Why do people hate Oblivion so much?

[Okagron]

Barely do any damage? You can easily kill yourself by interacting with hanging spiky balls, or by just walking on a rolling log. Traps often do massive amounts of damage...

By now it should be clear that the Emperor's dream wasnt specifically about you, but about a person which happens to be in that cell. Its all a coincidence.

Same for Daggerfall and Morrowind. Your point?

At this point you're spewing bullshit more than ever. Traps do next to no damage, 95% of the time i take like 5% from any trap and that's early levels.

The Emperor says seeing YOUR face specifically in his dream. Did you actually played this game or pay attention to what the npcs are saying? I get a feeling that you're more and more a 15 year old with ADD.

Daggerfall had generated quests and you barely played Morrowind or not at all, so how do you know they are all like this? Oh right, because you are full of shit. Fetch quests aren't bad by design, but most of the fetch quests in Oblivion are terrible. Most of the npcs are lazy pricks that can't do anything on their own and just say "Do this thing for me and i'm not gonna give you any context as to why."

 

[Alkarl]

Morrowind traded the larger scale for a smaller world with better graphics.

I suppose this is true enough, but most of Daggerfalls world consisted of empty fields, randomly generated dungeons and npcs, and many of the same kind of shop (of varying quality, "the smell of incense.." etc). Most of this world, you were intended to cross via fast-travel. So, if you're going to just go from a location to a loading screen to another location, they may as well be closer together right? Morrowind traded the more open, empty design for a tighter area filled with more things to do. I'm not saying you can't enjoy one, more than the other, as seems to be the case.

Level of maturity took a hit with the writing and quest design.

I'm still not sure I follow as you've not provided any solid examples. Morrowind, unlike Oblivion, but very much like Daggerfall, had a number of different organizations you could associate with. More than just guilds where you obtain quests, faction membership in Morrowind often came with the penalty of annoying another faction. Associate with many Imperial guilds? Well, the Dunmer organizations aren't gonna like that, and vice-versa.
Also, the level of political intrigue involved in Morrowinds quests is at least far better than those in Oblivion. While maybe not as good as Daggerfall, Morrowind at least had a political world to involve yourself in. Oblivion has none of this, if you want people to like you, just feed them some conversation pie.

Quality of the MQ is in DF and Oblivion. Dangerous dungeons. Larger scale. More engaging combat. Side quests with evolving objectives (havent seen any in Morrowind).

What about the main quest in Morrowind turned you off? The combat in Daggerfall and Morrowind is the same. It's nearly identical, rule wise, you have to roll to hit. So I'm not sure what you mean. What are some side quests that are comparable between Daggerfall and Oblivion?

 

[mfkndggrfll]

Morrowind traded, and it was a bad trade. At the time it was released it seemed like a pretty good deal, but as the years pass we start to realize that maybe it wasnt such a great idea. Being sent across the street to retrieve ancient artifacts doesnt feel very epic.

For the level of maturity I mean that the game is trying to be funny, quirky, etc... Like the guy literally falling from the sky and dying. Its fun for a couple of seconds and then you sorta realize that the game isnt serious. There are other silly sidequests around the starting area too.

''More than just guilds where you obtain quests, faction membership in Morrowind often came with the penalty of annoying another faction. Associate with many Imperial guilds? Well, the Dunmer organizations aren't gonna like that, and vice-versa.''

In practice it pretty much equals you getting locked out of some content for allying with X faction or doing Y action. Thats some very basic stuff, its the same as a karma system in a Fallout game.

''What about the main quest in Morrowind turned you off?''

The introduction's pacing is completely broken. The game starts by treating you like a snowflake and doesnt give any sense of urgency. You are given a free pass out of jail and a letter/package. You can just drop the package in the garbage and ignore everything and the MQ disappears. It is the only TES game where there isnt any sense of danger in the intro. I got bored before the MQ managed to hook me, and now the game expects me to grind some more to unlock the next quest, which I assume will be rinse and repeat until the end. Thats where I quit.

I remember the Oblivion quest about reuniting the twins living in different towns. It starts off by hearing a rumor, then you are given the investigation mission, then an errand to report and finally you travel to their cottage/mansion in another location and clear it of the trolls living there. As for DF most quest templates have an evolving objective at some point.

 

[Alkarl]

For the level of maturity I mean that the game is trying to be funny, quirky, etc... Like the guy literally falling from the sky and dying. Its fun for a couple of seconds and then you sorta realize that the game isnt serious. There are other silly sidequests around the starting area too.

Ok, so, you've given me one example that takes place at least maybe a whole minute into the game.

But fine, tit for tat I suppose:

How about Oblivions Jakben Imble? Jack be nimble. That's literally referencing a childs nursery rhyme.

Both cases are comparable for the utility their characters provide the MC (jakbens boots, scrolls of icarian flight both boost acrobatics).

In practice it pretty much equals you getting locked out of some content for allying with X faction or doing Y action. Thats some very basic stuff, its the same as a karma system in a Fallout game.

Daggerfall had a similar system, not just in relation to guilds, but also with the main quest. Spending too much time in Wayrest could lock you out of events happening in Daggerfall or Hammerfell. You had to eventually choose who you were going to support, you couldn't give the Tibellum (or w/e its called) to every faction. You don't mind this system in Daggerfall?

I remember the Oblivion quest about reuniting the twins living in different towns. It starts off by hearing a rumor, then you are given the investigation mission, then an errand to report and finally you travel to their cottage/mansion in another location and clear it of the trolls living there.

Morrowind has these in spades, so I'm not really sure what you're talking about.

The introduction's pacing is completely broken. The game starts by treating you like a snowflake and doesnt give any sense of urgency. You are given a free pass out of jail and a letter/package. You can just drop the package in the garbage and ignore everything and the MQ disappears. It is the only TES game where there isnt any sense of danger in the intro. I got bored before the MQ managed to hook me, and now the game expects me to grind some more to unlock the next quest, which I assume will be rinse and repeat until the end. Thats where I quit

This is where your ignorance is most telling. The main quest never forces you to grind, unlike Daggerfall, and faction membership and rank is based on skills, not level, just like Daggerfall. Certain npcs will advise you to go and get skilled up, but you don't have to. You can run straight into Red Mountain at level one if you'd like, nobody will stop you, but it wont end well for you.

The introduction is paced perfectly, you get off a boat, create your character, and then what you do next is up to you. Other than length, there is very little difference between Morrowinds intro and Oblivions. At the end of either you're just as free. In Morrowind, hey, maybe look up Caius Cosades, in Oblivion, hey, maybe take that mcguffin to Jaufre. It's effectively the same. You can fast travel straight to Weynon Priory or you can take a silt strider straight to Balmora. No difference.

You see, Morrowind may tell you you're special, but its up to you to figure that shit out. Oblivion tells you you're a nobody, but makes you feel super special. At the outset you're just some lucky convict, the emperor dies and gives you his amulet. Barrus, a blade, is just like "Ok, you go." You get to Weynon Priory and deliver the amulet to the Grandmaster of the blades and he's just like, "Can you go get Martin?" so on and so forth. None of the real players in Oblivion want to do anything more than send you off like an errand boy.

And as far as being a chosen one, in Morrowind, it is equally as likely that you are just a guy in the right place at the right time. Most of what determines you fit the prophecy are actually just matters of happenstance. The game leaves it open enough for you to take it either way. Despite this, you are eventually given proof and evidence in both words and deeds as to why you're the only one who can fulfill the prophecy.

How far did you honestly get in Morrowind?

 

[Dustin542]

Dagoth Ur even asks if you believe if you're the reincarnation of Lord Nerevar and you can answer him how you like.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

''Daggerfall had a similar system, not just in relation to guilds, but also with the main quest. Spending too much time in Wayrest could lock you out of events happening in Daggerfall or Hammerfell. You had to eventually choose who you were going to support, you couldn't give the Tibellum (or w/e its called) to every faction. You don't mind this system in Daggerfall?''

I know it had a similar system and I wouldnt praise the game because of this, some people would but I dont. Its nice to have but its not enough to say ''Hey look, the game has faction C&C!''

''This is where your ignorance is most telling. The main quest never forces you to grind''

Well yes it does. You must do errands and then do some more and it goes on. Either way Im sure it involve more crappy combat or errands, I dont see how it can be good.

''Other than length, there is very little difference between Morrowinds intro and Oblivions.''

And the fact that the king gets assassinated.... The game gives you a blatant warning that shit just hits the fan and you should act ASAP, unlike Morrowind. RP-wise the PC is less likely to throw the amulet away on his way out of the sewers and say 'fuck this''.

''You see, Morrowind may tell you you're special, but its up to you to figure that shit out.''

While not having any motivation to do so.

''Oblivion tells you you're a nobody, but makes you feel super special''

Could say the same of Arena and DF...

''And as far as being a chosen one, in Morrowind, it is equally as likely that you are just a guy in the right place at the right time.''

Rofl what are you talking about? You get a free pass out of jail with your name on it. The Emperor chose you for his mission not because he saw you in a dream or something vague, but he had information on you, and most likely your past. All of this makes it worse that you are sent on errands, when clearly the game tells you that you are more than that.

 

[Bigg Boss]

Cmon guys! Don't you like Bandits with Daedric armor? Morrowind doesn't have Patrick Stewart so it is automatically not giving you enough of a boner to finish the main quest. Obviously starting off as a recently freed prisoner working for a secret group of Knights spear headed by a bare chested badass isn't giving you enough incentive to head out and find out what the fuck is going on. What Morrowind needed was more randomly generated Demon portals to really hammer home the whole main quest being about Demon portals, so you feel like you need to close the Demon portals...I don't really remember how that game ended these days... I remember some big epic battle with 3 Knights fighting alongside me, as if Helms Deep was just the Dwarf and Hobbits fighting 7 Orcs, with the rest of the bad guys in the background doing this...

I do know the level scaling and removal of several skills makes Oblivion automatically shit when compared to Morrowind regardless of any inferior combat issues. Oblivion has shit combat. Skyrim has shit combat. Yes, Morrowind has shitty combat. It also has a really fucking good magic system which Oblivion and Skyrim lack. It boils down to dumbing down by compass, level scaling, fast travel, and writing quality. Every person here knows it except our friend Mxyplyzyk.

The trick is to get him to say his own name three times I think.

 

[coldcrow]

Hope you guys enjoy circular "arguments" with a rather disingenious troll. That he refuses to properly quote adds to it and should be one more reason to get his ass hauled into retardo land.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

The Thief games are a product of their time. First person stealth is garbage. The early Splinter Cell games are the pinnacle of stealth games. Metal Gear Solid would be the runner up.

What makes first person stealth garbage and what makes SC/MGS better than Thief, in your view?

 

[Zer0wing]

What makes first person stealth garbage and what makes SC/MGS better than Thief, in your view?

The shitposting license.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

TorontRayne A skooma smoking bare chested badass*

''I do know the level scaling and removal of several skills makes Oblivion automatically shit when compared to Morrowind regardless of any inferior combat issues.''

Removal of a few skills doesnt automatically makes it worse... The level scaling is the reason why the game aged so well.

''It boils down to dumbing down by compass, level scaling, fast travel, and writing quality''

Oblivion has better writing, or at least less retarded stuff. Morrowind's writing is automatically retarded because of the fact that when asked for 'a little secret' NPCs tell you that you are allowed to defend yourself if attacked....and when asked for 'some advice' they suggest that you go 'practice' your skills on some bandits in the wilds like its a casual thing to do.

The Thief games are a product of their time. First person stealth is garbage. The early Splinter Cell games are the pinnacle of stealth games. Metal Gear Solid would be the runner up.

What makes first person stealth garbage and what makes SC/MGS better than Thief, in your view?

The major flaw of stealth FPS is that if you can see 'them', 'they' can see you. It involves too much trial and error, saving and reloading that breaks the immersion. Since you can never be sure if its safe or not to poke your head out, you often end up just sitting there waiting and waiting..... 3rd person perspective allows to see more and automatically involves more strategy. Overall its more about 3rd person> FPS than SC/MGS > Thief. FPS is more immersive and realistic but it isnt fun.

 

[Okagron]

The level scaling is the reason why the game aged so well.

What is probably the worst thing about Oblivion is the thing "that made it age so well". At this point his "arguments" are fucking stand up comedy.

 

[unfairlight]

The major flaw of stealth FPS is that if you can see 'them', 'they' can see you. It involves too much trial and error, saving and reloading that breaks the immersion.

This is just plain retarded. This has never been an issue for me when I played through Thief 1 and 2 because I mastered the basic ability of using my eyes, ears and tools given to me to make a decision if where I decide to go is safe or not, such as listening for footsteps, dialogue or simply looking around the corner from a safe spot, such as darkness. You being the retard that you are, I doubt that you ever noticed that you have the ability to extinguish lights in these games. Also, Thief 2 had scouting orbs that you could throw to scout the area out before entering, similar to the sticky cam from SC.

 

[PorkBarrellGuy]

he shittalked thief

he seriously did it

wow

 

[Zer0wing]

What is probably the worst thing about Oblivion is the thing "that made it age so well". At this point his "arguments" are fucking stand up comedy.

Well, Oblivion sure did aged well in minds of many people because of this worst thing (lol not really), after all Oblivion's autoleveling is the stuff of legend.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

The major flaw of stealth FPS is that if you can see 'them', 'they' can see you. It involves too much trial and error, saving and reloading that breaks the immersion.

This is just plain retarded. This has never been an issue for me when I played through Thief 1 and 2 because I mastered the basic ability of using my eyes, ears and tools given to me to make a decision if where I decide to go is safe or not, such as listening for footsteps, dialogue or simply looking around the corner from a safe spot, such as darkness. You being the retard that you are, I doubt that you ever noticed that you have the ability to extinguish lights in these games. Also, Thief 2 had scouting orbs that you could throw to scout the area out before entering, similar to the sticky cam from SC.

Yeah because sitting there staring at walls while listening to footsteps in the distance is so exiting. The Thief games were cool and stuff back in the days but they havent really aged well. Those games still involve too much trial and error, and waiting.

 

[PorkBarrellGuy]

Every time I think "he can't possibly get any dumber" and every time I am proven wrong

 

[unfairlight]

Yeah because sitting there staring at walls while listening to footsteps in the distance is so exiting. The Thief games were cool and stuff back in the days but they havent really aged well. Those games still involve too much trial and error, and waiting.

So instead you are at cover, looking at your enemy in Splinter Cell? So exciting. Those games don't involve trial and error if you aren't shit at games or retarded as fuck, but you are both.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

The major flaw of stealth FPS is that if you can see 'them', 'they' can see you. It involves too much trial and error, saving and reloading that breaks the immersion. Since you can never be sure if its safe or not to poke your head out, you often end up just sitting there waiting and waiting..... 3rd person perspective allows to see more and automatically involves more strategy. Overall its more about 3rd person> FPS than SC/MGS > Thief. FPS is more immersive and realistic but it isnt fun.

Talking about Thief Dark Project and Metal Age in particular, I always thought the FPS perspective worked to its advantage since it made you more aware of your surroundings. What I never liked too much in a game like MGS for example is how your view is more overhead which gives you a clear view and if you play with the presence of a radar it is almost overkill. I won't bother with MGS4 since the game becomes a movie halfway through and the Octo-Camo gimmick makes stealth alarmingly easy.

But Thief encourages you to use your ears more than your eyes. Taking a cautious approach makes you prowl without even realizing it and listening for chatter among guards or footsteps and how they hit particular surfaces is like giving you a 'hint' of what to expect. You know what I always hated in games like MGS? It's when you get that cinematic run-down of an upcoming area and the camera shows you all around, how many guards there are, what potential hazards you'll run into, it's much more rewarding to deal with those things as they are introduced naturally or at least that's how I see it when it comes to stealth games which have you infiltrate tightly guarded venues.

Perhaps it is due to harder hitting nostalgia but I consider The Dark Project and Metal Age to be the best stealth games and best "thievery" games out there. Admittedly I think to fully enjoy them you need to use earphones just to really get the complete experience and to invest your attention into the game entirely.

 

[DragoFireheart]

Every time I think "he can't possibly get any dumber" and every time I am proven wrong

The Codex is a place of wonders and magic!

 

[mfkndggrfll]

Yeah because sitting there staring at walls while listening to footsteps in the distance is so exiting. The Thief games were cool and stuff back in the days but they havent really aged well. Those games still involve too much trial and error, and waiting.

So instead you are at cover, looking at your enemy in Splinter Cell? So exciting. Those games don't involve trial and error if you aren't shit at games or retarded as fuck, but you are both.

The fact that you can see enemies from cover means you can time your movements perfectly, which reduces time spent waiting and allows to focus on other aspects. Overall it adds depth. Those games can be pretty fucking hard too... Like there is a reason why such games got dumbed down and arent popular in today's market; They are hard and involves too much failure and reloads.

The major flaw of stealth FPS is that if you can see 'them', 'they' can see you. It involves too much trial and error, saving and reloading that breaks the immersion. Since you can never be sure if its safe or not to poke your head out, you often end up just sitting there waiting and waiting..... 3rd person perspective allows to see more and automatically involves more strategy. Overall its more about 3rd person> FPS than SC/MGS > Thief. FPS is more immersive and realistic but it isnt fun.

Talking about Thief Dark Project and Metal Age in particular, I always thought the FPS perspective worked to its advantage since it made you more aware of your surroundings. What I never liked too much in a game like MGS for example is how your view is more overhead which gives you a clear view and if you play with the presence of a radar it is almost overkill. I won't bother with MGS4 since the game becomes a movie halfway through and the Octo-Camo gimmick makes stealth alarmingly easy.

But Thief encourages you to use your ears more than your eyes. Taking a cautious approach makes you prowl without even realizing it and listening for chatter among guards or footsteps and how they hit particular surfaces is like giving you a 'hint' of what to expect. You know what I always hated in games like MGS? It's when you get that cinematic run-down of an upcoming area and the camera shows you all around, how many guards there are, what potential hazards you'll run into, it's much more rewarding to deal with those things as they are introduced naturally or at least that's how I see it when it comes to stealth games which have you infiltrate tightly guarded venues.

Perhaps it is due to harder hitting nostalgia but I consider The Dark Project and Metal Age to be the best stealth games and best "thievery" games out there. Admittedly I think to fully enjoy them you need to use earphones just to really get the complete experience and to invest your attention into the game entirely.

I dont see how the FPS perspective can make you more aware of your surroundings when it limits your PoV. The MGS games really shine when you play them with emulators (to have save states and avoid game over screens) and try to speedrun them, or play the best way possible. If you play at snails pace it will get boring, its better if you play fast. MGS4 still has the best stealth mechanics, we just need it on emulators for the reasons I just stated.

''You know what I always hated in games like MGS? It's when you get that cinematic run-down of an upcoming area and the camera shows you all around, how many guards there are, what potential hazards you'll run into''

Well I think this is a matter of preference. I personally like that run-down, because as soon as it starts your brain start working on finding the best possible route and how you will act, hence the strategic aspect. It creates a different type of stealth experience.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

I dont see how the FPS perspective can make you more aware of your surroundings when it limits your PoV. The MGS games really shine when you play them with emulators (to have save states and avoid game over screens) and try to speedrun them, or play the best way possible. If you play at snails pace it will get boring, its better if you play fast. MGS4 still has the best stealth mechanics, we just need it on emulators for the reasons I just stated.

Well, think about it: with FPS then a lot of your success in a game like Thief comes down to gradually advancing and taking the more slow approach. Because Thief gives you ways to tackle an environment from both infiltration and avoiding detection, you have to take things into account such as the sounds and alternate routes as well as proper use of your tools. I don't believe a stealth game should be fast in the vein of speedrunning (which I'm assuming you would do once you know the layout of the game well enough) on the first few playthroughs. I like the more experimental approach. You have a goal to reach, but many ways to reach it.

A lot of it comes down to how different the characters Garrett and Snake are which translates to their gameplay. Snake is pretty much regarded as a super soldier, he is capable of extraordinary feats that other people simply can't do. In this way, it seems a bit incoherent that Snake can go from taking down tanks and gigantic robots as well as paranormal enemies such as Psycho Mantis but he still needs to sneak by soldiers that should present little contest to him. Garrett on the other hand is much more grounded in reality and is really not going to be taking out his sword to kill an entire night patrol single-handedly. In fact, he sucks dick when it comes to fighting but that's because fighting is the last resort for him and his true talents lie in being able to get in and get out with little to no interference.

So you can apply the characters to the way how their respective games are played. With MGS, not even halfway through the game I feel like a walking arsenal that even if caught can solve my problems by blowing them away and then waiting for the danger/evasion levels to expire but in Thief if I'm caught then I'm going to die unless I make a swift getaway somehow. This makes me have to be more clever in my approach which is how, well, a thief should be.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

I dont see how the FPS perspective can make you more aware of your surroundings when it limits your PoV. The MGS games really shine when you play them with emulators (to have save states and avoid game over screens) and try to speedrun them, or play the best way possible. If you play at snails pace it will get boring, its better if you play fast. MGS4 still has the best stealth mechanics, we just need it on emulators for the reasons I just stated.

Well, think about it: with FPS then a lot of your success in a game like Thief comes down to gradually advancing and taking the more slow approach. Because Thief gives you ways to tackle an environment from both infiltration and avoiding detection, you have to take things into account such as the sounds and alternate routes as well as proper use of your tools. I don't believe a stealth game should be fast in the vein of speedrunning (which I'm assuming you would do once you know the layout of the game well enough) on the first few playthroughs. I like the more experimental approach. You have a goal to reach, but many ways to reach it.

A lot of it comes down to how different the characters Garrett and Snake are which translates to their gameplay. Snake is pretty much regarded as a super soldier, he is capable of extraordinary feats that other people simply can't do. In this way, it seems a bit incoherent that Snake can go from taking down tanks and gigantic robots as well as paranormal enemies such as Psycho Mantis but he still needs to sneak by soldiers that should present little contest to him. Garrett on the other hand is much more grounded in reality and is really not going to be taking out his sword to kill an entire night patrol single-handedly. In fact, he sucks dick when it comes to fighting but that's because fighting is the last resort for him and his true talents lie in being able to get in and get out with little to no interference.

So you can apply the characters to the way how their respective games are played. With MGS, not even halfway through the game I feel like a walking arsenal that even if caught can solve my problems by blowing them away and then waiting for the danger/evasion levels to expire but in Thief if I'm caught then I'm going to die unless I make a swift getaway somehow. This makes me have to be more clever in my approach which is how, well, a thief should be.

Game still has issues, lets say you come to turn a L shaped corridor and you hear footsteps coming, you kinda have to sit there hoping that the guard doesnt turn the corner, otherwise you gotta backtrack without even knowing the guards patrol area. Overall its much more tedious to have to learn the patrol zones bit by bit, with trial and error. It comes to a point where you just start running around for a 'dry' run to learn the patterns, then die and reload. Thief games just have too much 'dead time' that is spent sitting there waiting for the sound of footsteps to fade.

''With MGS, not even halfway through the game I feel like a walking arsenal that even if caught can solve my problems by blowing them away and then waiting for the danger/evasion levels to expire''

You can also force yourself to not use any weapons and do ghost runs, that is kinda what I meant. Going fast while doing ghost runs is a bonus. With emulators you can just load saved states rather than wait 1-2 minutes for the alarm state to reset.

''but in Thief if I'm caught then I'm going to die unless I make a swift getaway somehow.''

Or you might as well just reload a save, because the alarm state is just a waste of time.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Even adddeed was better.

 

[taxalot]

Oblivion is not as terrible as some people would like it to be but seriously what the fuck is this shit