Let’s talk about one of the most overrated games in recent memory. I have no grudge against Bethesda, in fact I tend to thoroughly enjoy their games, and this one is no exception. However, just because I enjoy the game doesn’t mean I don’t feel it gets a little more praise than it deserves. Role-Playing Games encompass my favorite genre in video gaming, I love being captivated and immersed in new worlds and new environments with three-dimensional characters that carry an impressive narrative throughout. Bethesda has garnered immense popularity thanks to The Elder Scrolls and Fallout, both of which usually get a hefty amount of praise whenever a new title from either series is thrown out into the public. The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was a flawed but impressive experience, much like Skyrim now. Personal bias towards dystopian storytelling aside, Fallout 3 was just a more in-depth title, simple as that. Oblivion and Fallout 3 were given unanimous praise so you can debate amongst yourselves which is the superior title, I have my opinion, and you have yours.
Skyrim takes place two hundred years after the events of Oblivion, and involves the numerous adventures of you, the Dovahkiin, or Dragonborn. You as the Dragonborn, affect the fate of the land of Skyrim as dragons have returned to the lands after supposedly being extinct for centuries. As a Dragonborn, you wield the power of Thu’um, a Dragon Shout, in which you utilize words of the dragon language into various shouts, examples including Unrelenting Force (basically Force Push from the mouth), among others. Despite my criticisms to come, I love this concept for its originality and prominence to both gameplay and plot.
From a technical standpoint, Skyrim is ultimately a more fine-tuned and improved version of its predecessor. This is to be expected of course, being the next installment. Ultimately though, I feel Oblivion could have been Skyrim (for the most part) when it was out... six years ago. The melee combat still needs tweaking and a bit more fluidity to bring it beyond what’s already been established in Morrowind and Oblivion as well as lesser-loved titles such as Dead Island. Thankfully, the leveling system has been much improved from its very counter-intuitive origins. Shouts are a welcome gameplay mechanic with both variety and viable application. Dialogue-branching is fairly underwhelming and inferior to titles such as Dragon Age: Origins and Fallout 3. Being that Bethesda’s games focus on a single character, I can slightly excuse the lack of memorable characters considering the game is centered on you as a player.
However, when it comes to an in-depth role-playing experience, other characters help carry the narrative and offer much-appreciated gravitas to the overall drama. The fact of the matter is that the majority of the NPCs in this world are uninteresting, useful only for offering quests or exposition on the lore, which I can expect and accept from an MMO, but not this. Aside from minor touches, the graphics aren’t very impressive, and it would seem that the engine seems a tad dated in the same way the Source Engine seems to be for Portal 2. Fighting dragons is initially exciting but quickly becomes straightforward and monotonous considering the embarrassing A.I.
Praise goes to exploration and size in terms of how massive Skyrim really is. I sometimes find it more interesting to journey out into the unknown rather than clumsily swing a sword at a troll or Frostbite Spider. While combat could use some work, magic execution is relatively solid and dual-wielding is always a nice touch. The quests are varied and interesting but towards the end of the game dungeons start to become noticeably padded. Make no mistake, this is an intriguing world but the main storyline doesn’t seem to live up to its full potential, and therefore undermines the setting more than it should.
Generally speaking, it’s easy to compare how different companies handle their genres. I think this even more prevalent for RPGs in particular, considering the tact and amount of creative license that applies, more so than say an FPS or platformer. RPGs are thankfully one of the best genres for storytelling in the medium, and aside from a few tropes, they’re very flexible. I’ve always stood by the opinion that Pokémon is a great introduction to RPGs, especially for younger players. Nintendo handles their long-going franchise with simplicity and variety, the different Pokémon teach a player unfamiliar with the genre how to utilize different stats and assemble an effective party, which applies to the majority of most turn-based titles. Bethesda tends to focus more on scale and scope than actual context, and while the context is pleasing, it’s quite lackluster compared to its competition as well as games released years before it. BioWare tends to establish a happy medium with context and scope as well as gameplay (when they’re not embarrassing themselves with Dragon Age II). Then again, character weight to the narrative is part of the appeal in their titles.
My critical point is that Skyrim succeeds so well in its impression that general players tend to look past it’s very visible flaws and go so far as to call it perfect or even one of the most revolutionary RPGs to date, which isn’t the case at all. I found Skyrim to be quite an enjoyable and addictive experience, putting in over 100 hours into it on my own playthrough. That being said, this is far from a flawless experience, and Bethesda still has a lot to learn before they get there, but as it stands, it’s well worth the cash and time I put into it, aside from the bugs and glitches Bethesda is slightly infamous for. 8 out of 10.
No comments:
Post a Comment