Why do people say Oblivion is the worst TES game? :: The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009) General Discussions

Store Page

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009)

All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos News Guides Reviews

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009) > General Discussions > Topic Details

deuceyd

has The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009)

Jun 27, 2018 @ 5:50pm

Why do people say Oblivion is the worst TES game?

Since we have new people coming in I just wanna elaborate a little bit, why do you think Oblivion is either the worst TES game or if you think its the best in the series say why you think so.

Last edited by deuceyd; Jul 2, 2018 @ 10:11pm

The author of this topic has marked a post as the answer to their question.
Click here to jump to that post.

Originally posted by IvantheFormidable:

While I recognize that no one really asked for this, and it's a bit of a read, which is an understatement, I'll admit, I thought I'd elaborate on my thoughts about a few quotes. (There is a highly condensed version at the very end, for those short on time)

Mitya: "Roleplaying is supposed to be manifested in-game and not just limited to your brain, well at least in my opinion and at least if a game is to be considered a proper RPG."

Before starting, I do just want to defend Mitya's position. It is absolutely reasonable for a player to want high-quality writing, and a game world that actually responds to the player choices in a significant way. To want roleplaying to be "manifested in-game" and not simply in the mind of the person playing the game.

Personally, I compartmentalize cRPGs into two general groups.

The first group is comprised of games where the player picks up a more or less predefined character, and experience that character's journey. To ground this thought, some examples would be the Mass Effect or the Witcher games. The player is more than able to create their own version of each character, and their versions can drastically change the outcome of a story. The character's motivations, however, tend to be better defined than the next group.

The second group includes games that attempt to create a very open-ended experience where the player makes their own character that is more or less thrown into the game world without any fanfare. Prime examples of this design are TES III - V.

When given a game that fits into the second category, I see two options. The first is to choose to play the character as a blank slate where the only character motivations mirror those of the player. And there's nothing wrong with that, but often these folks are the "one and done" playthrough sorts of players. The second option, is for the player to consciously create a character with a unique background and motivations. And this is what I tend to opt for, as I often will make an outline (even have a word doc for it) of the character before I boot the game up. That way, I have something concrete to refer to. At the most basic level, it's putting the character's motivations first. And this is what, for me, can lead to unique playthroughs even in a game like Skyrim, where I might do the same quest over multiple playthroughs, but it seems exciting and different because each character approaches the issue from a different perspective. And this is where that roleplaying that might be all in my head enters into the game world, informing the character's actions.

And this, I think, is where some folks would look at my previous paragraph and think "wow, it sounds like you make things up to have fun in the game". And I can see their point, and even agree to an extent. But these self-created stories, in my view, are where Bethesda RPGs thrive. It's a sandbox.

And this transitions to my next point, which I'll start with this fantastic quote from Etain the She-Wolf:

"This REALLY puts things into perspective, in my opinion, of the different approaches to these games. I know many people who bought Skyrim, played it for forty or so hours straight, "beat" it, and then shelve it. I also know many people who are still playing Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim to this day with different playstyles and can't even comprehend the concept of "beating" it. "

Ever since Oblivion came out, and even more so with Skyrim, there has been an argument that the games have been dumbed down in order to generate a more mass appeal, which isn't incorrect, but one subsection of this argument is that the player can often finish nearly every quest in the game on a single playthrough. And this, I think, corresponds with Etain's experiences with people who play Oblivion or Skyrim with a single save, beat it by doing every quest they lay their eyes on, and then shelve the game. Again, I feel that I should say, there is nothing wrong with doing that. It's completely valid.

And this idea brings me to Deucey d's quote:

"Ivan repost that Rule Vs Role playing thing"

I cannot claim the rule vs role playing dichotomy is my own idea, as it was expounded in an article about roleplaying in Skyrim that I read years ago. In order to avoid unnecessary confusion, when I use the terms "role player" and "rule player" with a space between the two words, I am only refering to this very specific context, and I do not make any claim that either "role players" or "rule players" are superior, or that people that support one side or the other are wrong.

To distill the essence of the argument, it's that rule players are very focused, and happy, when the game's mechanics and rules restrict or allow certain things to work. For example, a rigid class system. Rule players thrive when these conditions are imposed by the game itself, but often struggle in their absence. Folks that fit this category, as an example, include people that will lament the fact that you can complete the questline for every single guild in Oblivion and Skyrim in a single playthrough, or that a non magic user can become the Arch-Mage. And I absolutely agree, it is extremely odd when the character is simultaneous the head of every major guild in the game's province.

However, on the other side, a role player might respond that there is no reason for the character to become the head of every guild. After all, in the mind of a role player, the only reason that a non-magic user become the Arch-Mage is because the player decided that their non-magic character should become the Arch-Mage. A role player, unlike a rule player, often thrives when restrictions are lifted from the player, and allow the player vast freedom in defining their character. Rather than relying on the game's rules, they construct their own rules. To make the game experience more enjoyable for themselves, they might add artificial constraints, but that they feel fall in line with the character.

To recycle my example from way earlier in this thread, one of my Skyrim characters thought that stripping the dead of their armor or clothes was disrespectful and distasteful. So when playing, I wouldn't take a fallen foe's armor or clothing, even if it was clearly the easier option at times. And this, in part, is why role players tend to enjoy and spend a lot of time with games like Oblivion and Skyrim. In contrast, rule player would typically complete the game and then move on, and look at those still playing the games with some confusion, given the lack of replayability in their eyes.

And the response to this whole rule and role players discussion, is of course the essence of the idea that Mitya brought up. Aren't we simply inventing and creating due to the game's own flaws and failures? To an extent, we are. The lack of real choices in later TES games means that the player often has a binary choice, either do the quest, or don't do the quest. And I think that branching quest paths and endings, especially guild questlines, are something that the Oblivion and Skyrim both sorely lack. I would personally love for more quests, as well as the ability to take a path where someone else becomes the head of the guild at the end of the story, or even that the guild leader remains the same. And I think that's a fairly widespread desire. Within 4 months of Skyrim being released, there was a mod that made Tolfdir the arch-mage instead of the player's character, which to date has over 30,000 downloads. And that's just one of several mods that do the same thing.

Oblivion and Skyrim had and have such expansive modding communities because the players that went into modding realised the vast and relatively untapped potential of the games. And they did so much with the mods that I can only hope that Bethesda learns from them.

To conclude, I think that while some, like myself, might have a lot of fun telling stories within the universe of TES, there are others that play the game through once and declare that they have beaten the game. I'm not going to assert that my view is correct and that their view is incorrect, but it seems that a fundamental difference divides those who complete Oblivion one time and see everything, and those that are still around playing it over a decade later. All this being said, I think that everyone can agree that just because we may greatly enjoy a game doesn't mean that the game doesn't have flaws, or that the formula cannot be improved. Bethesda can, and should, always strive for superior writing and quest design, as well as creating a vast and interesting world for the player to explore.

Short Version: I think that games that have the player take control of a character with virtually no background provide a rich opportunity for the player to tell a unique story, regardless of the limitations with the game's actual writing, and these stories are what draw me back to TES games time and time again. Is the player essentially inventing things and using their own imagination to supplement the game world? Absolutely, but that freedom to tell stories is fantastic, and that's where games like Oblivion and Skyrim shine, at least for me.

However, the lack of choices in latter TES games, typically resulting in a series of binary choices of either "do the quest" or "don't do the quest" is something that I think everyone can point to as needing change. Branching quest lines, as well as mutually exclusive decisions, in my eyes, are essential to the future of the series, as they will satisfy players of both the rule and role category.

< >

Showing 121-135 of 388 comments

deuceyd

Jul 2, 2018 @ 3:58pm

I can go ahead and tell you brother, he is not going to read all that. Look back in this thread and see how he basically ignores any long post because he thinks it might not be in his favor or disproves something he has said...

#121

IvantheFormidable has The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009)

Jul 2, 2018 @ 4:00pm

Originally posted by deucey d:
I can go ahead and tell you brother, he is not going to read all that. Look back in this thread and see how he basically ignores any long post because he thinks it might not be in his favor or disproves something he has said...

Regardless, I feel obliged to express my opinion as best I can. Whether or not anyone wants to listen, that's up to them. And the story that takes up most of the post is more of a general observation about my experience with TES games, rather than a rebuttal of some sort.

#122

deuceyd

Jul 2, 2018 @ 4:06pm

I don't think its because of a lack of self control or discipline but I really do like the old attribute system better than Skyrim's perk system, also the whole "rule" vs. "role" thing sounds like something out of a psychology textbook, really interesting to be honest. Maybe you can tell what type of person someone is by which they prefer or etc.

"I'd simply like for my character to have some input on the main and faction stories. "

One of the reasons I prefer Morrowind as a better RPG, you had an actual impact on the world.

Last edited by deuceyd; Jul 2, 2018 @ 4:09pm

#123

IvantheFormidable has The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009)

Jul 2, 2018 @ 4:13pm

Originally posted by deucey d:
I don't think its because of a lack of self control or discipline but I really do like the old attribute system better than Skyrim's perk system, also the whole "rule" vs. "role" thing sounds like something out of a psychology textbook, really interesting to be honest. Maybe you can tell what type of person someone is by which they prefer or etc.

See, I understand where you're coming from, and that's why I was really careful to avoid using any words like discipline or self control, because I think that comes off as condesending to the folks that prefer the "rule" system, which I didn't mean to. I simply wanted to explain, in a very long paragraph, why the removal of that system didn't bother some players, but seemed to be a hotbutton issue for others.

All that being said, I like the idea of a class system and attributes, and have used mods before to add those into Skyrim, but the meta-gaming that attribute increases encouraged in Oblivion didn't sit well with me. Skyrim had a more "natural", for lack of a better word, approach to increasing in skills/attributes, and I overall think the switch to a perk system was a good idea (although most of those vanilla perk trees, yikes). Maybe it's just me.

#124

Kieldoozer has The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009)

Jul 2, 2018 @ 4:25pm

lol

#125

deuceyd

Jul 2, 2018 @ 4:26pm

I can see where you are coming from. especially about the metagaming aspect. For example a lot of Morrowind players take endurance early on to try and get the most HP out of it before its gone. I don't entirely think the switch to a perk system was a bad thing, but I think that like radiant ai they coulda improved upon a lot of it. A lot of perks are pretty whack imo and the first ones in one handed/two handed that give the 20% damage increase per level (and other skills) seem lazy to me.

Originally posted by LT1Z:
lol

lol

#126

BondageSpider has The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009)

Jul 2, 2018 @ 4:50pm

Originally posted by deucey d:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RuZczsQGCw

I'm glad you want an honest exchange of opinions, and that you're calling everyone else a troll.

Dude, we've been helping you argue with yourself for a week and you're still craving validation.

Just let it go.

#127

deuceyd

Jul 2, 2018 @ 5:10pm

If I let it go, all is lost. Not really, however maybe I was in the wrong for calling (one guy) a troll, so instead I will repeat and put extra emphasis on a previous statement:

Im able to post this just as much as you are able to ignore it, which would be the recommended course of action if you truly thought it was a troll post. Ever heard of "don't feed the trolls"?

#128

Melkor

Jul 2, 2018 @ 6:04pm

OBLIVION is definetly the best elder's scrolls yet

#129

deuceyd

Jul 2, 2018 @ 6:16pm

Why?

#130

Johnny Silverhand has The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009)

Jul 2, 2018 @ 8:43pm

Bought the disk version of it in 2006 and still playing so yeah it's not your normal game as long as you feel like doing a little modding here and there. Yeah it seems kind of open and empty at times but that means less chance of extra clutter getting in the way of building things.

#131

Count Von Count has The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Game of the Year Edition (2009)

Jul 2, 2018 @ 8:53pm

Originally posted by IvantheFormidable:
But ultimately, the problem that I have with Oblivion and Skyrim both, is that there is a real lack of choices that influence how the game turns out, as a whole. I'm firmly of the belief that in the case of Oblivion and Skyrim, their main quests are actually the weakest part. Despite putting hundreds of hours into the games, I've only ever beat the main story in Oblivion once, and the main story in Skyrim twice. I find the stories that I can weave through interaction with the rest of the world to be much more entertaining and interesting than the one adventure with a preset outcome they defined for my character. I'd simply like for my character to have some input on the main and faction stories.

Overall, were I to condense my thoughts above, I'd say that I think that Bethesda are masters of world and lore creation. They give me a fascinating set to experience. But their writing and the quests in most TES games leave something to be desired. But the TES experience, for me, is something far more involved and personal than simply playing the linear faction and main quests that they provide, and I think that is something very special that not a lot of computer RPGs are able to achieve.

I read your comment, and I’d like to point out (in relation to the comment I kept) that in Oblivion you were the Hero of Kvatch. That’s all. You aren’t an important guy, then you do something important and you help in the quest. But if you look at your characters role in the world, you aren’t a maker of decisions, just a follower of them. And I think this makes sense, it justifies why you are asked to do everything, and why the plot does not rest on what you decide to do. You are the player character, but Martin is the main character of the MQ.

By contrast, in Skyrim you should have had more decisions in the quest due to your vaunted status as the Dragonborn. You could probably claim the throne of the Emperor for crying out loud...

And faction quests are also somewhat different, as you aren’t necessarily important, but they are case by case

#132

Ankou

Jul 2, 2018 @ 8:57pm

I'm not going to quote IvantheFormidable's entire post but I thought that was rather interesting.

Role playing in the Elder Scrolls has always been about doing the things your character would and avoiding the ones they wouldn't. Since alternative quest paths are limited in Morrowind and non-existent in Oblivion/Skyrim doing or not doing are pretty much the choices.

Given that, maybe some people felt numbers were an additional way to connect with their character?

I'm aware I'm in a minority but I actually don't mind the combat in Morrowind being numbers based because it was another link to your character. It represented their skill rather than ours (and I certainly preferred the dice rolls and complete lack of physics to Oblivion's weightlessly wiping your sword across a damage sponge.)

Maybe because of Oblivion's combat and aggressively over-implemented leveled lists but even in my original playthrough I remember feeling like stats didn't matter. After a nearly decade long shelving and revisiting it now if feels like it has stats because Morrowind had stats and they didn't want to gut too much out of it.
With everything leveled to the player, seemingly even lock levels and disposition checks or maybe that's OOO, it feels like Oblivion wants to have a static player.

I was one of the people who initially didn't like the idea of no stats in Skyrim. At the time I wanted to see a return to stats mattering but I actually do like the perk system as much as Morrowind's stats and more than whatever they were trying to achieve with Oblivion. (As a concept, the actual vanilla perks are very underwhelming but the system isn't a bad idea.)

And is it just me or do many of the "Oblivion is be best ever!" arguments hinge on things that are blatantly untrue?

I really do think Oblivion did some things better than other TES games but the "mortal" hero, varied environment, potential for role play, number/quality dungeons, gameplay mechanics (vs. Skyrim,) and main quest (vs Morrowind) all feel like things that are false or just objectively worse in Oblivion.

#133

deuceyd

Jul 2, 2018 @ 9:49pm

Originally posted by Ankou:
I'm not going to quote IvantheFormidable's entire post but I thought that was rather interesting.

Role playing in the Elder Scrolls has always been about doing the things your character would and avoiding the ones they wouldn't. Since alternative quest paths are limited in Morrowind and non-existent in Oblivion/Skyrim doing or not doing are pretty much the choices.

Given that, maybe some people felt numbers were an additional way to connect with their character?

I'm aware I'm in a minority but I actually don't mind the combat in Morrowind being numbers based because it was another link to your character. It represented their skill rather than ours (and I certainly preferred the dice rolls and complete lack of physics to Oblivion's weightlessly wiping your sword across a damage sponge.)

Maybe because of Oblivion's combat and aggressively over-implemented leveled lists but even in my original playthrough I remember feeling like stats didn't matter. After a nearly decade long shelving and revisiting it now if feels like it has stats because Morrowind had stats and they didn't want to gut too much out of it.
With everything leveled to the player, seemingly even lock levels and disposition checks or maybe that's OOO, it feels like Oblivion wants to have a static player.

I was one of the people who initially didn't like the idea of no stats in Skyrim. At the time I wanted to see a return to stats mattering but I actually do like the perk system as much as Morrowind's stats and more than whatever they were trying to achieve with Oblivion. (As a concept, the actual vanilla perks are very underwhelming but the system isn't a bad idea.)

And is it just me or do many of the "Oblivion is be best ever!" arguments hinge on things that are blatantly untrue?

I really do think Oblivion did some things better than other TES games but the "mortal" hero, varied environment, potential for role play, number/quality dungeons, gameplay mechanics (vs. Skyrim,) and main quest (vs Morrowind) all feel like things that are false or just objectively worse in Oblivion.

I actually liked the combat in Morrowind, but I can also understand why people wouldn't. The fact it relied on your characters skills makes for interesting playthroughs testing different builds and such. Another thing people don't realize (but they would if they actually played) is that you get to a point to where the diceroll mechanic becomes irrelevant because you land every hit.

Oblivions level scaling and damage sponge enemies are terrible. Simple as that. If I had to pick between missing a hit or two on an enemy (which once again, becomes irrelevant easily) and swinging a sword at an ogre a thousand times I'd go with the door #1. On release I didn't think about it much, coming from Morrowind I liked the stat system in Oblivion but after coming back from Skyrim I also wondered why it was even there. Hell why was leveling there, if every bandit and mudcrab were your equal. No real sense of growth :/ I do think Oblivion had some of the coolest looking enemies though.

I do hope for the return of stats in TES 6 but I highly doubt it, I'd be happy if they improve upon the perk system in Skyrim though. Some perks were just downright lazy others were pretty dumb.

"And is it just me or do many of the "Oblivion is be best ever!" arguments hinge on things that are blatantly untrue?

I really do think Oblivion did some things better than other TES games but the "mortal" hero, varied environment, potential for role play, number/quality dungeons, gameplay mechanics (vs. Skyrim,) and main quest (vs Morrowind) all feel like things that are false or just objectively worse in Oblivion."

100% agree

#134

deuceyd

Jul 2, 2018 @ 10:04pm

Originally posted by The Serpent:
Whoever says Oblivion is the worst TES game needs to be exiled from this planet.

It's the best TES game, and as someone who started with Morrowind, I still think Oblivion did it better.

Originally posted by solidap:
They're trying to get internet cred by ♥♥♥♥ talking a game they never played before while praising another game they've never played before.

Oblivion is one of the best RPGs of all time

Originally posted by criminal scum:
Morrowind was fun, but the combat wasn't that fun
Oblivion was the best imo
Skyrim was okay, but it was way different from the other 2

I think this one is the most compelling argument yet ^^^

Originally posted by Carnifex665:
Oblivion is awesome. Although Morrowind is still my fav and my first Tes game when I was 14. The problem everyone has with morrowond is exactly why I loved it. Based on skill level. Not to mention levitation, mark and recall, almsivi and divine intervention, awesome travel system as opposed to click a town and fast travel like everything now. People hate on Oblivion because of the enemy scaling. But yet again... that's why I loved it. They are all great. ♥♥♥♥ the haters.

I think loving enemy scaling in oblivion is a smaller minority than people that prefer Morrowinds combat lol