Besides attacking one town which is one of two appearances in the game what is he doing that makes me want to go out of my way to stop him? For being the head bad guy in the game he doesn't have all that many reasons for why the player should stop him. The only thing we're being told is that he's the "World Eater" but he isn't doing anything to live up to that name. Hell you don't hear about any areas that are not in the game but are lore wise being attacked by him. He goes off after that attack and is not seen again until you fight him.

Because he's waking the dragons, and the last time that happened the world was in peril.

And we don't get that feeling because, as everyone previously agreed, Bethesda sucks at writing.

I'm not sure if it's the writing so much as Skyrim being a static world and nothing bad would ever actually come of ignoring the story and not being a hero.

Very early on in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, the player character is called in to resolve a hostage crisis. His boss tells him that he needs to leave in like 15 minutes or bad things might start happening. If you take too long to leave, you'll find out that the hostages were killed.

Nothing like that would ever happen in Skyrim, because the game doesn't care to be that ambitious.

Quote from: Kupo on February 05, 2015, 08:01:43 AM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 07:38:00 AM

Because he's waking the dragons, and the last time that happened the world was in peril.

And we don't get that feeling because, as everyone previously agreed, Bethesda sucks at writing.

I'm not sure if it's the writing so much as Skyrim being a static world and nothing bad would ever actually come of ignoring the story and not being a hero.

Very early on in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, the player character is called in to resolve a hostage crisis. His boss tells him that he needs to leave in like 15 minutes or bad things might start happening. If you take too long to leave, you'll find out that the hostages were killed.

Nothing like that would ever happen in Skyrim, because the game doesn't care to be that ambitious.

Even in games where nothing will happen when you dilly-daddle, they can still create the illusion of pressure. You just never get that feeling in Skyrim because the writing isn't good enough to provoke that feeling.

Writing doesn't go far enough. Any game can try to do that, but there needs to be tangible consequences, or else it doesn't mean anything.

You're not wrong about the writing, though >.> just, the gameplay could use a step up, too.

And yet.. the population of people playing Skyrim right now, on Steam, is 25,000.. I've seen it as high as 50,000.. Pretty impressive for such an old game.

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 08:06:45 AM

Quote from: Kupo on February 05, 2015, 08:01:43 AM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 07:38:00 AM

Because he's waking the dragons, and the last time that happened the world was in peril.

And we don't get that feeling because, as everyone previously agreed, Bethesda sucks at writing.

I'm not sure if it's the writing so much as Skyrim being a static world and nothing bad would ever actually come of ignoring the story and not being a hero.

Very early on in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, the player character is called in to resolve a hostage crisis. His boss tells him that he needs to leave in like 15 minutes or bad things might start happening. If you take too long to leave, you'll find out that the hostages were killed.

Nothing like that would ever happen in Skyrim, because the game doesn't care to be that ambitious.

Even in games where nothing will happen when you dilly-daddle, they can still create the illusion of pressure. You just never get that feeling in Skyrim because the writing isn't good enough to provoke that feeling.

Writing doesn't go far enough. Any game can try to do that, but there needs to be tangible consequences, or else it doesn't mean anything.

You're not wrong about the writing, though >.> just, the gameplay could use a step up, too.

Of course tangible consequences are a big part, but that doesn't mean the writing isn't also at fault for the lack of build and tension.

Quote from: Kupo on February 05, 2015, 08:08:45 AM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 08:06:45 AM

Quote from: Kupo on February 05, 2015, 08:01:43 AM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 07:38:00 AM

Because he's waking the dragons, and the last time that happened the world was in peril.

And we don't get that feeling because, as everyone previously agreed, Bethesda sucks at writing.

I'm not sure if it's the writing so much as Skyrim being a static world and nothing bad would ever actually come of ignoring the story and not being a hero.

Very early on in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, the player character is called in to resolve a hostage crisis. His boss tells him that he needs to leave in like 15 minutes or bad things might start happening. If you take too long to leave, you'll find out that the hostages were killed.

Nothing like that would ever happen in Skyrim, because the game doesn't care to be that ambitious.

Even in games where nothing will happen when you dilly-daddle, they can still create the illusion of pressure. You just never get that feeling in Skyrim because the writing isn't good enough to provoke that feeling.

Writing doesn't go far enough. Any game can try to do that, but there needs to be tangible consequences, or else it doesn't mean anything.

You're not wrong about the writing, though >.> just, the gameplay could use a step up, too.

Of course tangible consequences are a big part, but that doesn't mean the writing isn't also at fault for the lack of build and tension.

But the gameplay is more important here. Every game tries to create tension with the writing (ie: a "time limit" that doesn't actually exist), and the tension goes out the window once the gameplay doesn't hold up. Writing alone can only do so much, and is not the be-all and end-all of drama.

Skyrim's a shallow 'role-playing game' that doesn't bother to do justice to the writing >.>

And yet.. the population of people playing Skyrim right now, on Steam, is 25,000.. I've seen it as high as 50,000.. Pretty impressive for such an old game.

Sheeple will be sheeple.

I don't understand why people like that game.. It's so.. shit

Quote from: ChaosMetalDragon on February 05, 2015, 08:11:13 AM

Speaking of which...

Quote

So we all know that skyrim is all about killing dragons and becoming legend and shit...

Someone dig up that post from B.Net

somebody already did and posted it here.

Twice.

Quote from: Kupo on February 05, 2015, 08:01:43 AM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 07:38:00 AM

Because he's waking the dragons, and the last time that happened the world was in peril.

And we don't get that feeling because, as everyone previously agreed, Bethesda sucks at writing.

I'm not sure if it's the writing so much as Skyrim being a static world and nothing bad would ever actually come of ignoring the story and not being a hero.

Very early on in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, the player character is called in to resolve a hostage crisis. His boss tells him that he needs to leave in like 15 minutes or bad things might start happening. If you take too long to leave, you'll find out that the hostages were killed.

Nothing like that would ever happen in Skyrim, because the game doesn't care to be that ambitious.

Also the fact that in Skyrim you can stare into somebody's soul and not choose your option to talk, while in Deus Ex they actually ask why you aren't speaking.

They don't question you, no.
But after a couple of minutes they'll just walk away.

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 08:22:24 AM

Quote from: Kupo on February 05, 2015, 08:08:45 AM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 08:06:45 AM

Quote from: Kupo on February 05, 2015, 08:01:43 AM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on February 05, 2015, 07:38:00 AM

But the gameplay is more important here. Every game tries to create tension with the writing (ie: a "time limit" that doesn't actually exist), and the tension goes out the window once the gameplay doesn't hold up. Writing alone can only do so much, and is not the be-all and end-all of drama.

Skyrim's a shallow 'role-playing game' that doesn't bother to do justice to the writing >.>

I blame a lot of Skyrim's shortcomings on the fact that it was released on hardware that, at the time, was already six years old.  Sure that doesn't excuse Bethesda's bad writing, but I imagine that's the reason why we didn't have a civil war questline where you actually invade cities and have the chance to lose control of cities if you failed to defend them (ultimately resulting in you losing the entire war).  In fact, the mod that lets you do that is based on existing scripts and quests that were never used.  There's even dialogue files in the base game files for each city invasion.  The 360 and PS3 can't pull off large-scale battles or extremely complex enemy AI (at least not the battles and AI rendered in the extremely script-heavy Creation engine).

Time constraints and deadlines also played a part, I imagine.

Ma'iq wishes he knew why Alduin was a lame antagonist

But seriously, I had a better fight against a Dragon Priest and an Ancient Dragon on top of a mountain than I did with Alduin.

Speaking of which...

Quote

So we all know that skyrim is all about killing dragons and becoming legend and shit...

Someone dig up that post from B.Net

*dragins