So, I see the balls already rolling and there's been a few passive mentions about some of the things Oblivion did sorta well, and the even some defense of it. Anyways, here's a few points I'll make to show how a lot of design choices were made that either changed the formula for the better in some ways or returned to the series roots in others.
First, let's look at combat. I find it funny how in this video, this guys elaborates on all these plethora of factors that come into Morrowind, then say: "by comparison, all a gamer has to deal with in Oblivion or Skyrim is the damage of the weapon, the armor of the opponent, and whether or not the weapon reaches the hit box of the opponent". Is this an accurate representation?
Well, look up the damage formula for Morrowind, which if you break down all the variables into their simplest components have various factors from your skills, condition, the state of your armor, and so on. All in all, the most variables we can get out of this equation is 20, so lets say that Morrowind has degree 20 complexity, and there are 3 attacks you can make (Chop, Slash, Thrust). By comparison, how does Oblivion fair?
Well, look at Oblivion's formula. Well, since there is no hit/miss calculation from variables like there are in Morrowind, what would the variables be if they simply subtracted all the hit/miss jazz? There would then be about 8. 12 of Morrowind's combat variables go into your chances of hitting or missing. But is there 8 variables in Oblivion's combat? No, there are in fact 15, the damage calculation is 7 variables more complex. As a design choice, it seems effort was made not to simply strip down the combat of Morrowind and here you go, but rather to make more complex by almost doubling the number of variables to take into account. Also, though the 3 varieties of attack are gone from the game, there are 2 varieties of attack with the normal and power attacks, so not that much decline there. Now, whether that was implemented in truly interesting ways or not, if they truly were trying to dumb it down to a casual game, they wouldn't have added so many variables, and that truly is a step in the right direction if we want a Elder Scroll game with interesting combat.
By comparison, Skyrim's damage forumla: (BaseDamage+SmithingIncrease)(1+skill/200)(1+PerkEffects)(1+ItemEffects), with 4 more variables all about perk bs if you're dual wielding. Now THAT's the formula of
.
Furthermore, let's talk about the other things that are arguably improved in the combat of Oblivion. First of all, there's no missing rats 20 times when you're looking RIGHT AT THEM. I get it, this goes away after some time, but it just doesn't work for a first person action rpg. In first person turn based, it's fine, turn based in an abstract sort of combat system. In third person action rpg, it's not a huge deal. But in a game trying to make you feel like you're actually there, actually doing the fighting, it's just immersion breaking to miss something you aimed and timed your attack for perfectly. Also, let's not forget no autoblocking anymore, you have to actually block for yourself in Oblivion, again this is less immersion breaking and it puts more emphasis on skill, even if it could have been better implemented for actual challenge.
Even the introduction of Level-Scaling, despite not being well implemented, I think wasn't a bad idea in and of itself. Daggerfall had this all throughout it's game, with certain enemies spawning depending on your level. The concept of allowing most the world being accessible by you regardless of level may be a slight bit immersion breaking if you think about it, but overall it just furthers your capacity for exploration, so the tradeoff makes it pretty not awful IMO. Anyway, like it, don't like it, but it's not a new concept that never was part of the Elder Scrolls before.
Perhaps the one example of where they really did dumb it down a bit was in the reduction of skills, with less skills meaning less choices with weight during your character creation. They did go from 27 (9*3) to 21 (7*3) skills, a bigger decline than from Oblivion to Skyrim where they went from 21 to 18 (7*3 to 6*3). Arguably streamlining from 27 to 21 isn't necessarily bad, but I'll just bite the bullet and say it's a bit of decline and move on.
Gameworld and NPCs absolutely were taken in the right direction with Oblivion I think. There's a few reasons for this, and again I'm focusing more on idea than execution. So, first of all there are 225 forts, caves, mines, and Ayleid Ruins in Oblivion, which is much more than the number of caves and tombs in Morrowind. Bigger game world is a big plus, and more in keeping with the previous Elder Scrolls games. For comparision, the increase from Morrowind to Oblivion is about 1.6, while from all measurement Skyrim seems to be about the same size as Oblivion or smaller, which is definitely a strike against it. The reason they could even do this, however, is because they returned to procedural generation. While, yaah Daggerfall/Arena did it isn't necessarily a defense of it, and it has the drawback of leading to blander areas, it does however make the increase in size possible, which for the Elder Scrolls games is great because it's all about getting lost in a world and so big game world is an important part of that. Therefore, I think the direction they went is a big step in the right direction, they just need to focus on making their procedural generation algorithms much better (look at how effective .kkrieger is with it's procedural generation for it's size). Or at least, you know, shit or get off the pot with procedural generation or hand-crafting, because every time they switch around there's a jump in how bigger or smaller the worlds are and they can't build up on their previous work for improvement because a game later it'll be obsolete. Anyways, yah that was the better way to go for size, the quality could be nearly as good if they worked more on their procedural generation algorithms, and it's more fitting with the series.
NPCs too, we should appreciate the improvements here. They're not wikipedia pages for one, they actually have their own dialogue. Grant it, it could use some polishing, but the way dialogue with NPCs was formatted in Morrowind, and the series of generic responses, honestly? Weird phrases every now and then, yes, not enough voice acting variety maybe, yes, but if you compared it to the amount of generic responses in Morrowind, it's clear that it wasn't the wrong direction to go presentation-wise. Furthermore, take a small moment to appreciate the attempt with Radiant AI. Seriously. Yes, it was a buggy mess, I'll give you that easily. However, so was Daggerfall, but that's a lovely buggy mess for some reason
. Anyways I just mean to say that let's be honest, programming NPCs with their own schedules was pretty cool, even if it was a little buggy, but I don't know why some of the things those NPCs do is any less immersion breaking than a bear getting stuck in a wall, so to each there own.
And you have to admit, the faction quests were pretty cool overall , even if the main quests was eh. I mean the Dark Brotherhood storyline for Oblivion is one of the more fondly remembered ones by many people, even if it's not War and Peace or anything. Did Morrowind handle faction better? In most ways, probably yes. However, the faction storylines weren't a turn downward or anything.
So, overall? I think Oblivion was a step in the right direction from Morrowind, even if it was a boring, poorly executed step.
Bring on your rage Codex (and your informed debate
), I can take it