Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim reviews start appearing
Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim reviews are starting to show up online now, and we have found one that is very interesting indeed. This one points out a few details about gameplay, pros, cons and much more.
Feed Your Console has published their review, which mentions they have not finished the game and nowhere near it, and cannot see an end in sight. They have been playing for around 30 hours, and from the start of the game many improvements have been made after Oblivion, such as character models. The game starts off with prisoners’ on a cart being taken to a fort; once they are off loaded this is when character customization begins.
The review reports that the story is not related directly to Oblivion, as it takes place a few hundreds years later after the Empire began relinquishing territories to the Elven nations. The hands-on review is interesting and points out character development and assigning points to a variety of skills.
It details the different races and each of their individual perks, and also points out that the graphics are not as cutting edge as iD Tech 5, but it still works very well. The reviewer said that the game manages to fit on 1 disc with no minimum install on the Xbox 360, they seem very happy about that.
Overall they gave Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim a massive 9 out of 10, they have their pros and cons, and on a positive side the game is very big, there is so much to do and see within the game, sandbox games is a high point for them and the graphics look very clean and has more depth.
On a negative, they mention that there is no co-op mode, and that this game should have it.
What do you think of their review?
Recent News
- PlayBox: PS4 and Xbox 720 as one console
- GTA 5 release date avoided by Killzone Mercenary
- iPhone 6 release date rumours, colours galore
- GTA 5 features for online mode incoming
- Forge of Empires, cheats gain advantage with money
- Fallout 4 news of Boston accepted by most
- Google’s Galaxy S4, play with a Nexus version at a price
Related Posts
glad it is not co-op cause then achievements would require XBox Live ..... I like playing the game on my own.
I didnt mean last year in 2008. I meant like 3 years ago. Haha sorry im comin of a crazy night.
how does gta iv get 10/10 from many reviewers last year in 2008 and Skyrim only gets a 9/10. Gta IV was terrible and the worst of all out of the GTA series. And then they say stuff about how graphics arent as cutting edge as id. Rage has good graphics, amazing graphics actually, but imo, Skyrims are thousands times better. Even though they are both hand drawn out, Skyrim has more of a feel to it. And then co-op? Wtf. This isnt gears 3, or COD spec ops or anything that needs a multiplayer or co op mode. Explain how you could play co op in a game like this.
It's very clear and easy to understand if you follow the reviews, particularly Gamepot. It's quite obvious that Rockstar has some sort of "vested" interest in the reviews it gets. If you don't understand what that means in plain English it means Rockstar pays for their high reviews. Look at every review Gamespot have ever given to a Rockstar game...I rest my case. Gamepot seems to only gives 10s to Rockstar. Is that a coincidence? I definitely think not.
damn. doesnt need coop. i wanna kik ass on my own
exactly wtf, coop? who the hell is this reviewer? what a tool.
Perhaps the pre order sales and the sales of the first week of release will be enough for game magazines, online review sites and other games developers to realise that there is a "huge market" for single player games of high quality. Just because lots of people like multi player games does not mean that all games should be multi player. It's high time that games reviewers stopped trying to convince individuals that they need to become sheep in order to fit in with the hard of thinking.
Amen!!
This game was supposed to be an epic single player game, the players buying the game are aware that it is a single player game, and so why would someone reviewing the game think it was a negative point?
are you sure the reviewer has played this game? he hasn't mentioned anything new about the actual game..
oh yeah co-op are you kidding me? lol that BS man , it dont need to co-op, SKYRIM aint not happy hour COD,
yep, this reviewer sucks
oh my days i cannot wait for SKYRIM oh the excitment
It doesn't need coop.
30 hrs? he has the guts to review Skyrim by playing just 30 hrs of it? though i doubt he has actually played it at all.
well this dude wants coop so he doesn't really belong reviewing single player games anyway, really, wtf is that
The reviewer you linked to is abusing people who don't rate his reviews. How embarassing.
And this is different from any site/magazine/person/blog that does reviews, how?
I've never once seen Kotaku, IGN or Eurogamer directly insulting their readers, that's how.
I don't think the "reviewer" ever actually played the game. The only opinions he states are related to the graphics, and all the information he lists can be found on the Wikipedia page or in any number of previews. I mean, come on, does that look like the sort of website that gets sent review copies of games?
Whoever gave it that for no co-op doesn't deserve the right to play skyrim
CO OP? get a grip, how does it need one? This is a rubbish article too.
I agree with the last comment in regards to grasping at straws, its as if they were looking for a reason not to give a game as hyped as skyrim a perfect score of 10/10, perhaps its from the past experiences with Bethesda over hyping elder scrolls games, I remember when Morrowind was coming out all of the things they were promising,and now with Skyrim the bar is raised even higher, I believe in these guys though, Elder Scrolls is there passion project and you have to just believe based on that alone they have given it everything they have, and that its going to in many ways surpass our wildest imaginations, I cant wait to delve into the depths of Skyrim, ugh t-minus 24 hours
I agree with the former posts. There is no reason why co-op should have been included and, from personal experience, co-op for a game of this genre usually acts as gimmick. Fair points overall but it seems the reviewers are clutching at straws for marking it down for its lack of cooperative gamplay.
That one negative isn't a negative in my opinion so yeah, all is good.
you seriously can't rate negatively because it has no multiplayer. it's like if you bought chips and complained there was no chocolate in it.
They should not rate down because there is no co-op mode; Bethesda never said that there would be a co-op mode.
You can't rate negativatily just due to no online. What about Fallout 3, Oblivion, and all those other great single player ONLY games?
