Skyrim

[Zoltor]

Lol, people love to overexaggerate.
I suggest that you actually play games, instead of just reading about them.

After that complete POS Oblivion, although gameplay wise Skyrim seems much, much better, I'm scared to waste money. It's clear they have yet to actually learn how to make a proper game(really, do they have any beta testing at all, It's like they just skip the beta phase all together, and go from Alpha, right to release).

I'm sorry but a game with gamebreaking issues, is not worth buying, I'm not like the crazy fanboys of this subpar company, that accepts major game breaking issues, and even downright unfinished games in some cases.

[The Jackal]

Look when all you hear people talking about, is how the game crashes, about major bugs, and game breaking flaws, there's nothing else needed to be known.

The game's got it's fair share of problems, but it's nowhere near the level you're making it out to be; nowhere near.

On top of that, their games are not completed projects, which means to get the most enjoyment out of their games, you need mods(you can't create/use mods with the PS3/360 versions).

I've been playing and enjoying the 360 version for five months and I still find things to do; the game's massive. You've not played the game and here you are telling me what version I should own? Of course the PC version is the best; you can customise it to your heart's content, but don't knock the console ports; they do the job just fine.

It sickens me how fans of the series are so accepting of game breaking issues. If any other company popped out such a game, people would be outraged, but not this company.

I've sunk over 100 hours in and I've experienced no game-breaking bugs; I've had a few quests glitch on me, but they were easily fixed by reloading the auto-save. Seriously, you're blowing smoke out of you're arse.

Of course not. He makes stupid comments about games and systems he's never played all of the time.

I'm starting to see that now.

After that complete POS Oblivion,

I know the answer already, but have you even played Oblivion? Or any Elder Scrolls games for that matter? I'm sure you haven't.

although gameplay wise Skyrim seems much, much better, I'm scared to waste money.

Again, you don't have a clue what you're sprouting.

I'm sorry but a game with gamebreaking issues, is not worth buying, I'm not like the crazy fanboys of this subpar company, that accepts major game breaking issues, and even downright unfinished games in some cases.

If you had played the game, you'd realise why those "crazy fanboys" () stick with it through all the bugs; it's a brilliant, gripping game. But I'm thinking I'm just wasted my time with you.

[Olls]

After that complete POS Oblivion, although gameplay wise Skyrim seems much, much better, I'm scared to waste money. It's clear they have yet to actually learn how to make a proper game(really, do they have any beta testing at all, It's like they just skip the beta phase all together, and go from Alpha, right to release).

I'm sorry but a game with gamebreaking issues, is not worth buying, I'm not like the crazy fanboys of this subpar company, that accepts major game breaking issues, and even downright unfinished games in some cases.

Again: I suggest that you actually play the games you're ripping on, before you rip on them, to avoid sounding like an idiot.
Having an opinion is fine, but yours are solely based on other people's opinions. Grow some balls.

[gamevet]

Look when all you hear people talking about, is how the game crashes, about major bugs, and game breaking flaws, there's nothing else needed to be known. On top of that, their games are not completed projects, which means to get the most enjoyment out of their games, you need mods(you can't create/use mods with the PS3/360 versions).

It sickens me how fans of the series are so accepting of game breaking issues. If any other company popped out such a game, people would be outraged, but not this company.

Yeah, their games suck so bad, that I've put in over 220 hours with Skyrim and that was on the PS3 version. I've probably spent nearly 140 hours between Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Even if their games have slight issues, they're still the best out there.

You will not find another game out there, with all of the content that Bethesda puts into their games. Even Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas seems small in comparison to the likes of New Vegas and Skyrim. It takes thousands of hours of playtime, for most of these bugs to be discovered and corrected, plus they have publisher deadlines to meet. I'd say they've done a very good job, considering all the content these games have.

[Zoltor]

Publishing deadlines are not real, It's a random date that the developer/publisher comes up with, so that's no excuse(It's their decision to stick with a unrealistic date).

"You will not find another game out there, with all of the content that Bethesda puts into their games"

I really hope that is an oversight, and you're not implying Oblivion had a lot of content(the lack of content is the main reason that game sucks to beginwith).

Let me ask this, do the enemies in skyrim actually drop items, that aren't just basic crap(however I do like the number of dungeons they claim to have added to Skyrim, that's a huge improvement over oblivion alone, likewise the Dragon Word system sounds pretty good)? How's the implimentation of the content, and is it even worthwile content(lol the house system is not what kind of content they should focus on for example, talk about pointless).

Also I'm sure you meant, for a console game, because I could name a ton of games with no doubt more content, but they're PC only.

[The Jackal]

Publishing deadlines are not real, It's a random date that the developer/publisher comes up with, so that's no excuse(It's their decision to stick with a unrealistic date).

[Knuckle Duster]

[gamevet]

I really hope that is an oversight, and you're not implying Oblivion had a lot of content(the lack of content is the main reason that game sucks to beginwith).

Did I mention Oblivion? You seem to be very fixated on what is probably their weakest release in the past 7 or 8 years.

Let me ask this, do the enemies in skyrim actually drop items, that aren't just basic crap(however I do like the number of dungeons they claim to have added to Skyrim, that's a huge improvement over oblivion alone, likewise the Dragon Word system sounds pretty good)? How's the implimentation of the content, and is it even worthwile content(lol the house system is not what kind of content they should focus on for example, talk about pointless).

Again, you don't know anything about Skyrim.

Also I'm sure you meant, for a console game, because I could name a ton of games with no doubt more content, but they're PC only.

Bust out that list, because beyond an MMO like World of Warcraft with years of downloaded content, you're going to be hard pressed to find a title as big as Skyrim.

[Zoltor]

Did I mention Oblivion? You seem to be very fixated on what is probably their weakest release in the past 7 or 8 years.



Again, you don't know anything about Skyrim.



Bust out that list, because beyond an MMO like World of Warcraft with years of downloaded content, you're going to be hard pressed to find a title as big as Skyrim.

You said "their" games, which I clearly pointed out, and yes, that doesn't mean you were talking about just Skyrim.

I hit the nail on the head, didn't I, if not, why didn't you answer my questions?

Stardock's flagship title, they have other games that are large scale as well, and Diablo 2 are prime example of non MMOs filled to the brim with relevent content.

[Olls]

You said "their" games, which I clearly pointed out, and yes, that doesn't mean you were talking about just Skyrim.

I hit the nail on the head, didn't I, if not, why didn't you answer my questions?

Stardock's flagship title, they have other games that are large scale as well, and Diablo 2 are prime example of non MMOs filled to the brim with relevent content.

Content is not the same as replayability. I've played Diablo 2 for years without touching any other game, but that had little to do with actual content.

[Zoltor]

Content is not the same as replayability. I've played Diablo 2 for years without touching any other game, but that had little to do with actual content.

Not dirrectly no, but it does tend to lead to better replay value more times then not. However what I was hinting at was the vast amount of item based content, equipment customization, and the skill trees/different char you can play around with.

[Olls]

Yes, but this is about content, not replay value.

[Zoltor]

Yes, but this is about content, not replay value.

Perhaps you missed this: "However what I was hinting at was the vast amount of item based content, equipment customization, and the skill trees/different char you can play around with. "

[Olls]

Tossing a bunch of items in is nothing in the way of content, adding more areas, mobs and bosses to explore and kill is content. 7 characters without any way to customize them, isn't content. Going down a skill tree isn't content. Equipment customization is the same as item based content, since runes and gems are items too. Did I miss something?

[gamevet]

You said "their" games, which I clearly pointed out, and yes, that doesn't mean you were talking about just Skyrim.

I said this: "Yeah, their games suck so bad, that I've put in over 220 hours with Skyrim and that was on the PS3 version. I've probably spent nearly 140 hours between Fallout 3 and New Vegas."

I didn't say anything about Oblivion, and even if I did, how many RPGs have as much content as that game had?

I hit the nail on the head, didn't I, if not, why didn't you answer my questions?

I didn't answer your questions, because they were silly. The only thing that got hit in the head was you.

Stardock's flagship title, they have other games that are large scale as well, and Diablo 2 are prime example of non MMOs filled to the brim with relevent content.

Galactic Civilizations is a piss-poor example, and so is Elemental: War of Magic. The graphics are simple, with very little detail in War of Magic, and GC has a bunch of starfields.

I've yet to play Diablo 2, but if it's anything like the first Diablo, then it's not even close.

Skyrim has detail at just about every square foot of the maps. You could walk through an area several different times and the flowers, grass and rocks are pretty much the same; It's not randomly generated stuff here. You can talk to literally 100's of NPCs and here 100's of conversations. There's so much detail in Skyrim, over any other RPG out there. Even the recently released Star Wars MMO only has about a month or 2 worth of content and they'd spent over 2 years on that project.