User blog comment:Draevan13/The streamlining of the Elder Scrolls series, and some Skyrim flaws./@comment-1600847-20121113165034/@comment-5135631-20121113231419

To a point I agree, specifically with the first paragraph. Skyrim made a great first impression on me, and matched RDR in my eyes, perhaps the best non-FPS I've ever played.

Halo 4 is a good example of fixing stuff; there wasn't much too fix as Bungies games were the best in the FPS industry IMO, but any obvious positive change to the multiplayer were made and now the only thing I find wrong with it in multiplayer is the fact that you can't see how many times you died until the end of the game, which is such a small complaint it might as well not exist. Everything else is completely fair. (sidenote: the campaign/story is brilliant too, though subtlety seems to be lost on game developers; they marketed the story as more cinematic, but a film has more subtlety, but in terms of gameplay and an exhilirating, though somewhat Metal Gear Solid-esque ending (ie slightly, slightly, slightly cheesy to anyone without prior knowledge of the series) you can't beat it. It was the only game I found myself clapping at once I'd finished the story. I'd definetly recommend it if you haven't picked it up already, though do your homework on Halo first.)

The trouble is Skyrim was marketed not as an RPG but as an open-world combat game. Thus many gamers who are new to the series don't tend to moan about magic etc because they've never experienced it before. Personally Skyrim is the closest game I've found to an actual medieval battle that's fun to play. It is fun to play, very.