Skyrim is worse than Oblivion in every way

[subotaiy]

So any good total conversions done?

 

[Lhynn]

Todd_the_Liar

1. true

2. false. Tho making something different and original takes a vast knowledge in scripting. Just to prove you wrong

3. This is too true, they fucked up because of selling out to consoles, the game wasnt designed to be so heavily loaded by scripts, so it simply breaks when it is.

4. True.

5. Maybe true, but there is a big variety of mods avaible for download, no just weapon reeskins.

6. wouldnt know.

False statement. Skyrim modding is shinning bright, there is a stupid amount of people wasting a stupid amount of time modding fixing this shit game. This will not change, because people are stupid. Great quests mods? Falkassar, moongate and 3 or 4 more i guess. True quest mods are on the companion tab, were the most important companions have epic quests that take you to a ton of new locations, fully voiced and huge.

 

[Todd_the_Liar]

Whoa nice.... maybe i'll reinstall Assrim just to play Tycoon.

wait... after reading about the mod further, it seems it's a meta-game with scripts. Still sounds interesting but doesn't invalidate my point #2 about lack of empty space.

Anyway, my rule of thumb for Bethesda games is play vanilla once, wait a few yrs for mods to mature for a proper playthrough. Hopefully by that time, Assrim will be playable through mods.

 

[Xenich]

So, since I've only played Oblivion before, I'm considering starting from Arena and finishing the first 3, or should I not waste my time and just go for Morrowind, the Kodex Konsensus seems to be that it's the best one in the series.

Start with Arena, on to Daggerfall, and then move to Morrowind (don't bother with the gimmick releases like Redguard/Battlespire as they were just fad gimmicks trying to ride the FPS multiplayer deathmatch craze). It will give you a very good perspective on how the game has slowly degraded over time. The problems from Morrowind to Oblivion (and on to Skyrim) aren't "new", only more drastic in change than that of the previous iterations. Skills were still removed, consolidated, features removed/streamlined (as well as new risks in design direction), etc... from the beginning. I think everyone who plays the entire series has their favorite (there are pros and cons between them), but most who have played them all and don't have the console "taint" to their perception tend to see the severe problems with the later releases (Oblivion-unmodded/Skyrim).

When you get to Morrowind, you can play it vanilla, or... if you like... mod it heavily. I enjoyed Morrowind vanilla, but it really shines with mods (make sure you pick mods that enhance systems and UI, fix bugs, repair imbalanced mechanics, add quests/story lines, etc... and avoid the overpowered ones. It blows vanilla Oblivion out of the water. Then, go back and try Oblivion again modded to the hilt (look for FCOM mod) and you will see it makes skyrim look like it is a gimmick arcade game.

The problem is, while there are some attempts to improve skyrim through mods, as some have already discussed, there is a cap on what it possible. Look how long the game has been out and what they have actually been able to do with it. Oblivion and Morrowind had complete overhauls (changing everything in the game) in the same amount of time. Skyrim is limited in what can be done, so you will likely not see it progress much past what you see now. I am not saying it is impossible, but few are going to waste their time trying to work against Skyrims limitations when they could achieve more with the same effort in the past games.

 

[Zarniwoop]

So, since I've only played Oblivion before, I'm considering starting from Arena and finishing the first 3, or should I not waste my time and just go for Morrowind, the Kodex Konsensus seems to be that it's the best one in the series.

Start with Arena, on to Daggerfall, and then move to Morrowind (don't bother with the gimmick releases like Redguard/Battlespire as they were just fad gimmicks trying to ride the FPS multiplayer deathmatch craze). It will give you a very good perspective on how the game has slowly degraded over time. The problems from Morrowind to Oblivion (and on to Skyrim) aren't "new", only more drastic in change than that of the previous iterations. Skills were still removed, consolidated, features removed/streamlined (as well as new risks in design direction), etc... from the beginning. I think everyone who plays the entire series has their favorite (there are pros and cons between them), but most who have played them all and don't have the console "taint" to their perception tend to see the severe problems with the later releases (Oblivion-unmodded/Skyrim).

When you get to Morrowind, you can play it vanilla, or... if you like... mod it heavily. I enjoyed Morrowind vanilla, but it really shines with mods (make sure you pick mods that enhance systems and UI, fix bugs, repair imbalanced mechanics, add quests/story lines, etc... and avoid the overpowered ones. It blows vanilla Oblivion out of the water. Then, go back and try Oblivion again modded to the hilt (look for FCOM mod) and you will see it makes skyrim look like it is a gimmick arcade game.

The problem is, while there are some attempts to improve skyrim through mods, as some have already discussed, there is a cap on what it possible. Look how long the game has been out and what they have actually been able to do with it. Oblivion and Morrowind had complete overhauls (changing everything in the game) in the same amount of time. Skyrim is limited in what can be done, so you will likely not see it progress much past what you see now. I am not saying it is impossible, but few are going to waste their time trying to work against Skyrims limitations when they could achieve more with the same effort in the past games.

I've already decided to give Arena a go after I finish fuuus-RODAAAAAAAH'ing everything. Been looking at some gameplay videos and I'm pretty amazed at how different things were, setting-wise. Looking at Winterhold or the Imperial City there, compared to the Imperial Farmstead in Oblivion - LOL. I never thought Oblivion was a good game but I didn't really get the massive hate it got here either, probably because I didn't play the earlier ones. I think I understand now, it's basically how insulted I was the first time I played that other Bethesda turd, Fallout 3 after having loved the first two.

 

[markec]

[ (don't bother with the gimmick releases like Redguard/Battlespire as they were just fad gimmicks trying to ride the FPS multiplayer deathmatch craze)

Screw you man Battlespire was great.

 

[Xenich]

[ (don't bother with the gimmick releases like Redguard/Battlespire as they were just fad gimmicks trying to ride the FPS multiplayer deathmatch craze)

Screw you man Battlespire was great.

I think you mean it was the "bestest eva!"

 

[Sceptic]

(don't bother with the gimmick releases like Redguard/Battlespire as they were just fad gimmicks trying to ride the FPS multiplayer deathmatch craze)

You've clearly never gotten within a 100-mile radius of a copy of Battlespire.

So, since I've only played Oblivion before, I'm considering starting from Arena and finishing the first 3, or should I not waste my time and just go for Morrowind, the Kodex Konsensus seems to be that it's the best one in the series.

You are wrong. There is no Codex consensus on Morrowind. It's probably one of the most polarizing games on here actually. If we had to reach a consensus (Masterderp doesn't count) then DF would probably come out on top.

Anywho, Arena's not a very good game but it may be fun to play, and some of the MQ dungeon design is really pretty good. It also allows you to do things with Spellmaker that no future game allowed (Passwall!). Worth playing anyway IMO. It's the one that started it all, though it didn't have most of the features that made the following games great. Speaking of which, both Daggerfall and Morrowind are great for very different (and mostly exclusive) reasons. Both are not to be missed. DF has one of the most complex and interesting character and faction systems to grace a CRPG, a very nonlinear MQ that is possible to mess up and not be able to finish if you don't pay attention to what you're told, and a pretty complex political intrigue underlying its plot. MW is unique in terms of both quality and quantity of hand placed content and has an extremely detailed lore and backstory where the interpretation of what ultimately happened and how some of the main players relate to each other is mostly in your hands as a player. Unfortunately MW sacrificed some of the complexity of the character and factions systems on the way. Battlespire is awesome, it's a dungeon crawler a bit a la Ultima Underworld except it has a variant of Daggerfall's character system and some very, very nice level design. Redguard is an action/adventure (almost no RPG to speak of) but is not a bad game for what it is and has a lot of implicit lore that connects with Daggerfall's and Morrowind's. Battlespire's definitely worth playing, Redguard may depend on your tolerance for action/adventure games.

 

[Crooked Bee]

Battlespire's definitely one of the best dungeon crawlers I've played. Nothing gimmicky about it, just hardcore dungeon crawling.

 

[Onholyservicebound]

Commies have no right to pass the judgement on fascists or even Nazis and with fracking Trotskite party (who was so far left his comrades Bolsheviks purged him from the Party) getting 5 percent of votes France should have real far right parties to balance the political spectrum. FN is right of center party with program resembling XIX/XX Radicals so it is too left for this role; what France needs is Bonapartist and Orleans/Bourbon party and yes even those WN nepopagan wierdos to match and counter the far left. Kwans after WWII made Jewrope into their own copy with only centro right and cetre left blocks allowed to rule which brought the same cronism and lobbing scum managed dumbocracy to our continent; we need realy distinct parties with real alternative programs for voters to make real choices. BTW what is Communists and FN position on central Banks and Fiat Currency?

Is there an anagram in this or something?

 

[Jick Magger]

Commies have no right to pass the judgement on fascists or even Nazis and with fracking Trotskite party (who was so far left his comrades Bolsheviks purged him from the Party) getting 5 percent of votes France should have real far right parties to balance the political spectrum. FN is right of center party with program resembling XIX/XX Radicals so it is too left for this role; what France needs is Bonapartist and Orleans/Bourbon party and yes even those WN nepopagan wierdos to match and counter the far left. Kwans after WWII made Jewrope into their own copy with only centro right and cetre left blocks allowed to rule which brought the same cronism and lobbing scum managed dumbocracy to our continent; we need realy distinct parties with real alternative programs for voters to make real choices. BTW what is Communists and FN position on central Banks and Fiat Currency?

 

[Commissar Draco]

This was DU and Trash fault warping Codex dimensions and scattering Commissar posts to wrong threads. Damn Tzeench cultists.

 

[Xenich]

(don't bother with the gimmick releases like Redguard/Battlespire as they were just fad gimmicks trying to ride the FPS multiplayer deathmatch craze)

You've clearly never gotten within a 100-mile radius of a copy of Battlespire.

Oh please, it was a hack and slash gimmick stripped from it original expansion concept to market the multiplayer angle. It was terrible.

 

[Broseph]

 

[Xenich]

Battlespire's definitely one of the best dungeon crawlers I've played. Nothing gimmicky about it, just hardcore dungeon crawling.

That is part of its problem. During that time, the whole FPS hack/slash fad was in full force. Making it a limited action oriented (the objectives are basically hack and slash objectives over and over), narrow scope crawler was disappointing when you were expecting a continuation of the series. Rather than integrate it into the original game as an expansion (what they initially planned), they stripped it and made it a one trick pony game. To be fair, on those grounds if that is what you are seeking, fine... but it can't reasonably be considered a part of the series in terms of its play direction. As you said, it was a crawler, but that isn't the point of an ES game and so it sticks out like a sore thumb, just like Redguard did. The natural progression of the series is Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, etc... Those two games were... "gimmicks", "experimentation", etc... and I know that it may piss people off that I refer to them that way, but the fact remains they are not of the same design focus, rather "specialty" in their direction. Good or bad, that makes them gimmicky when you compare them to the original direction and focus of the series.

That said, personally I disliked it. That is not to say I don't like that type of game play, but I was expecting pie when they released it and what I got was cake. I didn't want cake, I wanted pie. So in that respect my opinion on it being a good game or not should be disregarded. Maybe I will go back and play it again sometime from a different expectation. /shrug

All I know was that when it came out, I was pretty disgusted.

 

[Sceptic]

You keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

when you were expecting a continuation of the series. Rather than integrate it into the original game as an expansion (what they initially planned)

No.

Battlespire was not meant to be an expansion to Daggerfall. It's not even meant to be a "main series number" game. That's why they spun it off into its own series with a different name, and that's why they said that BATTLESPIRE IS EXTRA SPECIAL NOT LIKE DAGGERFALL (I think this was the actual quote). As for your expectation, well, RTFM and all the game's marketing. It very clearly explained why the game was not a continuation of the series and what the scope of the Elder Scrolls Legend spinoff series was supposed to be. Complaining that it doesn't match your expectation is like complaining that UW is a first person dungeon crawler and not like the main Ultima series. This analogy is pretty good, now that I think of it...

they stripped it and made it a one trick pony game. To be fair, on those grounds if that is what you are seeking, fine

Well, some of us like dungeon crawlers. Also, this is exactly what it was marketed as. More importantly (very, very importantly), it was a GOOD dungeon crawler, pretty hardcore, with tough encounters, with very solid level design. That's what distinguishes Battlespire from Oblivion, and, to continue the analogy, UW1 from U9. The whole point of spinoffs is to experiment with a different kind of gameplay without alineating the core group, since it IS a spinoff and the series naming and numbering can allow you to keep clear track of what series does what. That was the point of the TES spinoffs: the main series can continue to be the open world CRPG a la Daggerfall, the Legend series can be for little experimental dungeon crawlers like Battlespire, and Adventures are for their action/adventure games. That all went away when Battlespire flopped and Redguard almost bankrupted them so the concept never really took off, but that was the idea.

but it can't reasonably be considered a part of the series in terms of its play direction.

... and that's why it is in fact NOT part of the main series! That's the whole point! It doesn't stick out because it is not there in the first place! It is its own spinoff. The reasons it DOES keep the "Elder Scrolls" moniker (but NOT the main numbering) are a) it shares the same world (and in fact expands on Daedra lore like no other game does), and b) it uses almost the same character system from DF, with some simplifications and some added complexity (the point buy system is the most glorious I have ever seen in a CRPG).

As you said, it was a crawler, but that isn't the point of an ES game and so it sticks out like a sore thumb, just like Redguard did. The natural progression of the series is Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, etc... Those two games were... "gimmicks", "experimentation", etc... and I know that it may piss people off that I refer to them that way, but the fact remains they are not of the same design focus, rather "specialty" in their direction. Good or bad, that makes them gimmicky when you compare them to the original direction and focus of the series.

No. They were spinoffs. Or experimentations, but THAT is why spinoffs exist in the first place. Gimmick implies pulling a trick that is ultimately unproductive or counterproductive to the game, like Radiant AI for Oblivion, which adds nothing to the game but can be used as a marketing, well, gimmick. Battlespire was designed for a specific subset (notice, SUBset; the very opposite of what you use a gimmick for) of Daggerfall players, namely the ones that though the character system was great and loved to have huge dungeons, but wished these dungeons were more structured, more handplaced and less clusterfucky, but just as big. So Battlespire removed the outside world, removed the randomization, and tried for a linear series of eight hardcore, large, completely hand-built and extremely well designed dungeons. And BOY did it deliver on THAT! You could say it WAS a one-trick pony, as it took a single aspect out of Daggerfall (the dungeoneering), but Bethesda never hid that fact, and, very importantly for me, the trick was done very, very well.

That said, personally I disliked it. That is not to say I don't like that type of game play, but I was expecting pie when they released it and what I got was cake. I didn't want cake, I wanted pie.

At the risk of sounding pissy.... next time, buy the item labeled "pie" instead of the one next to it labeled "cake"...

So in that respect my opinion on it being a good game or not should be disregarded. Maybe I will go back and play it again sometime from a different expectation. /shrug

I wish, for your own sake, that you can get over the disappointment of not having had the game you expect, because, if you do like what I described about the game above, and can get rid of the preconception born out of that disappointment, you're really going to like Battlespire.

 

[Xenich]

You keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

when you were expecting a continuation of the series. Rather than integrate it into the original game as an expansion (what they initially planned)

No.

Battlespire was not meant to be an expansion to Daggerfall. It's not even meant to be a "main series number" game. That's why they spun it off into its own series with a different name, and that's why they said that BATTLESPIRE IS EXTRA SPECIAL NOT LIKE DAGGERFALL (I think this was the actual quote). As for your expectation, well, RTFM and all the game's marketing. It very clearly explained why the game was not a continuation of the series and what the scope of the Elder Scrolls Legend spinoff series was supposed to be. Complaining that it doesn't match your expectation is like complaining that UW is a first person dungeon crawler and not like the main Ultima series. This analogy is pretty good, now that I think of it...

Actually, that is incorrect. It was initially designed to be an expansion. It was previously called Dungeon of Daggerfall: Battlespire. I remember when they were making it, they changed focus and made it stand alone. Why? No idea, but if you look at the games of time (I was working at a game software store at the time), the big craze was 1) multiplayer 2) Action-combat. The ES series always was action combat, but it balanced that with a deep development system, open expansive world with quests and plots everywhere. My guess is that those "gimmicks" (1, 2) they thought would pull in a broader audience. Even Regard appeared to be an attempt to tap into the action/adventure market that was pretty popular at the time.

Point is, they did initially plan it as such, but changed focus. So while the game could be fun (I actually respect most types of games, even some tardsole types) as a crawler, it was irritating because rather than filling in the gap between Morrowind with two more expansions to daggerfall, they decided to experiment with mainstream gimmicks. /shrug

 

[Sceptic]

Actually, that is incorrect. It was initially designed to be an expansion. It was previously called Dungeon of Daggerfall: Battlespire. I remember when they were making it, they changed focus and made it stand alone.

I checked and you're right, I do not remember this. However, reading about Dungeon of Daggerfall: Battlespire, it WAS going to be exactly what Battlespire is now, ie focused purely on the dungeon crawling and excluding most everything else. In this respect, them changing it to a stand alone should be a good thing for you; as an expansion you would be justified in expecting "more Daggerfall" and would have every right to be pissed if it turns out to be something different. And it may very well be that this is the reason they turned it into a standalone spinoff, because they didn't want to alienate the Daggerfall fanbase, since at their cores the games are quite different.

Why? No idea, but if you look at the games of time (I was working at a game software store at the time), the big craze was 1) multiplayer 2) Action-combat. The ES series always was action combat, but it balanced that with a deep development system, open expansive world with quests and plots everywhere. My guess is that those "gimmicks" (1, 2) they thought would pull in a broader audience.

I'm not sure I agree with the action-combat part. The combat system is IDENTICAL to Daggerfall's. And their marketing and switching to a stand-alone spinoff game, and their claims to focus on a single aspect of Daggerfall to the exclusion of all else, make it seem more like they were targeting a subset of Daggerfall's audience - maybe not as small as what they eventually got, but "Did you like Daggerfall dungeons? Well here's more, except they're HARDCORE!" really doesn't strike me like it's what they would say if they were trying to broaden the audience.

I wanted to mention this in my previous post but forgot. I've been ignoring your arguments regarding the multiplayer because I've never tried it, nor do I know anyone who's actually played it, so I don't feel I can comment on how much of a "gimmick" it was. Besides the single-player stands out on its own to justify the game's existence. You may be right that they included it because it was the big fad (what with Quake) but IDK.

Even Regard appeared to be an attempt to tap into the action/adventure market that was pretty popular at the time.

My guess is that it tried riding on the popularity of Tomb Raider. It did introduce some nice elements that you wouldn't expect in an action/adventure and that are more in line with what you'd expect from TES, like a LOT of NPC interaction and an open-world (not a very big one, but still) that you can explore from the get-go, and a relatively non-linear main quest for the first half or so.

Point is, they did initially plan it as such, but changed focus.

No, that's the point. As far as I can tell they changed nothing about the game, other than not making it need Daggerfall installed. The focus was always going to be on the action and dungeon crawling rather than the open world and the faction system. That didn't change when they switched it to stand-alone; on the contrary, the focus being different justifies making it stand-alone and a spinoff.

So while the game could be fun (I actually respect most types of games, even some tardsole types) as a crawler, it was irritating because rather than filling in the gap between Morrowind with two more expansions to daggerfall, they decided to experiment with mainstream gimmicks. /shrug

Redguard was certainly riding the mainstream action/adventure bandwagon, even if they made a pretty good one IMO. But I'm still not convinced that Battlespire was. And seriously, just get over the disappointment and play the game with a fresh mind already! Everything you say that isn't your expectation of 20 years ago make it sound like you'd love the game.

 

[Xenich]

I checked and you're right, I do not remember this. However, reading about Dungeon of Daggerfall: Battlespire, it WAS going to be exactly what Battlespire is now, ie focused purely on the dungeon crawling and excluding most everything else. In this respect, them changing it to a stand alone should be a good thing for you; as an expansion you would be justified in expecting "more Daggerfall" and would have every right to be pissed if it turns out to be something different. And it may very well be that this is the reason they turned it into a standalone spinoff, because they didn't want to alienate the Daggerfall fanbase, since at their cores the games are quite different.

I honestly wouldn't have been as upset if they had made it an expansion and tied it in with the original game. That way, battlespire would have been a specific component of the game rather than a focus to a standalone gimmick. Heck, every game has moments of focus, a grindy action based multi-level dungeon in daggerfall as a component of the overall game would have been fine. A standalone merely alienated all the aspects of daggerfall and turned it into a gimmick focus.

I'm not sure I agree with the action-combat part. The combat system is IDENTICAL to Daggerfall's. And their marketing and switching to a stand-alone spinoff game, and their claims to focus on a single aspect of Daggerfall to the exclusion of all else, make it seem more like they were targeting a subset of Daggerfall's audience - maybe not as small as what they eventually got, but "Did you like Daggerfall dungeons? Well here's more, except they're HARDCORE!" really doesn't strike me like it's what they would say if they were trying to broaden the audience.

The issue is not with action-combat, as I said Daggerfall has always been action-combat, but it balanced it with other aspects. It has been a while, but the development system in Battlespire is limited to that same focus. The quests are limited to that focus, everything is about "action" and while daggerfall had "action-combat", it wasn't an "action-combat" game if you understand what I mean? It had more than that, but battlespire was primarily an "action-combat" game, which is the point I was making. That action based play was extremely popular at that time. It was a sell point and if they made Battlespire an integrated "expansion" to daggerfall, it might give audiences the perception that the game was simply "daggerfall" and that would not have achieved the result they were intending, which is to obtain the action junky audience craze of the time. Also, the multiplayer aspects fits nicely in with that theory. All I know is what I saw during that time, and honestly, it felt like a sell out. Considering the actions of the company over the years after that, I would say I wasn't too far off from that "feeling" I had about it.

I wanted to mention this in my previous post but forgot. I've been ignoring your arguments regarding the multiplayer because I've never tried it, nor do I know anyone who's actually played it, so I don't feel I can comment on how much of a "gimmick" it was. Besides the single-player stands out on its own to justify the game's existence. You may be right that they included it because it was the big fad (what with Quake) but IDK.

Well, it is just a perception I had being that I was working in games/software/computers at the time. One of the companies I worked for started out as a hub for multiplayer gaming (Warcraft/Doom/etc...) and I watched the craze evolve. I even remember getting my first copy of Daggerfall back then. I was working for a game store at the time all of this was going on. It was an insult to most of the RPG gamers at the time because we expected (and were initially told) that it was an expansion. The multiplayer aspect was major at that time. Heck, game companies were trying to work in multiplayer any possible way they could. It was a major gimmick. My point is, Battlespire... while on a certain evaluation may have good merits, it was a major let down from its existing focus. While I can respect the "dungeon crawler" games, ES never was that, and it was kind of a downgrade of them to revert to it after all they achieved with previous games. Something had a bad smell with that release. It didn't do well, and they pissed off most of their loyal following at the time. That is why you don't hear that game being touted as one of the greats in their genre.

My guess is that it tried riding on the popularity of Tomb Raider. It did introduce some nice elements that you wouldn't expect in an action/adventure and that are more in line with what you'd expect from TES, like a LOT of NPC interaction and an open-world (not a very big one, but still) that you can explore from the get-go, and a relatively non-linear main quest for the first half or so.

Which is the point I am making. Both Battlespire and Reguard were initially meant to be progressions of Daggerfall, but... well... someone... something... etc... stepped in and drove them to gimmicks, chasing the fads, etc... While you may have liked Battlespire, it was a gimmick, it was designed to fit an action focused style of play, it was shallow in its design and its "style" to be honest, can be seen through numerous games today (ie the action focused grind kill based game). Take away some of the functional aspects of Battlespire and it really is just DOOM with quest stops.

No, that's the point. As far as I can tell they changed nothing about the game, other than not making it need Daggerfall installed. The focus was always going to be on the action and dungeon crawling rather than the open world and the faction system. That didn't change when they switched it to stand-alone; on the contrary, the focus being different justifies making it stand-alone and a spinoff.

But they did...

Here is what I think happened. I think they were working on building the thing as a true expansion. That it would be a full on major dungeon story, etc... progression of daggerfall, added into the game with the same development and complexity that Daggerfall had. What I think happened is that their funders said "hey, this multiplayer thing is booming!" and... "Hey, FPS games are booming!" and they decided to package an action packed dungeon stomping game with limited development, limited focus on choice, and simply a "DOOM" style fantasy game where player could "multiplay" through the game "tearing shit up".

Happens more than you think. Gaming is politics, it suffers the same manipulating stupidity. It is about building the next boy band, the next "market" to filch off of. Battlespire and Redguard were some of the first sellouts, regardless if they were entertaining or had some merit. I think anything positive these games provided to the market was simply dumb luck as they chased after the fad. Don't mind me though, I am cynical.

Redguard was certainly riding the mainstream action/adventure bandwagon, even if they made a pretty good one IMO. But I'm still not convinced that Battlespire was. And seriously, just get over the disappointment and play the game with a fresh mind already! Everything you say that isn't your expectation of 20 years ago make it sound like you'd love the game.

My point is that they both were. Mainstream isn't always bad. Mainstream is just some fad expectation of what people want. They get some aspects right at times, but... Battlespire was an upset at the time, while you and others think it is a good hack and slash dungeon crawler, it isn't and never was ES, but... it should have been if they didn't sell out to mainstream.

The problem with the industry is that they don't understand, everything has its place and when they try to chase fads, we miss what could have been if they would have held true. People remember what is true, the real talent, not the boy band crap pushed out in mass. Battlespire, while good to some, for most is garbage boy band crap because it was "some of something else" being pushed off as another.

 

[Crooked Bee]

You have a pretty weird definition of a "gimmicky" game, imho. Battlespire was just as "action-ey" as Daggerfall had been. I did play both, and did enjoy both, and I just don't see the huge difference between their respective playstyles that you seem to advocate. Both are first-person action games, their only difference being the "open world" aspect. You could as well have argued that both Arena and Daggerfal tried to cash in on the FP action game fad -- it seems to me that you failed to make a convincing argument about Battlespire specifically in that regard.

In my view, Battlespire built on what Daggerfall did best -- namely, the dungeons. And it did an awesome job of that. That's why Daggerfall and Battlespire are my two favorite Elder Scrolls games. Imo Battlespire was just a natural extension of Daggerfall, doing away with the bad and focusing on the good. As you can see, I am the kind of RPG player that Battlespire was meant for. Which doesn't make it "gimmicky" at all.

I can see why many fans like yourself would regard taking away the open world aspect as a travesty -- but in my opinion the Elder Scrolls games with the exception of Morrowind were never any good in the exploration deparment. That's why Battlespire was so good: it did away with the awful and repetitive "open world" aspect of Daggerfall and actually focused on what made Daggerfall good: dungeon crawling.

My thesis is that Daggerfall was all about dungeon crawling in the first place. Its "open world" aspect wasn't any good at all. Its dungeons were what made the game, and what makes it worth playing to this day -- and also makes it the best game of the main series.

 

[Xenich]

You have a pretty weird definition of a "gimmicky" game, imho. Battlespire was just as "action-ey" as Daggerfall had been. I did play both, and did enjoy both, and I just don't see the huge difference between their respective playstyles that you seem to advocate. Both are first-person action games, their only difference being the "open world" aspect. You could as well have argued that both Arena and Daggerfal tried to cash in on the FP action game fad -- it seems to me that you failed to make a convincing argument about Battlespire specifically in that regard.

Actually, I am applying the definition of a gimmick. The difference between the two is the focus and "hook" so to speak of the game. Daggerfall was an open world, strongly focused on exploration, quest resolution, character development and NPC interaction. The "action" combat was simply a delivery system for the rest. Battlespire was designed specifically for the action based combat. Its character development system specifically tailored for that "action" based play. Everything in the game focused to that dungeon crawling combat play. Even the quests are focused to that effect of play. That makes it a "gimmick" as its attraction, appeal, focus, and strategy of design centers around the action combat. Daggerfall did not.

In my view, Battlespire built on what Daggerfall did best -- namely, the dungeons. And it did an awesome job of that. That's why Daggerfall and Battlespire are my two favorite Elder Scrolls games. Imo Battlespire was just a natural extension of Daggerfall, doing away with the bad and focusing on the good. As you can see, I am the kind of RPG player that Battlespire was meant for. Which doesn't make it "gimmicky" at all.

Nothing wrong with you liking that focus, my point however stands on its specific focus of style being a sell point to attract a given interest at the time, hence it being a gimmick. Gimmick isn't necessarily a negative word, though I use it as such simply because I was disappointed with the narrowing of scope and focus that Battlespire achieved. Battlespire if placed within Daggerfall, would have been a good addition, but making it a standalone, streamlining the system specifically for dungeon hack and slash, well... I hope you can understand my point.

I can see why many fans like yourself would regard taking away the open world aspect as a travesty -- but in my opinion the Elder Scrolls games with the exception of Morrowind were never any good in the exploration deparment. That's why Battlespire was so good: it did away with the awful and repetitive "open world" aspect of Daggerfall and actually focused on what made Daggerfall good: dungeon crawling.

Maybe, but the point was that it was part of the package. Options, more options, exploration, etc... regardless if implemented well were a component that defined the whole style. Focusing on a specific is limiting, and one of the reasons I enjoyed the series was having those options, regardless of the opinion of their implementation. Sometimes, just the simplicity of choice and openness provides a different play perspective.

My thesis is that Daggerfall was all about dungeon crawling in the first place. Its "open world" aspect wasn't any good at all. Its dungeons were what made the game, and what makes it worth playing to this day -- and also makes it the best game of the main series.

To each their own. As I said, open world was always a component of the game, good or bad. While I enjoy dungeon crawlers, I have to be in the mood for them. The elder scrolls series always fed that "explorer" type aspect of play regardless of the opinions on its quality. Having it there is what was important and the focused gimmick of Battlespire, narrowing its focus to a given appeal was a disappointment to me.

As I said though, to each their own, but I really wish companies would stop chasing gimmicks (agree to disagree, but I think my argument of the time period and their choice to make it as they did is valid) and stick to their main concepts. Like I said, I think I would have been fine with Battlespire if it weren't for the fact that the early info on the game sold it as full expansion and later changed to its standalone focus.

I will retract my comment about it being a "terrible" game, but in the context of my initial discussion concerning playing through the series, I think battlespire stands outside of it, so naturally if you are looking to play the series after only playing the latest ones, then omitting battlespire and Redguard from that progression is reasonable.

 

[Commissar Draco]

Installed Reqiem and got enriched every time wolves come; have now use wagons or walk with friendly Imperial Legion Patrols to reach towns; the with frostfall, real needs, better inns etc... causes my ''hero'' to burn the Septims and I love it; its just as hard and unforgiving as Morrowind was... Only thing I need is to earn potatoes to hire trainers and/or mercs. Know any mods which add low risk/not combat quests and jobs Comrades? Also banking mod ala daggerfall would be nice now when the Drakes have weight.

 

[Borelli]

its just as hard and unforgiving as Morrowind was...

 

[Turjan]

So, since I've only played Oblivion before, I'm considering starting from Arena and finishing the first 3, or should I not waste my time and just go for Morrowind, the Kodex Konsensus seems to be that it's the best one in the series.

You are wrong. There is no Codex consensus on Morrowind. It's probably one of the most polarizing games on here actually. If we had to reach a consensus (Masterderp doesn't count) then DF would probably come out on top.

The only actual measure we have for this is the RPG Codex top ten list, and there Morrowind is on a shared 9th place, while Daggerfall manages a 26th. That still doesn't mean consensus and doesn't exclude people who played only one of the games (or none of them :D), but Morrowind is one of the top ten (or eleven) Codex cRPG's, while Daggerfall definitely isn't.

 

[hakuroshi]

Xenich certainly has a point here. I've got to play Daggerfall only in 2000 and Battlespire much much later and so missed any contemporary reaction to TES-spin-offs. But judging from a lot of negativity to Morrowind from DF-fans (at ESF even) in 2002 on the grounds of expecting a better and bigger Daggerfall and getting tiny mushroom island instead, it is easy to imagine similar reaction to Battlespire earlier. If you expect an expansion to the game you would think it contains all things previous game had and adds more features or improves existing ones. No one would rage about getting better dungeons in Daggerfall (awesome as they were, they left much place to improvement). But getting better dungeons without the rest of the game... While action-combat dungeoncrawl was a core DF gameplay, and the open world mainly a shell to that core, providing an in-game excuse to dungencrawl, for many players it was an open world which made DF memorable and unique, or, more exact, the fusion of open world and dungencrawl. It created a working illusion, a simulation of a whole fantasy world, which lives by itself with PC only a part of it. Battlespire did dungeoncrawl better, actually the best Bethesda managed up to now. But it left everything else. And it was a time when every company rushes to make Quake and (later) Tomb Raider clones. Did Bethesda followed the suite or was it just a coincidence, did not matter.

Contemporary fan rage aside, both spin-offs are decent games. I've said that Battlespire did leave everything else DF had excepd dungeons. It is not completely true, it did create Daedra-lore, which featured prominently in Morrowind. And Redguard gave us PGE first Edition. So while they are not a part of main series, they still worth to trying out, both lore-wise and by thier gameplay value. Battlespire anyway, I can't say much about Redguard, as I never managed to run it. It may be easier to those who did not feel they expectation betrayed of course . But most Daggerfall players came to appreciate Morrowind eventually, for the things it did right, even not quite forgiving it's forsaking simulation nature of DF. Of course it took Oblivion to show, how to make everything wrong - both DF and MW features. And now Skyrim, though it is hardly worse then Oblivion in every way (just to stay on topic ).