Skyrim wasn't a GOTY?

[Vito]

Every bethesda game so far that recieved the Game of the Year Award, was later released with all the DLCs and the GOTY title on it, Morrowind, Oblivion and Fallout 3. But Skyrim got a "legendary" edition instead, similiar to Two World II who released a "Velvet" edition, since they didn't get a GOTY award.

So Skyrim wasn't a game of the year, or they just thought "LEGENDARY" sounds better than GOTY? I just hope it didn't lose to modern warfare...

[bra1n1ac]

I hope so too. Few games deserve it less than the mindless shooters the AAA companies keep cranking out.

Still, I think trying to turn TES into an action game was a recipe for disaster from the start, and I hope Bethesda learns their lesson and starts to work on re-complicating the series if they have any future installments planned.

[Gus the Crocodile]

There's so many different publications out there that Game of the Year (with no extra information like "according to who?") doesn't really mean anything anyway, does it? It would just mean "someone, somewhere, thought this was game of the year", which is going to be true of pretty much any game you care to name.

[Brandybuck]

Action game? WTF? Skyrim is not an action game.

[bra1n1ac]

Brandybuck님이 먼저 게시:

Action game? WTF? Skyrim is not an action game.

Sure it was. What else would it be?

It's certainly not an RPG, because "RPG" stands for "Role-Playing Game" as in "you pick a role, and play that role to the end, accepting its advantages and limitations." Nothing of the sort is present in Skyrim, because no choice that you make in character creation, or in leveling has any permanent consequences whatsoever.

Even the birthsigns are no longer permanent.

[Amycus]

bra1n1ac님이 먼저 게시:

Brandybuck님이 먼저 게시:

Action game? WTF? Skyrim is not an action game.

Sure it was. What else would it be?

It's certainly not an RPG, because "RPG" stands for "Role-Playing Game" as in "you pick a role, and play that role to the end, accepting its advantages and limitations." Nothing of the sort is present in Skyrim, because no choice that you make in character creation, or in leveling has any permanent consequences whatsoever.

Even the birthsigns are no longer permanent.

Let's try to not make this into another "what actually makes a game an RPG?", please. With that said, I do think that Skyrim was very strong in the action department, but a bit shallow on the RPG side, and I too hope that they try to bring back many of the RPG mechanics from the earlier games in the series.

[MoonRhae]

Skyrim lost game of the year to minecraft that year.

[Biff]

It is an RPG; you pick a race, you choose how you want to level up; various skills and such. You choose how you want to play the game.

[bra1n1ac]

riffahlc175님이 먼저 게시:

It is an RPG; you pick a race, you choose how you want to level up; various skills and such. You choose how you want to play the game.

Sure you pick a race, but it's mainly cosmetic. There are no inherent advantages that makes one race clumsy when played as a certain type of character, by relation to the others.

Sure, you pick which skills to level, but when it's level up time, is ultimately doesn't matter which skills you picked. You still get the same ten stat points and 1 skill point to distribute wherever you wish. In other words, you can get a bunch of smithing level-ups and pour them into magic points. The heck?

[Spieler]

It`s an Fantasy RPG for me. It may don`t have a lot of RPG dialog options like in Oblivion, but still a great game and people even play it in the year 2013 ?

Skyrim is GOTY for me, even if there`s no ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ sign of it. I don`t give a ♥♥♥♥ of Game awards, I play what I like

[Gus the Crocodile]

bra1n1ac님이 먼저 게시:

You still get the same ten stat points and 1 skill point to distribute wherever you wish. In other words, you can get a bunch of smithing level-ups and pour them into magic points. The heck?

You can also get a bunch of swordsmanship points using one-hand+shield and pour them into dual-wielding. So what?

Is your contention that the only games that are allowed to be called RPGs are ones where the player character only gets better at things they've directly done, and only in proportion to the "amount" they've done them? Because I think that probably leaves about three RPGs in the entire world.

Leveling up is not intended to be an accurate simulation of real-world learning, in practically any game.

[Stoob]

No video game is a true RPG, you are only able to do that which the engine allows. Get the dice and pencils out for a real RPG. Within the context of gaming, it's churlish to say Skyrim isn't an RPG.

[bra1n1ac]

Gus the Crocodile님이 먼저 게시:

bra1n1ac님이 먼저 게시:

You still get the same ten stat points and 1 skill point to distribute wherever you wish. In other words, you can get a bunch of smithing level-ups and pour them into magic points. The heck?

You can also get a bunch of swordsmanship points using one-hand+shield and pour them into dual-wielding. So what?

Is your contention that the only games that are allowed to be called RPGs are ones where the player character only gets better at things they've directly done, and only in proportion to the "amount" they've done them? Because I think that probably leaves about three RPGs in the entire world.

Leveling up is not intended to be an accurate simulation of real-world learning, in practically any game.

No, my contention is that unless you choose a "role" at the beginning, and then are penalized if you try to play outside that "role," in no sense can it be called a "role-playing" game.

[bra1n1ac]

Stoob님이 먼저 게시:

No video game is a true RPG, you are only able to do that which the engine allows. Get the dice and pencils out for a real RPG. Within the context of gaming, it's churlish to say Skyrim isn't an RPG.

Maybe, but it's not -false.-

Now, look at the first "Final Fantasy." You picked roles (warrior, black mage, white mage, thief, etc...) and those roles largely control how the characters level for the remainder of the game, as well as how they should be played. The same can be said of a hundred other video games; Phantasy Star, Dragon Quest, Quest For Glory, Ultima, Shining Force, etc... Even Morrowind and Oblivion, as I said, had permanent classes and birthsigns which effected, on some level, the way your character played clear through to the end of the game.

In Skyrim, every consequence to your choices has been amputated. Therefore, there are no more "roles." Therefore, it is not a "role-playing game." Simple.

[19wulf80]

And in the ROLE of Dovahkin, you the PLAYER.

[bra1n1ac]

19wulf80님이 먼저 게시:

And in the ROLE of Dovahkin, you the PLAYER.

Right. There's only one "role" in the game, if you can call it that, so you'd have just as much luck classifying Pac-man, or Sonic the Hedgehog as RPGs as Skyrim on this basis.

You're also right to stress the role of the player. In fact, it's the abilities of the -player- that matter in Skyrim, -not- the abilities of the role. As long as this is the case, what we're talking about is clearly not "role playing."