For those of you who played both Skyrim and this.....

[Phitt]

I think Skyrim and generally Elder Scrolls games have two major problems. The lack of any challenge at all due to thoughtless implementation of game mechanics and the randomization of the world. If I can defeat even the strongest enemy with a level 1 character there is no point in leveling up. Why even have RPG mechanics with levels and better equipment if you don't need it? And how can a game be fun that lacks any challenge? Then the randomization. No matter where you go you will always find the same randomly determined enemies and loot. There is no point in exploring the world and its dungeons if it doesn't matter where you go. Apart from different visuals it's all the same.

Other problems include the leveling system - if your character levels up enemies and loot also level up. Another game mechanic that makes the RPG game mechanics useless. It's pointless to level up and find better loot if every time you do your enemies become stronger as well. Actually it's quite idiotic when you think about it. You implement one game mechanic and make it useless it with another game mechanic.

The lack of puzzles and the mediocre quest writing don't help either. The few puzzles you can find are not even worth being called a 'puzzle'. A 5 year old child could solve them and that is no exaggeration. Some of the quests are pretty nice, but especially the main quest(s) are as unimaginative as a quest can be. Evil villain wants to destroy the world, you are the chosen one, go kill him.

The one thing that is great about ES games is the huge, detailed world. But after you've seen all the different environment and dungeon settings there is really no point in playing the game anymore.

It's the type of game I really want to like, but no matter how hard I try I simply can't. All I'm left with after playing Skyrim is the dream of what it could have been with challenging gameplay, a static world without randomization, no level scaling, nice puzzles and good quest writing.

Grimrock is short and small compared to Skyrim, but it is actually fun to play.

[gasgas]

Yes I agree, it often happens that skyrim drags me back in when I watch some cool screenshots that let my imagination go free, even the new dawnguard thingy inspired me to pick up the game once again, but sadly as expected it turned out to be the same uninspired game it has been since it was first released. It's just eye-candy tough.

I've recently completed dark messiah of might and magic a game from 2006 and couldn't resit comparing the two combat systems, and when 6 years aren't enough to teach bethesda a lesson in gameplay, there is little hope left. If only the gameplay and combat was as enjoyable as dark messiah I could give skyrim a go.

Grimrock did it right, it kept things simple and it was a great dungeon experience. I am waiting for a sequel.

[Isaac]

But.....for some oddball reason, I'm finding myself more addicted to Grimrock than I ever did for Skyrim.

Why is that?

At its core essence... it is the restrictions. (This is an overly simplified explanation).
Skyrim is servile by design ~this is the point of the game. LoG is 'are you sharp enough?' and 'can you make it all the way?'... Let's see.

[Eleas]

Skyrim is servile by design ~this is the point of the game.

^ This.

Legend of Grimrock is, to my mind, a much tighter game than Skyrim. It knows exactly what it sets out to do; everything in Grimrock exists to further that specific idea and take it as far as it can. This is made possible because Grimrock is a niche title. Calling Skyrim "servile" is fair because in many ways it's the polar opposite of Legend of Grimrock.

When looked at critically, Skyrim is both accessible and generic. That's by design. It's intended to appeal to as broad a spectrum of potential buyers as it possibly can. The challenge level in Grimrock is at odds with that ambition because true challenges mean a risk of failure, of getting stuck somewhere. Most casual gamers want to be entertained with action, but they don't really seem to enjoy puzzles unless the puzzles are explicit and/or tightly defined.

Come to think of it, we can see proof of this in earlier Elder Scrolls title. The differences between Morrowind and Oblivion are significant: in Morrowind, you were asked to play your role in a slowly unfolding story that was quite intricate. You were given rough directions, oblique hints, political factions, text that you had to understand, all in order to battle an enemy whose motivation earned him at least a bit of sympathy. The world was bleak, but beautiful in its own way, and before you knew it, pestilent Vvardenfell had gone from a prison into becoming your home.

Looking at all these things and then at what they changed for Oblivion, I can only surmise one thing: the general public hated most of what I just described. I feel it's a crying shame, but then again I'm not the one tallying the sales. When you want to reliably sell a product to everyone, it pays not to make it too different.