LMAO an MMO... Seriously!? The worst waste of money in the past year would be Brink without a shadow of a doubt. If I had played a demo, I would of never of paid a penny for it, money I can't get back as its locked to Steam. All in the name of "Anti-Piracy" no doubt!
Gotta love the blind MMO hate. WoW, WAR, FFXIV, FFIX, Mortal, GW, Rift... I've played a few MMOs and all have had better combat systems than Skyrim. All of them have their own flaws, some of which are pretty big, but at least they're all more involved than Skyrim. Each game (bar Mortal) gives the player direct access to a variety of unique abilities at any given time and often relies on the interaction of these abilities. Skyrim is more akin to Diablo: you have left and right click. You can hot-key them to do different things, but it's still left click and right click. Mortal requires a special mention as it's actually first person much like Skyrim. Its combat system is really quite equivalent. I say it's better than Skyrim, however, because Mortal was developed by Star Vault, a small upstart dev house publishing their first title. Bethesda is a large developer with a large pool of experience including previous titles in the series to allow them to refine and improve the system. The fact that the two developers ended up with nearly identical combat system says quite a bit about the effort Bethesda put in.
Problem I find with MMO combat is that it often just ends up being a case of... 1 1 1 2 6 5 3 4 pause 2 2 2 2 2 2 pause 7 7 [repeat until all stuff dead]. I suppose Skyrim is just... left-click, right-click (repeat for a while), SHOUT, TAB, Take Potion, [repeat until all stuff dead]. The only real skill is avoiding frying my wife (who is my companion - Aela [or wharever her name is] the Huntress). I gave her a perfectly good bow, so why she has to run in and try and hit stuff with the wooden stick for a sword I gave her is anyone's guess. OK, Skyrim combat is not exactly state of the art, but then again I play it for the scenery and the story really. I feel part of the world and just love exploring. Anyway, worse game I own other than Alone In The Dark (recent-ish Xbox 360 version) has got to be Uncharted 3 : Drakes Deception - it's not actually a game, it's like one of those interactive movie type games that were all the rage when CD-Rom drives first came out. Rubbish.
An old one I still regret paying for: Neverwinter Nights. It seems everyone loved it, but I really thought it was utter crap. Gave it up after an hour. Might give it a try again some time I think (well, I paid money for it after all...). Hey, I remember you! Still pondering about the comparison (but not a comparison) between Skyrim and Rift I guess? Well, at least you succeeded in creating an interesting discussion again... I personally think the combat in Skyrim is "good enough". It isn't a lot of fun, but I'm not annoyed by it either. I spend more time exploring and running around than fighting so maybe that's why. (I've spent my first 12 hours without even starting the main quest, just running around the world and enjoying the scenery) My personal experience with MMO combat is more or less exactely what Jedra said, and I can't say I really prefer that.
There's your problem. The appeal of it - and the reason for the volumes of praise - were its in-depth character growth and specialization and its huge, involving story. Kinda like The Witcher, although I could never get into that game as it happens. I don't criticize The Witcher because I only played it for two hours, which isn't long enough to get to any of the things that reportedly make it good. I mean to get back to it some day when I have time. Likewise, give Neverwinter Nights some more time and it'll begin to shine.
They have that already, it's called an adventure game. Exactly. I don't mind what 'class' I am, I just want it to be good. Thank.... god.... Only bad MMO's are like that.
Crysis 2. Just bought it for £3.75 from D2D and it's pretty ****! Will keep playing it but the simplicity of the game, the controls and the FOV are ****! Gfx wise, you can't complain with the DX11 patch but still, gfx ain't everything!
I'm amazed people are complaining about Skyrim's graphics. They're not good, but in my opinion they're good enough. Not every A-list game has, by definition, to be a graphical feast. Look at minecraft. Anyway we should never expect stunning visuals from Elder Scrolls, they've always had that strange pretty-but-half-finished thing going on. As games go, they're like the cute girl next door with the lazy eye. You want a really bad game? Call of Duty: Finest Hour on PS2. I don't know where it even fits into CoD's release history, but it's basically CoD2 with some changed window dressing and with awful music. Really, really awful music. My sister and I ground our way through about half of the co-op campaign but we eventually gave up and turned it off because the music on a particularly long and difficult level was so annoying. edit - wikipedia says the score was by Michael Giaccino, which seems impossible. I guess he really hated humanity when he was writing the score for that level.
Skyrim's graphics are amazing when you consider the amount of space the whole world takes up, only 7GB~ for that much information means you're going to loose a little somewhere, RAGE and it's awful popping textures was 15GB.
Skyrim = ugly and dated console graphics. If you think those graphics are good you obviously haven't played crysis in DX11 1080 or BF3. Minecraft doesn't attempt to have wonderful graphics but actually the graphics are pretty cool because of the lighting and shading. Minecraft is lightyears ahead of skyrim in terms of gameplay. It occured to me yesterday... what if minecraft had cutscenes and a story like skyrim? It would somehow lose it's appeal. Minecraft doesn't need all that and yet somehow it's still a better game.
Wait? What? I am actually staggered you would claim this is a great port to to the PC. The PC IS made for this type of game but the user interface is obviously made to be used with a controller. The mouse and keyboard should make inventory management, perk selection, etc a breeze but its a chore. The interface between the player and the game is the most fundamental link between you and the game and it's like having a conversation through google translate. During a battle you should be able to change from bow, to powers, to weapon quickly and smoothly but the clunky interface ruins the immersion. Just a disclaimer to say I'm quite a few hours into the game and I'm really enjoying it btw.
So is everyone suggesting that the next Elder Scrolls game should go the same way as Metro: Last Light is going? Barely capable of playable framerates on a Tri-Sli 580 system? Or would everyone just start bitching about how badly optimized it was? even though it'd be abusing every DX11 feature out there. Bitching about Skyrim's graphics is pointless. Sure; it's a console port. It was going to be a console port. You may as well punch trees and go "IT'S WOOD! HOW DARE IT BE WOOD!?!" At the end of the day; it manages to cram the full game world into 7GB. That's a a fair achievement in my book, there are always HD texture pack mods out there if you feel like you need more.
What I suggest is they put some effort into making a PC version that scales down to lowly console level and of course scales back for low end PC's as well. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out. Frostbyte 2 does exactly that. The character animation in Battlefield 3 is incredible. The textures and detail incredible. I have a good spec PC, I don't want my PC games limited because you run a low spec PC or play console games.
You sound like one of the people who complained they couldn't run Crysis when it first came out! Move with times my friend. Games can only look better if we stopped pandering around hardware which came out in 2006! Even on low the graphics look amazing!
I think this thread has lost its way a bit. Can we get back to listing the actual worst games we own.
Yup, totally agree. I remember the bitching when crysis was released... "cryis is badly coded", "crysis won't run ultra on my Nvidia 240". The game was built for future hardware and to scale down for the lower spec machines of the day. Crysis 2 was a console port but it was built on a far more modern engine and managed to look far better than skyrim even without the DX11 patch! Skyrim is just a lazy console port and I am actually sick of the effect consoles have had on PC gaming. For a 1st person immersive game like Skyrim I expect a PC game engine and expect some effort to be made to bring it up to date.
Then you're going to be sadly disappointed. Could you imagine the outcry should everyone find that their ickle Eggsbox 360's and PS3s couldn't run something smoothly? Face it; the Console has more weight than the PC now. As much as we should have the advantage, what with better EVERYTHING; it's over. Only a few companies dare go against the grain and produce exclusively for PC, then scale down to console. Bethesda is still using the Gamebryo engine for Skyrim, anyway. They might've updated it to v2.0 and called it the Creation Engine; but it's still Console oriented. You can't take something that awful and suddenly make it wonderful short of black magic and witchcraft. If you want better graphics; Convince Bethesda to use a new engine for the series. And have fun with that argument. You have to remember; the lowest denominator here is the 360. It can only hold the contents of a single DVD, possibly two. That limits you to 7 - 14GB game size, compared to the 24GB you can pack onto a single Blu-Ray; You're going to loose something in translation for that little an amount of space. As much as I wish we could stop catering to those outdated machines; We don't have any real say. We can whine, we can complain, but then we just get "Custom features" like bindable keys and text chat.
It's not about a cutting edge PC game not running on a console... it will scale down to console level just as you can scale down for lower PC. All you do is adjust the graphic settings. DICE have said they want to put PC gaming back on the map and it looks like they're doing so. Already news of other games using frostbyte engine. Developers have no real excuse anymore because anyone can develop for PC, console and iPhone using EPIC's very nice Unreal engine. If more PC people complain and get angry instead of accepting what ever console drivel they are given then PC optimised games will start to emerge again. Not all games have to be cutting edge. Minecraft doesn't need it but a game like Skyrim does. All it takes is more people to get angry and refuse console garbage. It is shocking how fast those things age. It seemed like only yesterday the PS3 was released and now it's a dinosaur (albeit superior graphically to the eggs box). I am not so desperate a gamer that I will spend money on a blatant console port. At least with Crytek they made some effort with the release of the DX11 patch but even in DX9 it is years ahead of skywank graphically.
Agree. I'm not saying skyrim is a bad game, just don't agree with their choice of making it primarily console with no engine update.
