna brush your opinions aside because they'll think you're too wrapped up in something to look at it rationally.

 

[Smeggs]

Simple question. Will Skyrim be remembered as a classic, or will it be vaguely remembered as "A good game that seemed much better at the time?"

So... that's that.

Considering Oblivion is still so very hugely remembered?

 

[King of the Sandbox]

-megasnip-

TL;DR: You agreed that it's not innovative, just new. So why should it be put over something that DID take a chance with something new?
And, if you're gonna present yourself as a fanboy, people are gonna brush your opinions aside because they'll think you're too wrapped up in something to look at it rationally.

If by new, you mean the one that currently has it's best pieces put together the correct way, well enough to impress me despite not being vastly different from it's predecessors, yet the pinnacle of what they were trying to achieve? Then yes, It's 'new'. Call me crazy, but that seems more of a merit than a flaw to me.

And people that insist, nay, defend, assigning me an arbitrary stance or opinion or level of dedication based on an image, is so fallible, arguing it only lends credence to it, and that's not my idea of something worthwhile. Long story short, it's a picture, not a goddamn banner. And it's a pretty weak defense point for any argument.

EDIT: Oh, and what about ME3? I'll be far too busy playing Skyrim to worry about raining on anyone else's parade the way the contrarians have tried to rain on ours. Not that I'd want to, because I'm not a jerk and don't try to tell people their opinions are out and out wrong like it's some sort of fervent duty. (Not talking about you in particular, so relax those butt-cheeks.)

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

Being remembered =/= being a great game.

Warcraft III was one of the best RTS games of all times, and almost nobody remembers it, because it was overshadowed by it's MMORPG sequel: World of Warcraft.

Hey! I am still preferring Warcraft III over new attempts such as Battleforge... plus, WC3 is comparably tiny to modern games, and minus the movies it can be basically carried around on a USB stick. I still have it installed on every machine I own, it's become my ersatz chess, and there are still tons of people playing it.

On topic: I believe yes, Skyrim is an instant classic. People who didn't play games much went bonkers over Oblivion, and to me Oblivion looked pretty ugly and felt raw... if the very same people get their hands on Skyrim, they'll lose their jobs and destroy their relationships.

Plus, me and other ageing gamers seem to like Skyrim. I only started wielding the console to fix a fistful of bugged-out quests, and after finishing the game for the first time and going at it a bit differently in my second plough-through, I am still finding lots of new stuff. After an average 100 hours of gameplay so far, I would say I have seen about 80+ hours of scripted material, so there should easily still be some 300+ hours of material out there. With so much crap games, annoying franchises, micro transactions and other rip-offs making marketing folks seem like devil worshippers to the average consumer, playing Skyrim is therapeutic. You're invited to do the quests, slay the big evil dragon, beat the game... but you can just as well just walk/run/swim/ride around, enjoying the scenery while thinning out the wildlife for pelts and eyes and claws. It's a remarkable title with a number of (technical and other) flaws, but Skyrim is the first title in the franchise that is absolutely enjoyable to me, and I will be looking forward to whatever they will bring out next. They made great improvements to their engines, a lot of things that seemed raw back in their interpretation of Fallout (3 and New Vegas) are now more polished and functional, and even though I dislike the gamepad-centric controls, I consider Skyrim to be instant GOTY material. Sure, there are other great games that came out this year, but let's be honest, some of them offer, what, maybe five hours of playtime until you reach the end credits. Five hours in Skyrim will let you wield two swords without cutting your legs off. It's quite a beast of a game, a Tardis full of content and an adventure you can pretty much play and lay out as you like. I really intended to hate Skyrim as much as I hated Dragon Age II, but I can't. Skyrim is a splendid effort, a great game and an instant classic with millions of players all having their own, individual and quite customized experience. There was little marketing gibberish upfront, and the game just plain delivers... and then some.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Being remembered =/= being a great game.

Warcraft III was one of the best RTS games of all times, and almost nobody remembers it, because it was overshadowed by it's MMORPG sequel: World of Warcraft.

Hey! I am still preferring Warcraft III over new attempts such as Battleforge... plus, WC3 is comparably tiny to modern games, and minus the movies it can be basically carried around on a USB stick. I still have it installed on every machine I own, it's become my ersatz chess, and there are still tons of people playing it.

On topic: I believe yes, Skyrim is an instant classic. People who didn't play games much went bonkers over Oblivion, and to me Oblivion looked pretty ugly and felt raw... if the very same people get their hands on Skyrim, they'll lose their jobs and destroy their relationships.

Plus, me and other ageing gamers seem to like Skyrim. I only started wielding the console to fix a fistful of bugged-out quests, and after finishing the game for the first time and going at it a bit differently in my second plough-through, I am still finding lots of new stuff. After an average 100 hours of gameplay so far, I would say I have seen about 80+ hours of scripted material, so there should easily still be some 300+ hours of material out there. With so much crap games, annoying franchises, micro transactions and other rip-offs making marketing folks seem like devil worshippers to the average consumer, playing Skyrim is therapeutic. You're invited to do the quests, slay the big evil dragon, beat the game... but you can just as well just walk/run/swim/ride around, enjoying the scenery while thinning out the wildlife for pelts and eyes and claws. It's a remarkable title with a number of (technical and other) flaws, but Skyrim is the first title in the franchise that is absolutely enjoyable to me, and I will be looking forward to whatever they will bring out next. They made great improvements to their engines, a lot of things that seemed raw back in their interpretation of Fallout (3 and New Vegas) are now more polished and functional, and even though I dislike the gamepad-centric controls, I consider Skyrim to be instant GOTY material. Sure, there are other great games that came out this year, but let's be honest, some of them offer, what, maybe five hours of playtime until you reach the end credits. Five hours in Skyrim will let you wield two swords without cutting your legs off. It's quite a beast of a game, a Tardis full of content and an adventure you can pretty much play and lay out as you like. I really intended to hate Skyrim as much as I hated Dragon Age II, but I can't. Skyrim is a splendid effort, a great game and an instant classic with millions of players all having their own, individual and quite customized experience. There was little marketing gibberish upfront, and the game just plain delivers... and then some.

If I weren't completely in the dark concerning your sexual orientation, gender, and general level of hygiene... I'd hug you.

Then I'd offer you some of my sweetroll and tell you about the time I took an arrow in the knee.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

Anyone can plainly see, from the hordes of favorable reviews and praise, that Skyrim will be a benchmark for eastern RPG's for a while. It's not bolstering, it's simple fact.

If it really manages to bring the japanese RPG folks back on track, moving resources and attention away from Demon's Souls and Final Fantasy, it could be the inspiring spark to ignite a new wave of excellent Japcrap.

Secret of Mana, MOTHER, Chrono Trigger and all the others - you're not forgotten!

 

[Creator002]

I think the latter. I bought Skyrim with high hopes, but after the main quest line, I play it less and less. Maybe I just have to get back into it or something.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Anyone can plainly see, from the hordes of favorable reviews and praise, that Skyrim will be a benchmark for eastern RPG's for a while. It's not bolstering, it's simple fact.

If it really manages to bring the japanese RPG folks back on track, moving resources and attention away from Demon's Souls and Final Fantasy, it could be the inspiring spark to ignite a new wave of excellent Japcrap.

Secret of Mana, MOTHER, Chrono Trigger and all the others - you're not forgotten!

Well, Famitsu did give Skyrim it's first perfect score for an western game, so who knows? ^_^

 

[irishda]

-megasnip-

TL;DR: You agreed that it's not innovative, just new. So why should it be put over something that DID take a chance with something new?
And, if you're gonna present yourself as a fanboy, people are gonna brush your opinions aside because they'll think you're too wrapped up in something to look at it rationally.

If by new, you mean the one that currently has it's best pieces put together the correct way, well enough to impress me despite not being vastly different from it's predecessors, yet the pinnacle of what they were trying to achieve? Then yes, It's 'new'. Call me crazy, but that seems more of a merit than a flaw to me.

And people that insist, nay, defend, assigning me an arbitrary stance or opinion or level of dedication based on an image, is so fallible, arguing it only lends credence to it, and that's not my idea of something worthwhile. Long story short, it's a picture, not a goddamn banner. And it's a pretty weak defense point for any argument.

But what pieces did they change and then put together the correct way? I didn't experience very much difference between Oblivion and Skyrim as a game, so why is skyrim so much better? I haven't gotten an answer to that question yet, and if people can't offer an answer in quantifiable terms then it can't set a standard or precedent for future RPGs. And if it can't set a standard then it hasn't done anything all that special. It's not a flaw in the sense of whether or not it's a good game but it's a point against it if you're trying to fit it into the pantheons of the great games.

And yea, you will be assigned an stance or opinion based on an image. But it's not arbitrary. Image is everything in this world regardless of whether or not it should be. Image tells you about something right off the bat because that person has chosen that image so that they can say something to the world without even opening their mouths. And your picture, even though it's just a picture, is the image for this forum. That's why it's called an avatar for god sake's, it's your embodiment on here. And your embodiment says "I think Skyrim is the king". That's fine, that's your opinion. But don't be so surprised if people don't take your opinion seriously, because sports analysts might lose some credibility if they're sitting their giving an analysis with a "I Love the Yankees" t-shirt on.

 

[seraphy]

I rather doubt it, Skyrim does almost nothing new compared to Morrowind. Only thing compared to Morrowind it has is better graphics.

Sure it might have infinite dragons or infinite kill bandit boss quests, but actual good and interesting quests are quite finite. Indeed actually fairly rare.

There are also no memorable nor interesting characters in the game. Well perhaps Parth.

 

[Sidonis]

In like 20 years I don't think Skyrim will be remembered individually as much as The Elder Scrolls games as a whole will be remembered.

Like even right now, Halo is remembered for what it is as a series and only the close fans of the game will point out the quality of the games individually. And like Halo, the Elder Scrolls series has never really had a game that wasn't good (in my opinion) so rather than thinking how great Skyrim was, they'll probably think how great the Elder Scrolls games were/are.

 

[Hal10k]

I contend that, in twenty years, whatever the top-rated game on Kongregate is right nowwill be hailed as the pinnacle of game design thrughout all of human history. That game will be the most remembered and referenced game of our time in twenty years.

Prove me wrong.

 

[Mordwyl]

It's popular now, wait till the modding kit is released. Sometimes when you spend a long time actually working on your game right it greatly pays off.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

-megasnip-

1. The world. Much more detailed, much more immersive.
2. Even minor character side-quests can be emotionally rewarding (Such as the poor gentleman in the town at the base of the 7000 Steps).
3.The tactile satisfaction of wielding magic, that succeeds in actually making me feel like a mage, and not someone who clicks a button for fire balls.
4. The differing and varied terrains. It's not all orange haze, or idyllic forest/grassland or snow-blown mountains. It's hot springs and tundra and mountains and forests and icy seas and everything except a desert.
5. The weapons/armor/item designs carry much more local (to Skyrim) flavor.
6. If I want to roleplay a blacksmith, I can. If I want to play a merchant, I can. No matter what type of character I want to roleplay, I can still enjoy the game completely.
7. The weather effects are as much a part of the environment as the trees and rocks.
8. Being a werewolf actually feels like being a werewolf, and not a palette swap with
slightly different stats.
9. NPC's don't give you the 1000 yard stare anymore.

...I can keep going, but my point is this... just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there. I think most people's problem is, like Yahtzee said, that developers and publishers have been pushing the quick, one play-through and you're done, on rails, action extravaganza game to be the norm. So when a game that's more of an epic DM's toolbox like Skyrim comes along, they don't know what to do with themselves and blame the game in frustration.

And yea, you will be assigned an stance or opinion based on an image. But it's not arbitrary. Image is everything in this world regardless of whether or not it should be.

I'm just gonna leave that at that. Seeing as how it's the first thing you mention when talking about it.

 

[Denim Knight]

I have never really played any of Bethesda's RPGs. Mostly of timing. I wasn't very much into gaming when anything before Elder Scrolls IV and Fallout never really got me hooked. I don't know why, I just lost of lot of feeling for what I was doing in the game. Call me what you will but it just never really clicked with me.

Now, Skyrim has pulled me in with a huge force. I find it fun and immersive in all the right ways. Granted their are a few bugs, but not a huge downside to me. The combat is fun and exploration is rewarded. It has made me think that I should go give Fallout another chance, which I didn't think I would do. So yes, it has earned a place in my book.

 

[skywolfblue]

I think it will be. Mostly for the world and the dragons. Definitely not any of the characters, and probably not for the story (while nice the main quest wasn't really all that long or well-crafted).

As far as being innovative... Some of the shouts were pretty unique, Storm Call and Clear Sky were the first time I've ever seen players be able to affect the weather. Aside from that it was pretty standard RPG stuff, not exactly a "Portal" style accomplishment but that's OK.

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

Being remembered =/= being a great game.

Warcraft III was one of the best RTS games of all times, and almost nobody remembers it, because it was overshadowed by it's MMORPG sequel: World of Warcraft.

Oh yes, i rememeber that game. I played the shit out of the story, cuz i liked it, and i kept finding new easter eggs and stuff in it.

I also cheated my way through it, just like every elder scrolls so.....

Warcraft III?
Sorry but Warcraft II and Starcraft was waaaaaaaaaaaaay better and almost nobody remembers those games now.

[hr]

Of course it will be remembered at least until all the patches are finally fixing the game, which will probably take about a decade or two. (Yes I'm still upset with the 1.2 Patch)

That aside, it really depends on the timeframe. I doubt it will be remembered in 50 years. It's not like Pong and the industry is racing towards its emminent doom, so probably no, not really athough it should be named in the anals of gaming history.