Or perhaps it's just because the flaws are more relevant for the person in question to enjoy the game? Every game has flaws, and hence literally anyone could just flip this argument upside down and start spouting this nonsense in reverse fashion, your angle is unreasonable.
Some people like different genres and subgenres, it's perfectly sensible to expect an old school oriented list from the Codex, go poll gamers who started playing in the 00's if you want a RPG list with Skyrim, it's no big deal. Stop releasing your frustration of it here please. You won't find a single "objective" top 'whatever' list on the internet and there wouldn't be a use for it anyhow.
Unfortunately, claiming I'm frustrated or that I have some kind of desire to see Skyrim on a Codex list - does not make it so.
We're on the Watch and we all know the Codex around here. I'm not sure there's a single person on this board that's surprised Skyrim isn't on that list.
I'm pointing it out - because the list was presented on the Watch - and since then, people from both sides have tried explaining why Skyrim isn't there.
That's all it is really. What can I say, I enjoy talking about games and I take an interest in how human beings operate.
Also, yes, it's very, very obvious that that the flaws of Arcanum are being overlooked because they're "no big deal" to the people on the Codex. That's the bias part - and that's why the list is subjective.
If Arcanum had worked as a design and if it was finished, it would indeed have been a fantastic game. But it didn't work very well - and was utterly without balance. That's without mods, by the way.
Arcanum had a shit combat system, middling visuals (at best), an unfinished world - and so on.
The IDEA of Arcanum was great, however. I know - Fallout in a Steampunk setting, right? That's the idea - and that's why it's so overrated on the Codex.
That's good enough for #5? Sure, to the Codex it is. Not to someone trying to be objective.
For the millionth time, there's nothing wrong with being subjective. It still is what it is, though.
If you already know, then why not just admit it? Why the denial?
You're at least as biased as anyone I've seen comment on this thread, you're just pretending otherwise.
If I'm biased - you have to point out how and why. Rationalise your claim, instead of just making it.
That said, all human beings are biased by nature. That's not the surprise or the trick.
The trick is to admit when it happens - because it helps us understand ourselves and others.
Also don't assume that game hours equate enjoyment, it's the context in which it happens that's more relevant. I've played Diablo 3 for 300+ hours, I finished a character on HC inferno when it was released and I still think the game was shit. I simply did it as a challenge for myself, out of a lack of anything challenging to play at the time.
You enjoyed yourself - so it's enjoyment. The fact that you still think the game is shit is not the point. You can live with a woman for years and enjoy most of your time with her, and then something can happen or you can just wake up - and she's suddenly a person you hate and she's a bitch.
Probably the most common kind of human denial and bias is about the ones they've loved and lost. That's pretty much the essence of subjective opinions. The women you used to love you now hate. So she's a terrible person, right? Not if you're being objective she's not - but you wouldn't be, because you're emotionally invested.
Which is a relevant analogy - because to the Codex, games are as emotionally potent as women - or so it seems
I'm afraid I don't believe you spent 300 hours doing something you didn't enjoy. That would be another kind of denial.
Skyrim gameplay drastically changes with mods, there are perk reworks, difficulty reworks, various gameplay enhancements, followers, 'survival mods and probably a lot more gameplay affecting changes that I've failed to mention, so even though you're going through the same crappily designed dungeons and settings the experience is different, Elder scrolls games have always depended on their ability to immerse you, so if you're not able to do that without mods it really doesn't matter how great the dungeons or whatever else is.
Yes, mods can change things significantly - but the vast majority of ALL mods use assets, content, systems, and so on developed by Bethesda.
Bethesda created the foundation and they ENABLED modders, not the other way around.
To pretend modders deserve most of the credit is an altogether different kind of denial.
It's all part of the SUPREMELY obvious bias against Bethesda.
I'm sorry, I can't see it any other way. It's ludicrously unfair to suggest modders created your fun. They might have made the final difference, but they're not responsible for the game you're playing - modded or not.
The simplest explanation for all of this:
Almost all of you love Fallout - it's your holy grail of gaming. It's indeed a very good game, so it's very understandable.
Then Bethesda went and got the license - and we all know the history of Fallout 3 vs the Codex.
Almost ALL of the Codex were so heavily invested against FO3 - and it would physically hurt to acknowledge it wasn't the kind of betrayal you wanted it to be, and there was a lot of good to be said about it.
I don't think it takes much of a brain to see how that relates to Skyrim.
Acknowledging the best parts of Skyrim without dismissing them as "unimportant" would literally go against how you've chosen to hardwire your brain paths
Ok, that's the simple explanation - but I wonder if there isn't some truth to it? What do you guys think?
