User blog comment:SaintOfAwesomeness/Should I Get 'Oblivion'?/@comment-5046408-20130218231904/@comment-4113369-20130224114528

@Mazekiel

Every Elder Scrolls main character is "marked by fate" in a way, and in another way none of them are. They're heroes (which is essentially a way of working the player's choices and overpowered stats into the lore). You are different, that's always the case. And don't forget the Emperor's vision at the start of Oblivion: s/he was definitely prophesised. In Morrowind you have to work for the title of Nerevarine by the way, it's in no way handed to you (Or, well, the emperor thinks you're the nerevarine, but that's about it). People don't start respecting you for being the Nerevarine until you've practially finished the main quest. Finally, you can stably be in all four guilds. Fame/Infamy hardly matters at all. In fact, you can become leader of all the guilds, even if your character doesn't fit in there. A warrior as archmage? Fully possible: the only spells you require to finish the Mages Guild questline are very basic ones, and in an emergency scrolls have your back. There are no skill requirements whatsoever.

@Draevan13

Because "generic western fantasy" is a bad change, actually. When you factor in that the entire landscape was procedurally generated, you get a game where it's very boring to just explore. Change can be good. I'd give you the changes Skyrim made after Oblivion as an example, but if Oblivion's your favourite I guess that won't be suitable...?

It's not a bad game, by any means. I'm sure there are some (*cough*me*cough*) who are a bit too critical of Oblivion, but on the other hand there are also people who really need to take off their rose-tinted shades, because Oblivion has its faults. If you really like a game, I think you should be able do so despite its flaws, not while ignoring them. Those are my two cents, anyways.