Game Sack

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thief

Finally, something I can agree with. Or are you just messing with me. :p

---

I found PDS to be quite enjoyable, it's one of my favorite RPGs of that generation. The battle system was pretty unique and required you to constantly keep thinking about your position and strategy throughout the battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

No way! Xenoblade had zoned based exploration, while I could ride my horse across the whole map in Skyrim and every rock, tree and plant would be in its exact place every time. There was no random generated scenery, the characters weren't cartoony looking and neither was the surrounding areas. I'll take live combat over the worn out turn based system any day.

---

Xenoblade wasn't really zoned in the traditional sense. Yeah, there's loading breaks due to it being a Wii game, you can still explore the entire map from beginning to end on foot if you want. It's not like your typical instance based RPG where the different areas have no coherent connection between them. And each of those "zones" are huge with tons to explore and do. And Xenoblade's combat wasn't turn based either.

And the Sequel took everything great about the first one and significantly improved it, and the world this time was much bigger and was one seamless thing. It was far bigger than Skyrim's world too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Qfhg2FJgx8

So yeah, I stand by what I said when it handled exploration better and not being linear. I'm not saying Skyrim sucks or is a bad game, it's just not number 1 on my list. Especially if you don't include mods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

I found PDS to be quite enjoyable, it's one of my favorite RPGs of that generation. The battle system was pretty unique and required you to constantly keep thinking about your position and strategy throughout the battle.



Xenoblade wasn't really zoned in the traditional sense. Yeah, there's loading breaks due to it being a Wii game, you can still explore the entire map from beginning to end on foot if you want. It's not like your typical instance based RPG where the different areas have no coherent connection between them. And each of those "zones" are huge with tons to explore and do. And Xenoblade's combat wasn't turn based either.

And the Sequel took everything great about the first one and significantly improved it, and the world this time was much bigger and was one seamless thing. It was far bigger than Skyrim's world too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Qfhg2FJgx8

So yeah, I stand by what I said when it handled exploration better and not being linear. I'm not saying Skyrim sucks or is a bad game, it's just not number 1 on my list. Especially if you don't include mods.

---

That's a bit of an unfair comparison however. The density of "Stuff" in Skyrim is far more than in Xenoblade. X has a large surface world, but most everything is there out in the open. It may still be larger than skyrim, but for a fair side by side you'd have to "unpack" all the 100+ various dungeons and such in skyrim and place them all in the open world. Some of those dungeons were pretty damn big, but no idea how much total area all of them would add to the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EclecticGroove

That's a bit of an unfair comparison however. The density of "Stuff" in Skyrim is far more than in Xenoblade. X has a large surface world, but most everything is there out in the open. It may still be larger than skyrim, but for a fair side by side you'd have to "unpack" all the 100+ various dungeons and such in skyrim and place them all in the open world. Some of those dungeons were pretty damn big, but no idea how much total area all of them would add to the world.

---

Yeah! The collector's edition guide for Skyrim is 655 pages long. There is a massive amount of content within that game, and that was before the release of the expansion stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118

So yeah, I stand by what I said when it handled exploration better and not being linear. I'm not saying Skyrim sucks or is a bad game, it's just not number 1 on my list. Especially if you don't include mods.

---

Eh, Xenoblade Chroricles X still looked worse than Skyrim without mods. The simple blurred out textures of Chronicles X were still not on the level of the vanilla Skyrim, and Skyrim came out 4 years earlier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EclecticGroove

That's a bit of an unfair comparison however. The density of "Stuff" in Skyrim is far more than in Xenoblade. X has a large surface world, but most everything is there out in the open. It may still be larger than skyrim, but for a fair side by side you'd have to "unpack" all the 100+ various dungeons and such in skyrim and place them all in the open world. Some of those dungeons were pretty damn big, but no idea how much total area all of them would add to the world.

---

Even without that Xenoblade Chronicles X is far bigger. more than 10x as large even with all dungeons not even close. hell skyrim itself is smaller than oblivion. a game not named enough as that was a far larger rpg revolution upon release than skyrim and still holds well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

Eh, Xenoblade Chroricles X still looked worse than Skyrim without mods. The simple blurred out textures of Chronicles X were still not on the level of the vanilla Skyrim, and Skyrim came out 4 years earlier.

---

xenoblade x looks a ton better than skyrim. I can't even believe I'm reading this. I'm far from a nintendo fanboy but xenoblade x looks better than any openworld game I've seen on ps3 and 360.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thief

Finally, something I can agree with. Or are you just messing with me. :p

---

Nah Shining Force is great.

That and Fire Emblem are two RPGs that managed to make combat not play like a chapter menu on a movie. You actually have to think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bultje112

Even without that Xenoblade Chronicles X is far bigger. more than 10x as large even with all dungeons not even close. hell skyrim itself is smaller than oblivion. a game not named enough as that was a far larger rpg revolution upon release than skyrim and still holds well.

---

It's more than just the size of the map, and Oblivion was certainly not bigger than Skyrim. The PC version of Oblivion GOTY is only 4.5 GB, while Skyrim's files size is twice that of Oblivion at 9 GB.

Just look at how big the guide for Skyrim is, compared to Oblivion and Fallout 4. Skyrim has a massive amount of assets which include enemies, armor, weapons, varieties of foliage and textures. Then you have about a 3rd of the game in underground caves and dungeons.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d7...psptsfmwme.jpg

Quote:

---

xenoblade x looks a ton better than skyrim. I can't even believe I'm reading this. I'm far from a nintendo fanboy but xenoblade x looks better than any openworld game I've seen on ps3 and 360.

---

Take a deeper look at what you are seeing in Xenoblade. The characters look more like anime' than real people. They aren't that demanding on the hardware and even Metal Gear Solid 2 on the PS2 had character models of that level. The grass and surrounding shrubbery is the same image being presented over and over and over again. Meanwhile in Skyrim, I'm surrounded by massive trees, a wide variety of shrubbery and a bunch of different rocks of varying sizes and shapes. Yes, Xenoblade X has really nice art direction, but what is being displayed on screen is not what I'd call hardware demanding.

I certainly wasn't talking about the hardware hindered console versions of Skyrim. Even without mods, the PC version looks substantially better than the console versions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMEYucAhnBQ

skyrims map is 37 square kilometres while oblivion is 57. oblivions world is nearly twice as big!

about xenoblade graphics. in skyrim every character looks the same and the world and draw distance is terrible. xenoblade looks beauitful on a grand scale and a small scale. skyrim looked dated already upon release.

People keep arguing about world size eh.

Daggerfall got every single game you mentioned beat by a country mile, and it was released in 1996. It's whats in the world that counts not the size of it silly people.

Also Skyrim > Xenoblade soz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bultje112

skyrims map is 37 square kilometres while oblivion is 57. oblivions world is nearly twice as big!

about xenoblade graphics. in skyrim every character looks the same and the world and draw distance is terrible. xenoblade looks beauitful on a grand scale and a small scale. skyrim looked dated already upon release.

---

Skyrim has a lot of mountains that when stretched out = bigger then Oblivion. And Skyrim was far from dated looking on release. It blew me away. And I'm still impressed by it playing the PS4 enhanced Special Edition.

Prima guides; they were so shit bitd. I did like their Oblivion one though; that one was quality.

A good example of how terrible they were, is some DBZ game they did a guide for. Half the characters weren't covered, and the ones that were, were filled with numerous errors. Only some of the moves being listed, the wrong bio for the character being printed or only parts of it (all of it copy and pasted straight from the game itself), incorrect character art being used, and a mode that was only partially covered. Terrible stuff. I bought a few more of their guides, and they were equally as bad, but this one is more easier for me to remember.

Bradygames were much, much better. Their San Andreas guide was fantastic; amazing detail.

The only guides I've ever really used have been Shenmue (Prima's) and Kingdom Hearts (Brady Games). But only bc that was prior to Youtube and the exponential growth of video game forums seemingly overnight. The guides were somewhat helpful, I should say. But I would only use them when I was really, really stuck. Nowadays I just like to get them because of the artwork. :)

Here's my take. Skyrim's combat, leveling system, and overall control was miles ahead of Elder Scroll IV. While I liked both games, Skyrim just wins hands down for just overall ease of exploration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bultje112

skyrims map is 37 square kilometres while oblivion is 57. oblivions world is nearly twice as big!

about xenoblade graphics. in skyrim every character looks the same and the world and draw distance is terrible. xenoblade looks beauitful on a grand scale and a small scale. skyrim looked dated already upon release.

---

You keep focusing on the size of the map, when there is more to consider, like everything that is within each city, including sub-levels and interiors of buildings.

The recommended specs for the PC version of Skyrim is a graphics card with a minimum of 1GB of VRAM. That is all the memory the Wii U has available for a game to operate. The other 1GB of memory the Wii U has is completely allocated to system operations. Xenoblade Chronicles X uses a lot of the same colors in levels, low detail texture maps and character textures to fit those big areas within the limits of its 1GB of game workspace, and who knows how much of that is available to graphics, since it's shared.

Honestly, I believe you are talking about the console version of Skyrim, when you bring up draw distance. The PC version draws as far as the eye can see. And Xenoblade Chronicles X has plenty of objects that just pop up right in front of you. The characters do not all look the same, some wear peasant cloths, some wear chain mail, some wear metal armor, others wear leather and fur outfits. The clothing is set to what Nordic people wore in those times. Your character and his companion will likely go through a half dozen, to a dozen, outfit changes within the game alone and some will include Dragon Scale armor. Yes, for the PC gamer the graphics were just good, but the game was designed around the most popular hardware of the time to generate more sales. Bethesda allowed mods for enthusiast that had much more capable hardware, and that is where the game becomes absolutely gorgeous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thief

Skyrim has a lot of mountains that when stretched out = bigger then Oblivion. And Skyrim was far from dated looking on release. It blew me away. And I'm still impressed by it playing the PS4 enhanced Special Edition.

---

I got the PC version for free, because I own the Legendary Edition. It looks good, but it's hard for me to go back to that after playing the Legendary Edition with 4k textures and a bunch of other mods that enhance the world. I'm looking forward to mods with SE though, because it will take advantage of more modern CPUs. I guess I could try running it @ 1440p though.

Skyrim is the spaghetti rings and meatballs of adventure games. Sometimes you just want something shitty because you can't be bothered to cook a full meal every day. Of course, there sure have been a lot of canned pastas on the market since 2007.