pezus said:
I'm pretty sure very many people complained about that game, which is one of the major reasons it didn't get 90+ on metacritic. But now you see the same thing with Skyrim for PS3 and yet it has 92 on meta... |
it'S just normal that these kind of games have these problems (except the ps3 save problem). it's not like uncharted or cod where they exactly know what you will do and everything. i mean cliff bleszinski said that this is pretty normal for this kind of game and he didn't try to defend his own game with that but he knows how it worls. i bet bethesda had plenty more people testing skyrim than naughty dog had for uncharted or so but still many people say they don't even try to make a game without glitches. sure they try it's just not possibel.
i played morrowind, oblivion and skyrim i think like 800 hours and i did never have a huge problem. i know one of my friends had huge problems with oblivion but after playing 800 hours i can really say it's not as bad as some pople try to let it seem. i had problems with two worlds and two worlds 2, with the witcher 2 and with all other western open world rpg's and i know the next games will have plenty of glitches as well which most of them are just irrelevant
for example many people complain anout the enemy following you and then "glitching" on a stair anywhere in this huge world. sure this happens but in other games they don't even follow me it's easy to say that in cod this doesn't happen when the enemies stay on one special point. then there are some quest problems sometimes for some poele which i did never have in any bethesda game included fallout 3. it's no wonder as well that other games don't have problems here knowing exactly what you will do first. in skyrim i can decide what to do and if there is one stupid problem when i do one quest and then the other the tester would have to play exactly the same quest after each other like me to see the problem. these are a lot of possible ways to play quests in diferent orders