Header image

Navigating Skyrim

PS3, Xbox 360, PC opinion by Sean Kelley on 13th January 2012

Skyrim is my third foray into the open worlds borne by Bethesda – including 2010’s Fallout: New Vegas, which was developed by Obsidian Entertainment. Skyrim, like Fallout 3 and New Vegas before it, delivers an enormous world and fiction for its player to explore. But, there are fundamental differences from one game to the next, specifically in the manner which the player is guided, and in this regard, Skyrim is no different.

Not long after the release of New Vegas, in the fall of 2010, I took a closer look at the way Obsidian directed its players versus Fallout 3 in A Tale of Two Wastelands. Fallout 3 was my first taste of Bethesda’s style of game and although I enjoyed the zany misadventures of the Mojave, I found New Vegas’ world and quest design at odds with what I personally loved about Fallout 3; and even after 120 hours spent in Tamriel’s northernmost province, I still lust for the brand of exploration I’ve only found in the Capital Wasteland.

screenshot

Given the topography of Skyrim, it’d be nearly impossible for it to replicate the line-of-sight navigation that Fallout 3 enjoyed – you could argue large parts of Skyrim are wasteland-like, but it is not a ‘wasteland’ in the Fallout sense of the word. Skyrim is a vast domain, separated by mountains, forests and other large obstructions. By this token, it’s the rare moment when you’ve happened upon a location that gives you a free range of vision in all directions – something that nearly every location in Fallout 3 provided, save for the DC ruins. And even if you do find a lookout, or you’re situated in the center of one of Skyrim’s planar regions, many of the locales fail to stand out quite like they do in Fallout 3.

“Many of the locales fail to stand out quite like they do in Fallout 3”Other than major cities and huge ruins, the vast majority of locations are either caves or forts. Each tends to be well-hidden though, caves are buried deep within the sides of mountains and many of the forts are tucked away within the numerous wooded areas. In Fallout 3 the world’s undulations were measured, and there was no growth to mask the landscape whatsoever. Settlements may have been overshadowed by crumpling bits of old freeway, but the point is there was always some sort of breadcrumb that tantalized you to wander in each direction. Where does this road lead me? Who’s shacked up in that bombed out suburban neighborhood? What’s the story with this old factory? These are the questions the Capital Wasteland was constantly stringing you along with; Skyrim continues to ask these questions, it just poses them very differently.

screenshot

Unlike the Fallout titles, Skyrim’s compass is always alive with directions. Beyond the quest markers and custom points you could set during the post-apocalypse, every single discoverable location within your immediate vicinity is fed to the compass. Locations you’ve never seen are represented as black silhouettes of the location type, while those you’ve found show up in white. Having this constant influx of information streamed to the screen is likely the most disappointing aspect of Skyrim to me as a player, and it largely feels like a copout on the part of Bethesda.

“It’s impossible to retain your focus in Skyrim”As an adventurer and a completionist, I want to see every corner of Skyrim. To this end, having the locations teased on my compass makes it all the more likely that I will, but it’s no longer on my own terms; I may not have seen everything there was to see in Fallout 3, but I had a certain comfort in the perceived thoroughness of my wandering. It’s impossible to retain your focus in Skyrim because there are so many places to see and nearly every one of them is soured to varying degrees because you never feel like the discovery is your own. I saw a location marker; I walked toward it; I found it. There’s no reward for filling in your map, neither tangible or not; it was served to you on a platter. Every single place you’ve been to or seen you know your friends have likely found as well. In Fallout 3 you owned each and every one of your discoveries.

screenshot

What’s most frustrating is that Skyrim is a living, breathing world. Bethesda has populated the province with thousands of NPCs to create the illusion of a working eco-system. This means that every location which is in use, and nearly all of them are by various adventurers, rogues and factions, should have a decipherable path to stumble upon, leading to the mouth of a cave or the archway of a fort; and actually, they do, but it never matters. Bethesda has gone to the trouble to flesh out Skyrim with the breadcrumbs necessary to lead players to their unknown destinations. Flags denote paths and entrances, grand staircases are carved into the feet of mountains and cobblestone roads lead to old farms and mills, but it’s all unnecessary. The only time you’ll peel your eyes away from the compass and navigate by sight is when you need to find the one predetermined path up the side of a mountain.

Skyrim is a huge, often breathtaking world that lets you wander in any direction you choose, but playing it often amounts to tunnel vision, a never ending chase toward the next blacked-out locale. Since there is always a destination on your compass you’re never content with what you’ve just found. On the one hand this design means there is always a new goal, but it also means there’s never a finish line. In Skyrim I never find myself taking a moment to enjoy the end of one journey before beginning the next. Hell, I don’t even bother to go into most of the locations anymore, the map isn’t going to populate itself.

Spread the word

About the author

Picture of Sean Kelley

Sean Kelley is an Associate Editor at Thunderbolt, having joined in April 2008. See more of his work at Negative Press and check out his web comic, Roy’s Boys. Get in touch on Twitter @_seankelley.

Comments

  • Flucksy

    16th January 2012

    Gravatar

    Why are you comparing Skyrim to Fallout 3 and NV? They are completely different kinds of games. They may play a lot a like, but pretty much everything made by Bethesda since Morrowond plays alike, but the styles of the game is completely different. TES are a kind of realistic fantasy with a focus on action while Fallout games are kind of quirky with a lot of grit and violence. You’re complaining that Skyrim didn’t look like Fallout. No shit. It’s not a sequel to it.

  • Sean

    17th January 2012

    Gravatar

    You seem to have missed my point completely. I say numerous times that Skyrim is a beautiful place to adventure; I don’t want it to look like Fallout, obviously it’s not related.

    I’m ‘complaining’ about why I don’t enjoy exploring Skyrim the way I enjoyed the Capitol Wasteland. I’m not saying I dislike exploring Skyrim because it’s not a bombed-out wasteland, it’s because Bethesda didn’t allow me to discover it on my own terms, which both Fallout games did.

  • Guymar Dudikoff

    17th January 2012

    Gravatar

    As an old Fallout exploration hand, I understood perfectly what Sean was saying. He’s comparing the exploration from two games he’s played by the same company. What do you find opaque about that?

    One of my favorites aspects of ANY game with a wide open world is exploration. I love to go off the beaten path and follow a power line, or a river, or that mountain in the distance and see what, if anything is there. And it’s great when you go off on a tangent and find a little hidey hole of loot or a funny pop reference or whatever in a place you had no quest or reason to be exploring.

    I haven’t played Skyrim, so I can’t comment too much on that, but Sean isn’t talking about anything other than navigation here from what I read

  • Stew

    18th January 2012

    Gravatar

    Flucksy, you probably wanna start picking up the habit of actually reading through an entire article before you start asking questions, or committing to having your emotions thrown out of whack.

    As much as I still want to play Skyrim, reading about this hand holding style of navigation does have me a bit concerned. Being also a Fallout fan, I’ve come to appreciate the joys that come with exploring and finding whatever surprises in the nooks and crannies.

    This does indeed remind me of the points Sean brought up in his Tale of Two Wastelands piece and I agree, since Bethesda has been successful with that ‘come see for yourself’ mode of exploration why not do it to all their open world games? For the quick-to-bawl types, this is not me saying that every game should be a Fallout game, I’m just questioning why a diverse design approach isn’t being taken (possibly abandoned).

  • Relayer71

    20th January 2012

    Gravatar

    Well that’s easy - Fallout 3’s world obviously lent itself better to exploration. It was a post-apocalyptic world and part of the allure of the game was this survival of the fittest, living off the land. It’s like comparing the Amazon to London. Skyrim differs very little from the previous ES games as far as exploration, except in that it is improved from Oblivion because of that game’s bland artistic design and from previous games because of more ambitious dungeon designs.

  • Sean

    20th January 2012

    Gravatar

    You’re right Relayer, Fallout does lend itself to easier exploration since it’s a vast open space with little in the form of mountains or other large obstructions. However, what I’m trying to convey is how the information the compass bombards you with ruins my sense of discovery. A friend of mine noted that you can turn the compass itself off, but what I’d really like is to turn the locations off. That way I navigate by the topography, the rivers, the paths, all of the things that a real adventurer might follow.

Show the three other comments

Add your own comment »

You may also enjoy