A game that got 90% five years ago would not necessarily get 90% now. I love text adventures/interactive fiction but some of the hugely influential and adored classics are postively painful to play today. Some of them can be completed in 30 moves or so, are painfully linear or have puzzles that are ridiculously obscure and rely on out-of-game knowledge or simply brute forcing them. I enjoyed the Ishar RPG , back in the day, but frequently you could die in the first minute or so of starting the game, and this was accepted because games at that point WERE that much harder to a large degree. Times change. I wouldn't enjoy that now because I don't have entire summers of doing nothing to throw at a game.
The flaws in Oblivion were complained about at the time and were arguably not necessarily taken into account in a lot of reviews (since reviews can be a] bought and b] reviewers would not always have played the whole game - you could easily play for fifteen hours before getting to the repetitive section) and also because while Oblivion was better than other RPGs at the time so that flaws could be ignored at the time, the flaws were specifically addressed for the next game in the series, while leaving much of the rest the same. The main gameplay mechanic that Skyrim lacks, compared to Oblivion, is something that was relatively late-game and only relevant for magic-users. Compared to Morrowind, I'd say that both Oblivion and Skyrim are far more accessible and playable in a more casual way by people who don't have hours and hours a day to play. If you look at reviews of Skyrim, you'll see this mentioned - that while Oblivion seemed good, there were problems that were overlooked because of the time it came out, but now seem like a big deal.
Similarly, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay was a great system when it came out. Now, the WFRP style critical hit tables that are used in Dark Heresy/Rogue Trader seem pretty stupid when compared against more modern RPGs which don't feel the need for that kind of thing. They slow down the game and add nothing that a competent GM or player can't do themselves - they're a legacy from a time when RPGs were written differently.
GTA 3 was amazing when it came out but Vice City, San Andreas and (sort-of) IV improve on it in every way and unless you're actually wanting to play all the GTA games then if you're just wanting a cool driving-around-and-shooting-people game, VC or SA or IV is a much better option. The Sims was fun and popular, but (from my admittedly limited experience of both) The Sims 2 is simply better. The same with Assassin's Creed to AC2 and Saints Row to SR2. The originals were good, but the sequels were better because they improved on the same core experience and mechanics.
Of course, this isn't always true (Mass Effect 2 is a radically different style of gameplay to the first game, for example and I can understand why that put people off) - and it depends what you want from a game. Morrowind is certainly a lot more challenging and less accessible at the start than Oblivion and Morrowind, and you can break the game more easily if you try. If that kind of experience is what you want from a game, fair enough. But if you're keen to play Morrowind because it was well regarded at the time, and nostalgically so now - why start there? Why not play Daggerfall too? There are people who see that as the peak of the Elder Scrolls series, and it's free. Heck, it has 750 times as many NPCs as Morrowind and a huge amount more to do.
no subject
The flaws in Oblivion were complained about at the time and were arguably not necessarily taken into account in a lot of reviews (since reviews can be a] bought and b] reviewers would not always have played the whole game - you could easily play for fifteen hours before getting to the repetitive section) and also because while Oblivion was better than other RPGs at the time so that flaws could be ignored at the time, the flaws were specifically addressed for the next game in the series, while leaving much of the rest the same. The main gameplay mechanic that Skyrim lacks, compared to Oblivion, is something that was relatively late-game and only relevant for magic-users. Compared to Morrowind, I'd say that both Oblivion and Skyrim are far more accessible and playable in a more casual way by people who don't have hours and hours a day to play. If you look at reviews of Skyrim, you'll see this mentioned - that while Oblivion seemed good, there were problems that were overlooked because of the time it came out, but now seem like a big deal.
Similarly, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay was a great system when it came out. Now, the WFRP style critical hit tables that are used in Dark Heresy/Rogue Trader seem pretty stupid when compared against more modern RPGs which don't feel the need for that kind of thing. They slow down the game and add nothing that a competent GM or player can't do themselves - they're a legacy from a time when RPGs were written differently.
GTA 3 was amazing when it came out but Vice City, San Andreas and (sort-of) IV improve on it in every way and unless you're actually wanting to play all the GTA games then if you're just wanting a cool driving-around-and-shooting-people game, VC or SA or IV is a much better option. The Sims was fun and popular, but (from my admittedly limited experience of both) The Sims 2 is simply better. The same with Assassin's Creed to AC2 and Saints Row to SR2. The originals were good, but the sequels were better because they improved on the same core experience and mechanics.
Of course, this isn't always true (Mass Effect 2 is a radically different style of gameplay to the first game, for example and I can understand why that put people off) - and it depends what you want from a game. Morrowind is certainly a lot more challenging and less accessible at the start than Oblivion and Morrowind, and you can break the game more easily if you try. If that kind of experience is what you want from a game, fair enough. But if you're keen to play Morrowind because it was well regarded at the time, and nostalgically so now - why start there? Why not play Daggerfall too? There are people who see that as the peak of the Elder Scrolls series, and it's free. Heck, it has 750 times as many NPCs as Morrowind and a huge amount more to do.