No, I have no idea what you mean. Feel free to respond though :).


... Constructively

lvl 40+ something, with (still unenchanted) best handcrafted gear available, playing on adept (standard) difficulty.
I rarely use power attacks. Restoration almost exclusively after a fight, only in particularly long fights while kiting, as I haven't put one perkpoint into resto yet.
Can't confirm distance not being a viable option. It's what keeps me alive. For me and my setup: fighting a troll in early game means flames, kiting, maybe shieldbash, distance - everything else = suicide. Now late game a Chaurus Reaper will eat me alive toe to toe - distance makes the difference.

Yes, there is an indication on your ingame cursor / target if enemies getting aware of you. No it isn't done as good as in Thief. But which other game achieved that? None. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Agreeing on almost all of your points, except the taking ages to train part. My alteration is around lvl 50 with exclusively using the transmute spell on ores, nothing else. I know of a way to push conjuration up to 100 in about 1 and 1/2 hour.
You can claim imbalance about how much a spell pushes your skill bar up, but there are ways to push almost all magic schools.

Wow. That's... just wow.

I take my time to listen to people. Granted, a lot is just repeated standard chatter, but then again I dare to claim that no other game did that part better then Skyrim. Ever.

On the other hand, my map is full with locations I haven't visited, that a guard dropped a hint about bandits / hags / whatever having taken over or just a general warning about several people gone missing near place X.
I also wouldn't wanted to have missed this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYgOBvavpO0
Walking around in bad weather huh? Well I've seen the same place being a lush spring like view as well as being thick covered with snow.

Yes, these aren't new features never done before. But done better? More immersive? Sorry, you lost me completely here.

Going the blades way and kill a certain NPC or not, is a rather big decision. Joining the Dark Brotherhood may be cool, but the ability to actually fight, even to obliterate them.... yes, I'd call that a rather big decision.

No idea how others feel, but World of Warcraft was it for me, that defined the term "fetch quest". Less sophisticated then WoW quests? I think we played two different games here...

Fetch quests.... a term wildly abused way beyond it's actual meaning.... taking a world as huge as Skyrim is, you can't avoid putting "collect item to progress beyond point / door X" quests into it - however, those do not qualify as fetch quests (at least for me). If they do so for you, I could boil almost all quests from every game down to being a fetch quest. It's just how much story has been wrapped around it, to not show it off blatantly.... and yes, I see Skyrim doing an above average job here.
A fetch quest is for example, to collect 10 wolf pelts for the wounded hunter or milking 20 cows for the too-busy-to-do-on-his-own-farmer, to get a meager exp / item reward... and I haven't encoutered many "collect [x amount] of [y item]" quests and those I did found, you can skip / ignore anytime without losing anything or not being able to progress further.

For you final words / question.... I think you're trying to harness the horse the wrong way here. It's not about what part Skyrim did better then game X. It's about what Skyrim offers all together where game X just did 1 or 2 pieces.
The Thief series was all about stealth, AC series about assassination, Severance / Die By The Sword about combat. Did they had so many crafting options in it as Skyrim has? Such a huge world to explore? So many different enemies / dungeons / locations to visit / experience? So many weapons / items to pick up and interact? No? Well, that doesn't make them a lesser game experience, doesn't it?

If you're approaching Skyrim with expectations that stealth works like in Thief, assassination attempts like in AC, combat like in Die By The Sword, mounted combat like in Mount & Blade, crafting like in Vanguard.... and so on, yes, it WILL disappoint. But which games wouldn't? They all would.

I would like that the very same measuring tape being used to determine Skyrims quality, would be used on other games. Not just comparing the one part the other game was designed around and should be top notch if the game wants any chance of success. But that doesn't happen with critics about Skyrim. Or at least I haven't see it. Anywhere.

I won't replying inline as it will just get confusing.

Combat: strafing attacking and moving may work too, it's still uninvolved, and low on strategy / skill.

Stealth wise there is no indication of how visible you are, there is an indication of how noticed you are. This is very different. It's no use to discover then that they can see you, I'd like to know before hand. Also, my main gripe with stealth was that the maps weren't designed to allow stealth. It was the fact that there were 4 enemies, you could only kill 1, then it's toe to toe with the other 3. There was no silent kill.

Involvement in the plot. I guess that's each to their own. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Fetch Quests: No, there are no big decisions. Even in your stated example, you don't really change much. One faction stops talking to you, but they're not important anyway. It's just that I can't remember a quest that isn't go here, kill, get item (optional), return.

Mostly though, you seem to have made my point for me, or at least agreed with it. Skyrim offers all together where game X just did 1 or 2 pieces. It does, it's universally average. Trouble is that I don't want average, I want a good sneak em up, a good trading game, a good combat game. What's really annoying is that they exist, and to me skyrim just appears a lazy implementation of each bit, with the justification that you just gave. We do it all, so it's ok if it's all below standard. They could have done it all well. These aren't new concepts. Oblivion was looking rusty, Skyrim looks rusted.

Basic melee combat is precisely as you mentioned. As you invest perks and practice moving in different directions when powerattacking, you will find that there are many more options than there seems. You can even get around blocks by striking properly. Some of the more notable moves actually involve counter-attacking (I built my melee character entirely around defense and counterattacking) with a shield or weapon. Other options include staggers, dodge rolls, and bullet-time. You can disarm, paralyze, or decapitate at will, given enough practice. I'm afraid melee does look pretty bad until you've spent some time with it, though. (Another fun tip - if you equip a torch, hold block, and hit your weapon attack button, your character will strike with the torch. This will set your enemy on fire and counts as fire damage on trolls).

I would have said the same. Again, getting perks and learning the intricacies of stealth may change your mind. If you have some time, this series of tutorials teaches how to assassinate neatly with bow or blade. To sum up, you have stealth rolls, you can turn invisible, remove torches to make yourself sneakier, attack at night (the 'wait' function was basically made for thieves and assassins), use arrows to 'lead' unsuspecting targets where you want them to go, use a mid level illusion perk to cast spells silently (combined with TK, you can distract enemies with loose objects as in Splinter Cell), and you can learn a shout to throw your voice and distract enemies. Combine this with companions (You can actually order your companion into battle to distract opponents while you backstab) and the system is fairly sophisticated. Even lockpicking has been improved - for instance, did you know that heating the lock with a torch or flame spell will actually make it simpler?

I'll give you this one. Except for the occasional neat spell like the finally PROPERLY working Telekinesis, magic's very bland. Although Thu'ums are almost enough to make up for it, in my opinion.

No. That's not what atmosphere's about at all. It's not about combat, or spawn points, or graphics (good grief, Morrowind is still immersive and its graphics are terrible). Atmosphere is the feeling of being in a different, living, breathing world. NPC's having daily lives, running up to return items you dropped, taking out contracts on you if you annoy them, greeting you as a friend or snarling at you as an enemy, that's a big part of immersion. Lore is another part - Skyrim is as rich in lore as Morrowind, if not better. Try collecting books - I learned to hunt trolls and ice wraiths from books (Herbane's Bestiary, as I recall). I picked up a different book, went on a quest, and finished the quest based on hints gleaned from the supposedly fictional story within. Even watching the interplay between different factions (I had a Thalmor patrol team up with me to take down a dragon, after I had already attacked them) can be immersive.

Odd. I find the quest design rather immersive. Dungeon design is good, and all radiant quests are like the ones you mentioned, but storyline quests are diverse. Many of them have puzzles to solve to complete them. Important questlines have major decisions littered throughout - including one stunning decision at the end of the main storyline that led me to abandon a certain faction. It's not as varied as Fallout - there often are not multiple ways of completing objectives - but the only time I felt like I was doing repetitive tasks for no point was when I accepted radiant randomly generated quests (those things need to pay better, too - the pay's a joke).

I can actually answer that. Skyrim is the best at sandbox high fantasy combat role-playing. Gothic can't compete, and I doubt KoA: Reckoning will, either. The Fallout series has come the closest to matching it, and those aren't fantasy, so don't apply. Sure, if you point at specific things (combat, stealth, magic) you can say 'But look! This game does it better!' However, it is not a spurious argument to point out that Skyrim tried as best it could to recreate everything about a fantasy world. None of the games you mentioned bothered - they picked one thing, they did it well, or as well as they could, and the developers were done. Bethesda tried, and in most cases succeeded, to make a game that would engross the player for hundreds of hours and permit many permutations of playstyle.
That's purely unfair. There's nothing wrong with the implementation of anything you mentioned. It may not be the best you've ever seen, but to make the best system they could for everything they included in the game, they would have needed more manpower and many more years of development. If you want multiple perfect games rolled into one, you need multiple development cycles, and there are budget and publication date restraints. You have to put out a product to make money.

This seems to be touching a few nerves, so I will only reply to this last bit, then the last word is yours:

That's the game I hoped Skyrim would be! Every window was open, shedloads of cash from oblivion, plenty of time, they could have made it. As a developer I really resent people that squander such an opportunity, as it is rare.

Interestingly enough, I can't claim credit for that. I found the information in a guide to lockpicking I found behind a locked door in the Ratway. I thought it was just for immersion, but if you hold a torch in front of the lock (hold down block) and get close, the lock moves more smoothly and lockpicks last MUCH longer.

I don't think people are mad at you. I'm not, anyway. I think the fundamental difference of opinion lies in our expectations. I was praying that Skyrim wouldn't be another Oblivion, and instead it is better than Morrowind (my most beloved game of all time). To me, Skyrim is an overwhelming success. It sounds as if (correct me if I'm wrong) you wanted this to be the perfect fantasy simulator. If that's the case, I agree - Skyrim would be very underwhelming.

I can't help feeling sorry for you, though. I paid $60 for an amazing experience that consistently amazes and enthralls me. You paid $60 for a disappointing hackjob of lost potential.

Note: I apologize for double posting. I assumed they'd auto-merge, but I guess I typed for too long. Or that's bugged, a bit. Not sure which.

Not really touching my nerves. Just wondering why people seem to demand so much more out of a Bethesda game then from any other AAA title.

Yes and no. Perfection is only something you can try to go for. You can't reach it ever.
And Skyrim comes closer to that perfect fantasy simulator then every other game before (at least in my book). Does it has it's flaws and faults? No doubt about it. Could it have been done better? Sure. Did some other game come closer? Not that I can think off.

And what's likely to be the next best thing on that road to perfection in the next few years? Yep, a modded Skyrim.

Fix'd.

You can't fairly judge a game on what you wanted. You have to judge a game on what it is.

Well, mods fix what developers dont.. And skyrim mods are already happening without the creation kit :D like midas magic and phendarix magic - both must have, magic was so unappealing in skyrim...

No, you have to judge it on whether it is what you wanted. After all, you paid for it right? We're not talking about writing media reviews, it's a user review, in which the user compares what they hoped the game would be when they paid for it with what it turned out to be once they got it.

YES! thank you for saying that. It's unbelievable how many people have complained that e.g. Mass Effect 2 is no RPG. I couldn't care less about what a game is supposed to be, as long as it's fun.

And Skyrim (which I just started) is surely fun.

Aye. Fable: TLC isn't the epic RPG-to-end-all-RPG's that was promised, but if you go into it without any expectations like I did, it's actually quite a lot of fun.