I was wrong

[kris]

Look in the green box in the lower right corner.

Here's hoping they have some reviewer with the acutal ability to give a good preview of it. But in the end, no game can be measured in a one day tryout... that is if it is not ridicoulusly short. Or so crap that the one playing suddenly got a call from his imaginary girlfriend.

anyhow, will be interesting to see how it shapes up. Hey MSFD, check the thread about character creation, I got some ideas for you and your crew. I can cough up loads of more for FREE. :D

 

[Hazelnut]

Look in the green box in the lower right corner.

Dude, where's the UK PC Gamer exclusive?

Fixed.

 

[merry andrew]

Look in the green box in the lower right corner.

Dude, where's the UK PC Gamer exclusive?

Fixed.

 

[Screaming_Dude_In_Vegas]

MrSmileyFaceDude wrote:
Don't presume that an emphasis in MARKETING on graphics (because it's visible and obvious) and AI (because it's one of the most significant new features of the game) reflects an emphasis solely on those two facets in DEVELOPMENT of the game. Again -- just because we haven't spoken about other things doesn't mean they're not in the game.

I'm not sure whether that was posted in response to my own post - but I'm pretty arrogant so I'll assume it was...

The way I see it the the focus on graphics and audio can be detrimental to other 'features' such as dialog (especially when dealing with dynamically, possibly randomly, generated information) and movement/combat (focusing on animation).

It's what their advertising. Most of the hardcore CRPG fans will buy this game simply because there's nothing like it, at least till G3 is released. So what market is left? The casual gamers and FPS fans who picked up morrowind because it looked nifty, and lost interest because it was boring. It's called hype people.

I'm also of the opinion (I have one or two... ) that the AI will be limited because it will not be used to it's full potential - creation and completion of dynamically constructed 'quests'; although that in turn I would attribute to a lack of thin-NPC characters, with skeletal histories that pass-through the game world as parts or originators of 'quests', other than guards and bandits (and we don't know how they will be handled either!).

Actually, the fact that certain people are protected leads me to belive that they are doing some complex interactions with a the AI. I mean bethsada would let you break the main quest (thought they would warn you), but I don't think they'd let you break the overall gameworld.

Anyways, all this will be changible in the CS, so the modders will probably end up being able to do some great stuff with the RAI that the dev's haven't even thought of. Also we might see quite afew AI modifications making the gameworld more flexible.

As you point out no-one has said specifically that dynamically created quests or thin-NPCs are in but as they can only be seen as a good thing surely they would be part of the PR hype about the new AI if they were to be in? (Well, I say that they can only be seen as a good thing but there are some pretty wierd people out there who might in their maddness disagree with me! )

Dose everything need a comfirmation to make you guys happy? There probably will be plenty of situations arising, though I don't think any of them would be technically be quests. We'll have to see.

I'm not saying that major plot-lines should be sacrificed - just that mundane quests that emerge from every day life should handle themselves... Although a greater redundancy in major plots might me nice too

Maybe establish a method of communicating plot/quest details from NPC to NPC? If intercommunication between NPCs was used in this way a plot can be preserved with relational information to tweak the plot on the fly.

They mentioned in-game conversations as well as info being passed between NPCs.

Plot tweaking on the fly is impossible. No way to simulate human langauge, let alone voice, in a remotely non-sucky fashon.

If random NPCs are to be used rather NPCs with a pre-defined relationship then character attributes can be used such as sex, race, affiliations, rank, time and other disposing factors.

Part of the goal was to remove "Filler" NPCs, aside from gaurds and bandits.

Indeed a plot may be hijacked in certain situations where the NPC is sufficiently disposed to change the quest criteria... Hell, the original NPC doesn't even need to be dead for that. This intercommunication framework could also be used for information disemmination of other types as well. Of course this would benefit from some proper AI where NPCs 'learn' based on the raw information they receive...

As highly-redundant a failover system as you create though I am sure the technology is a restriction at the end of the day there may need to be an allowance for quests/plots to die.

Interesting idea. The one problem with all of your Ideas is that all of this requires this to be comunicated to the player. Now even if you were using text only, all personality of those characters would be lost based on the fact that generated dialouge wouldn't be able to take advantage of all the variations of human language that make for interesting dialouge. Now forget about doing this with voices...

 

[Jaesun]

Submitted for your approval... Imagine if you will:

RPG Codex - Next issue!!

Think you know everything about PC RPG Gaming as much as we do? Think again with our full CRPG report on facts, rumors and information! Plus -- we spend a day gnashing our teeth,wailing and arming our crossbows spending a day with the PC version of Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion! And much, much more...

 

[Vault Dweller]

Look in the green box in the lower right corner.

Thanks. I'll take a look.

I see no reason for such a delay, other than the logical one - what they have isn't good enough to reveal.

Not necessarily. Wasn't Bethesda known for releasing considerably little info about their projects, prefering instead to mention a couple of things but releasing the game with its content still largely a mystery?

Not really. I've just read a few MW previews that were written 2(!) years before the game got released - big difference. Take a look at this one - http://pc.ign.com/articles/358/358037p1.html - it was closer to the release, but check the detail level.

Btw, here is a funny snipet from a GameSpot preview:

Bethesda describes Morrowind's combat as a combination of the combat systems found in Daggerfall, Jedi Knight, and Thief.

lol.

So, basically, what it boils down to is we're all on the edge of our seats waiting to see what the game will be like when it is released.

Uh, no.

and on the other end of the scale the pessimists who don't want to get their hopes up - "This game is being dumbed down and will suck like MW!"

I'd have worded it a bit differently: people who were disappointed with MW and weren't impressed with what's known about Oblivion.

they don't want pre-concieved notions or mis-understandings (which has happened several times) of quite difficult to explain aspects of the game to set false expectations I suppose.

First, basic things like magic system, skills, dialogues are hard to misunderstand, and second, the lack of info is what actualy creates false expectations

More fun quotes from Todd Howard, circa 2001:

Daggerfall was huge and great, but got old very fast when the player realized it was just the same stuff over and over. We're making the game world much more unique throughout

NPCs. Kind of the same scenario as the world. They were very simple and repetitive in Daggerfall

Dialogue has also gotten a major overhaul.

Every NPC can be killed, even the most important guys

 

[corvax]

Those Todd Howard quotes were pretty much on point. Now what is your point?

 

[Vykromond]

Hussar, his point is that if those things were bad in DF they sure were a lot worse in MW.

 

[WillyBubba]

Hussar, his point is that if those things were bad in DF they sure were a lot worse in MW.

Or that advertising from game to game is pretty much exactly the same except for the name of th installment.

 

[corvax]

Hussar, his point is that if those things were bad in DF they sure were a lot worse in MW.

Some things did get worse some did not.

Daggerfall was huge and great, but got old very fast when the player realized it was just the same stuff over and over. We're making the game world much more unique throughout

As bland and generic Morrowind felt it was defenitely more unique than Daggerfall. So what you had less guilds, no carts, horses, banks, etc. Those things did not make that big of a difference. Randomly generated cities sucked big time in Daggerfall, no flavor at all. The world felt dead, d e d, ded. In MW it was monotonic and dying but not dead.

NPCs. Kind of the same scenario as the world. They were very simple and repetitive in Daggerfall

Yes, yes, and yes. NPCs sucked big time in Daggerfall. Stale, bland and one dimentional. The improvement in Morrowind was minimal, nevertheless it was still there. Things got better in Tribunal and Bloodmoon. Almalexia, Helseth, Vivec, Dviath Fyr, most Telvani counselors, slavemaster Dren...Those are just some memorable NPCs. Of course nothing of Torment quality but at least they were average.

Dialogue has also gotten a major overhaul.

True. From badly functional wiki to a much better one. I'm not debating here whether the overall system is good, just the fact that it's been improved.

Every NPC can be killed, even the most important guys.

That's true. At one point or another anyone is fair game.

 

[LlamaGod]

Why cant you put in multiple ways of getting the NPC's info instead of just making them unkillable? Stuff like that always bugs me.

In Arcanum, they usually had a journal or something near by.

 

[Seven]

Why cant you put in multiple ways of getting the NPC's info instead of just making them unkillable? Stuff like that always bugs me.

In Arcanum, they usually had a journal or something near by.

Of course I haven't seen FO mentioned yet. Weren't all of the NPC's killable there? Of course that was over 8 years ago; this reminds of an article I read in The Escapist, I think it was called The Contrarian. It always boils down to the samething--Graphics and teh shinny will bring'em in, but gameplay'll keep'em around. And yeah, Arcanum used notes, journals, maps and even multiple NPCs, if only it had a better designed character system.

 

[Hazelnut]

I see no reason for such a delay, other than the logical one - what they have isn't good enough to reveal.

Not necessarily. Wasn't Bethesda known for releasing considerably little info about their projects, prefering instead to mention a couple of things but releasing the game with its content still largely a mystery?

Not really. I've just read a few MW previews that were written 2(!) years before the game got released - big difference. Take a look at this one - http://pc.ign.com/articles/358/358037p1.html - it was closer to the release, but check the detail level.

Btw, here is a funny snipet from a GameSpot preview:

Bethesda describes Morrowind's combat as a combination of the combat systems found in Daggerfall, Jedi Knight, and Thief.

hahaha - what idiot PR decided to call it that? Maybe a combo of Daggerfall & Thief, but JK???

So, basically, what it boils down to is we're all on the edge of our seats waiting to see what the game will be like when it is released.

Uh, no.

Yes you are! You're just in denial!!

Now, 'edge of your seat' isn't maybe quite the right way to put it for someone on the pessimist end of the scale such as yourself, but come on - deep down you wish OB will be a half decent RPG, even though you think it's bloody unlikely and you just don't want to let yourself hope... cos it'll most likely end in tears that way.

Well that's the impression you have given me with your OB related postings here anyway. I think the attention you give the game on here, even from a very sceptical viewpoint, is great - and creates some interesting discussions.

There's nothing wrong with healthy scepticism people, and I think that is definitely a great characteristic of this site, but lets not get carried away and bury any games before we *know* what they are like shall we?

H.

 

[Spazmo]

Of course we wish Oblivion would be a decent RPG--we wish every damn game would be a decent RPG. But what we're seeing, which is quite independent of any of our hopes, is not a decent RPG.

 

[lamaslany]

It's what their advertising. Most of the hardcore CRPG fans will buy this game simply because there's nothing like it, at least till G3 is released. So what market is left? The casual gamers and FPS fans who picked up morrowind because it looked nifty, and lost interest because it was boring. It's called hype people.

I know it could be hype - that's what worries me! Do you even know the definition of the word? I'm curious because it means deception; to deliberately mislead. How is hype a good thing?!

Actually, the fact that certain people are protected leads me to belive that they are doing some complex interactions with a the AI. I mean bethsada would let you break the main quest (thought they would warn you), but I don't think they'd let you break the overall gameworld.

But the complex interactions will be fixed, scripted, events that have a low tolerance for freestyle gameplay. If they were built with a dynamic failover system I would be greatly heartened. Regardless, the point is that they will not allow you to break the main quest - and from the descriptions I have read so far maybe some of the guild/faction quests too. They have argued that this would break the gameworld. While I accept that the idea of invunerable NPCs or forced reloading is a quick and easy way to avoid the need for a fault tolerant system it does not make it a good alternative - it is simply settling for second best.

Anyways, all this will be changible in the CS, so the modders will probably end up being able to do some great stuff with the RAI that the dev's haven't even thought of. Also we might see quite afew AI modifications making the gameworld more flexible.

I'd prefer they released a finished game rather than a development kit that allows me to finish it for them or make my own. It is also worth noting that there are limits to what the CS can do.

Dose everything need a comfirmation to make you guys happy? ...

Yes. (Well me at least although I imagine that many others would feel similarly)

In fact this very thread is based on a mistaken Dev comment - without confirmation we'd have been under the impression that you could continue in Oblivion even after breaking the main quest...

Once again: My thanks to MrSmileyFaceDude for the confirmation regarding this point (even if it wasn't what I wanted to hear! )

They mentioned in-game conversations as well as info being passed between NPCs.

Plot tweaking on the fly is impossible. No way to simulate human langauge, let alone voice, in a remotely non-sucky fashon.

This is why I expressed my concern that the focus on fully spoken game dialog would impose restrictions on what could be done with the so-called 'groundbreaking' AI. Such plot tweaking is possible - it just isn't easy (but then I never said it would be).

And as a point of fact synthetic voice creation is possible; the topic has even made an appearence on the Official TES:Oblivion bulletin board. There are two methods - pre-recording a range of actual spoken sound which are then assembled to create the sound of the word; the other is to model of the human vocal system. Both are processor intensive but both do work. I accept that such technology might not be usable (within a game) at present but it does not change the fact that the technology exists.

I am guessing the 'sucky' fashion to which you refer is a product of sentences being formed from a dictionary of pre-recorded whole words. This is significantly less sophisticated and is a poor comparision.

Part of the goal was to remove "Filler" NPCs, aside from gaurds and bandits.

But if 'filler' NPCs were dynamic then they would, to a large extent, be more substancial - their history and relationship to the game world could be created depending on the environment (condition of the gameworld) they enter.

I guess we'll just have to disagree on this point as I think that 'filler' NPCs would contribute to the game - particularly the replayability factor.

Interesting idea. The one problem with all of your Ideas is that all of this requires this to be comunicated to the player. Now even if you were using text only, all personality of those characters would be lost based on the fact that generated dialouge wouldn't be able to take advantage of all the variations of human language that make for interesting dialouge. Now forget about doing this with voices...

The point is to create a sustainable system that 'passes on' the relevant history with the personality dynamically created by drawing on events, past and present, within the gameworld.

Again this highlights the imposed restrictions resulting from the insistance on fully-spoken dialog. This focus has dictated that the free-form nature of an RPG be dumbed down so much that it is no longer an RPG at all.

 

[Rat Keeng]

Hype:
- To publicize or promote, especially by extravagant, inflated, or misleading claims.
- Blatant or sensational promotion.
- Exaggerated or extravagant claims made especially in advertising or promotional material.

But definitions aside, it's mostly used to describe what happens when highly anticipated games/movies/whatever are promoted to high heaven, often without anyone knowing if the product lives up to the acclaimed super-high quality.

Graphics and teh shinny will bring'em in, but gameplay'll keep'em around.

Which is why a smart game developer makes the gameplay terrible, and hides it behind awesome graphics and tiny little gimmicks like maybe the voice of a famous actor and other such tripe, so that everyone will storm out and buy it, and then leave it after a week's time, so they can go out and buy more games. What kind of businessman would you be, if you made a game that people can happily play for more than 5 years, without getting bored with it?

Associating good games and gameplay with a company's name and building up a solid fanbase doesn't count, it's not like today's gamers are primarily mature people, quite capable of remembering what companies made what games... I'm not sure if that's sarcasm, but i lose either way so meh

 

[Hazelnut]

Of course we wish Oblivion would be a decent RPG--we wish every damn game would be a decent RPG. But what we're seeing, which is quite independent of any of our hopes, is not a decent RPG.

But we're not really seeing anything to confirm or deny whether it will be a decent RPG, so in the absence of information, what you fear you are seeing isn't a decent RPG. I'd say this is pretty affected by your hopes...

My personal prediction is that OB will be a better RPG than MW, but will probably not be a perfect pure RPG like you'd wish for. I definitely don't see it being worse than MW like some seem to think is inevitable given some of the info released...

H.

 

[deus]

Of course I haven't seen FO mentioned yet.

The short answer is that you get dumped to the main menu. The key difference is that only the vault is important in Fallout and only the village in Fallout 2. Everything else is to the side and fair game. In regards to areas that only have one side, attacking the leader causes the entire area to be hostile, making any quests that involve that area impossible to complete. For example, Tandy will attack you if Shady Sands is hostile towards your character. In an area that has multiple sides, there is always a quest to eliminate the opposing side e. g. Killian and Gizmo in Junktown.

The approach is completely different because almost everything is a sidequest so there is no main plot to break.

 

[Spazmo]

But we're not really seeing anything to confirm or deny whether it will be a decent RPG, so in the absence of information, what you fear you are seeing isn't a decent RPG.

I fear we're getting a really superb erosion simulator with flashy graphics and not much else. Until BethSoft PR quits pushing the PATRICK STEWART! aspect of the game and starts talking about some concrete things, my outlook on this game is unlikely to change.

I definitely don't see it being worse than MW like some seem to think is inevitable given some of the info released...

Well, Morrowind was already pretty much the pits in most every aspect. It's not that hard to make a better game.

But really, I don't expect Oblivion to be what I want, and I don't think it should be what I want it to be. Oblivion should be what Elder Scrolls fans want. I hate the series anyways and am not about to buy Oblivion (even if it wasn't TES, it's yet another fantasy RPG and I need another one of those like I need an extra hole in my head). The game isn't being made for me. It's a particular style of game that does things its own way and that appeals to certain (simple) people. That's fine.

What bothers me is when Bethesda approaches Fallout 3, a game that had damn well fucking better be made for me, with a similar philosophy. And I'm not talking about first person perspective or Xbox 360 or real time combat (though I'd bet the farm that we will be as soon as any real info on FO3 comes out), I'm talking about more fundamental problems like pushing technical improvements of questionable value over actual game and other whacked priorities.

Best of luck to Bethesda in any case.

 

[Rat Keeng]

The approach is completely different because almost everything is a sidequest so there is no main plot to break.

That's the beauty of Fallout, you're set on a main quest to find a water chip, and you can bugger about and find it however the hell you want to, follow the hints as you please. Compared to Morrowind, where you're sent on one errand after another, and constantly have to report back to these obnoxious douchebags, who just sends you on another long trek across Cliff Racer County, to find some guy who'll send you on yet another errand.

Thing is, each of these people and their errands are crucial to the plot, and any meddling that makes them unsolveable "breaks" the plot. So you either deal with these potentially quest breaking moments (a la Arcanum), or you cop-out and force a reload.

 

[Kamaz]

But really, I don't expect Oblivion to be what I want, and I don't think it should be what I want it to be. Oblivion should be what Elder Scrolls fans want. I hate the series anyways and am not about to buy Oblivion (even if it wasn't TES, it's yet another fantasy RPG and I need another one of those like I need an extra hole in my head). The game isn't being made for me. It's a particular style of game that does things its own way and that appeals to certain (simple) people. That's fine.

Same with me. I aint gonna buy this game, it does not attract me. Maybe if it gets decent reviews here on codex :D but its unlikely.

I worry about Fallout3 - if they apply the same concepts the use in Oblivion, it would be real disaster. Fallout series and TES series are so different and of course, Fallouts being superior (in any aspects), especially concerning unkillable NPCs;P. Thats the most reason of my hassle here. I dont bear any hope that they'd make Oblivion better, I just hope they make Fallout3 as the previous games were. And this is the right time to shout about it.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

Well, Morrowind was already pretty much the pits in most every aspect. It's not that hard to make a better game.

But really, I don't expect Oblivion to be what I want, and I don't think it should be what I want it to be. Oblivion should be what Elder Scrolls fans want. I hate the series anyways and am not about to buy Oblivion (even if it wasn't TES, it's yet another fantasy RPG and I need another one of those like I need an extra hole in my head). The game isn't being made for me. It's a particular style of game that does things its own way and that appeals to certain (simple) people. That's fine.

What bothers me is when Bethesda approaches Fallout 3, a game that had damn well fucking better be made for me, with a similar philosophy. And I'm not talking about first person perspective or Xbox 360 or real time combat (though I'd bet the farm that we will be as soon as any real info on FO3 comes out), I'm talking about more fundamental problems like pushing technical improvements of questionable value over actual game and other whacked priorities.

Best of luck to Bethesda in any case.

Well, Morrowind IS one of those games that are still played years after release. I don't consider myself, nor many people I know on the TES boards as "simple" either. I am actually pretty sure you would agree if you would spend the time there (of course there ARE simple people as well, its a huge board). I guess what set us apart from the crowd here is that we value the freeform gameplay and exploration aspects above the NPC interaction/storyline aspects of RPG's.
While I loved Daggerfall, I actually, after playing both games for years, would judge Morrowind as the better game. Sure, there was a certain reduction of features, however most of the ones that were lost were rather shallow to begin with. In general, the design in Daggerfall today strikes me as shallow and generic compared to Morrowind. Morrowind, as a place had much more sense of identity than any part of Daggerfall, there was an actual sense of the different cultures and regions in the game. Even the mainquest, while more linear, was tighter and better told than Daggerfalls. Finally, while many here scoff at it as a lame excuse for devs not to make an even better game (which I think is incorrect, but thats a different story), the Construction Set was a godsend. Say what you want, but there is something to be said for the ability to tailor a game you already like to your preferences in pretty much every possible way. It may also be interesting, that some very critical fans and modders of the game are now working as developers on Oblivion.
So while I agree with you on the fact that MW is not for everyone, and maybe not for you, I would ask to be more careful in judging it's fanbase. We are no less dedicated and knowledgeable about the features of TES we value than you would be, maybe, about Fallout. Which happens to be another game I like, by the way.

 

[Claw]

The problem discussed in this thread is actually about the lack of freeform gameplay and the conflicting focus on an intricate storyline.

I don't want an intricate storyline with lots of important NPCs in an RPG. That's an "Adventure" aspect as far as I am concerned.

It's funny that you claim you "value the freeform gameplay and exploration aspects above the NPC interaction/storyline aspects" and then seem to praise MW's "more linear, (...) tighter and better told" main quest. So what do you value more now?

 

[lamaslany]

Hype:
- To publicize or promote, especially by extravagant, inflated, or misleading claims.
- Blatant or sensational promotion.
- Exaggerated or extravagant claims made especially in advertising or promotional material.

But definitions aside, it's mostly used to describe what happens when highly anticipated games/movies/whatever are promoted to high heaven, often without anyone knowing if the product lives up to the acclaimed super-high quality.

As I said: hype is to deceive; to deliberately mislead. In the context of promotion it would indeed involve extravagant, inflated, or misleading claims. This is not a good thing! The sleight of hand is done with distraction - by focusing on one aspect they draw your attention from other facets. You could argue that the focus on the positive elements of the game doesn't mean that they are concealing anything about the rest of it but there is a fundamental lack of details available to make such hype seem suspicious...

The last hyped thing I saw was War of the Worlds. There was a reason they didn't let reviewers see it and released only selected morsels of fottage in the trailers - the film was awful. I mean really bad. The only two reasons you would withhold detail is if it was really good or really bad. Despite the latter outweighing the former by a large margin I still gave it the benefit of the doubt (I am ashamed to admit it). I'm just pissed off that I couldn't get my money back or the hours of my life that I wasted.

The point is that I am synical for a reason. Most of us are. We've seen the bad and we know the good is a rarity. If the game is as good as it is cracked up to be I want to see proof otherwise I will remain sceptical about the 'hype' surrounding the game.

My personal prediction is that OB will be a better RPG than MW, but will probably not be a perfect pure RPG like you'd wish for. I definitely don't see it being worse than MW like some seem to think is inevitable given some of the info released...

I'm not sure I'd agree - while Oblivion will certainly be a better game than Morrowind (of that I have no doubt!) Oblivion moved away from character skills and further toward player skills. Surely in the sense of RPGs this would actually move Oblivion further from the RPG ideal?

I guess what set us apart from the crowd here is that we value the freeform gameplay and exploration aspects above the NPC interaction/storyline aspects of RPG's.

You cannot have freeform gameplay and exploration without the dynamic NPC interaction/storyline aspects of RPG's as you are restricted to doing certain things in certain orders. Morrowind was a nightmare for short, linear, quests - there was almost no redundancy built in as each quest was hand crafted.

The problem discussed in this thread is actually about the lack of freeform gameplay and the conflicting focus on an intricate storyline.

I don't want an intricate storyline with lots of important NPCs in an RPG. That's an "Adventure" aspect as far as I am concerned.

It's funny that you claim you "value the freeform gameplay and exploration aspects above the NPC interaction/storyline aspects" and then seem to praise MW's "more linear, (...) tighter and better told" main quest. So what do you value more now?

I'm all for the free-style approach. Static quests are too restrictive in many respects - certainly how they have been implemented in many games (Morrowind as an example). After playing Morrowind and Daggerfall for years I think Daggerfall was by far the superior CRPG. That said there was definite room for improvement - the sort that could be done now but for the further move toward action/adventure.

However I am not wholey adverse to having a main plot (I think many people would shy away from a game that had not ulimate goal). Maybe a broader goal is all that is needed?I think that it is important that your actions in the gameworld should directly impact how it plays out. I also think that you should be able to achieve goals in your own way rather than being forced to jump through hoops in a certain order although a jumping hoops is almost enevitable in CRPGs now (or is that just how I've been brainwashed for years? :shock: )

I understand that this is a tall order for any CRPG but I don't think that it is any reason not to try and make games as free-form as possible.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

The problem discussed in this thread is actually about the lack of freeform gameplay and the conflicting focus on an intricate storyline.

I don't want an intricate storyline with lots of important NPCs in an RPG. That's an "Adventure" aspect as far as I am concerned.

It's funny that you claim you "value the freeform gameplay and exploration aspects above the NPC interaction/storyline aspects" and then seem to praise MW's "more linear, (...) tighter and better told" main quest. So what do you value more now?

I think the two aspects are not necessarily mutually exclusive. In my first game of Morrowind, I stuck pretty closely to solving the mainquest, but I still appreciated the abitlity to just wander about, explore ruins, progress in some guilds, read the books, find out where which alchemical ingredients were found, etc. In subsequent games I sometimes ignored the mainquest completely, setting my own goals. You are right to say that Fallout took the nonlinear aproach farther with regards to the main quest, but really there are very, very few other RPG's that have done this successfully. And even in that game you probably had more fun if you followed the hints the developers throw your way, which means you follow the paths they have foreseen. And in a way, I don't mind being led through a nicely told, choreographed plotline, because it can be told (in the ideal case) following the rules of good storytelling. Morrowind was still quite lacking in that, failing to make key moments in the story truly stand out, but at least I had a clear idea of my goals, which I had a really hard time keeping track of in Daggerfall - not becasue that quest exceeded my mental capacity (as I am sure some here would like to suggest), but becasue of the way it was told, which was very disjointed. What I hate is when there is nothing more than the linear mainquest path, though. There were few games that were that linear and still managed to please me, KOTOR was one. However, a linear mainquest iis not "Adventure" style in my opinion - every P&P session I played and most CRPG's had a prepared story like that, too. However, like a good dungeon master, a good freeform RPG should allow you to deviate from the prepared path. But that does not necessarily imply that the path should not exist.