Am I the only person that thinks a game with as many bugs as Skyrim has shouldn't win any sort of GotY (I know it didn't here, but at almost every other place with a GotY it has)? Don't get me wrong, I love the game, but the massive amounts of hiccups and bugs are just so disheartening. Sure the 360 and PC version only have a few problems, one of which being some quests are rendered unfinishable, but the PS3 version is riddled with so many bugs, freezes and lag it's crazy. I've put nearly a hundred hours in and I'll sometimes have to restart 3-4 times in a 4 hour play session. I know that it's only one version, but a game should not be released if it has game breaking bugs in it. The fact that we have online patching available to all platforms is allowing devs to cut corners where they shouldn't, as well as allowing them to be greedy, but that's a different story. "The game doesn't work right? Eh, we'll fix it in a patch sometime down the line", and now that they have all their perfect scores and GotY awards, what's stopping them from doing nothing? The fans? Bah, they'll keep buying our game because they love 'em. It really pisses me off.
Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Portal 2, and Uncharted 3 all have a very minute amount of bugs and while the world they are set in is much smaller, you are still immersed in them all. Uncharted has that crazy action movie feel with characters you actually feel for, Deus Ex has you believing you are making actual decisions that effect what happens to the world around you, and allows for different play styles. Portal 2 has an engrossing story with its trademark humor and portal based puzzles. These games do almost everything they want to do completely right.
Also, while I'm on the subject of things being done right or wrong. In Skyrim, your actions don't feel like they have much of an impact at all. Sure, you can side with different sides, or you can marry a spouse, but beyond the very basic premise of the two, it lacks depth. You can marry a person after doing a fetch quest for them, and then you get to live with them, while they'll cook a meal a day for you or give you money from their shop, and they just sit in your house like some sort of backwards trophy with the depth of a Justin Bieber song. Not to mention the fact that all of the decisions you made in Fallout 3 and New Vegas felt much more tangible and real. Hell, in Skyrim, after you finish taking over a town with either faction you side with, it goes back to normal, like absolutely nothing happened. Maybe the Jarl changes, and a few "non-essential" NPCs die, but people don't seem the least bit displeased with the fact. I also hate that so many NPCs can't die, that you HAVE to side with either the Stormcloaks or the Empire, and that you can't screw over the world by being evil.
It's funny how people hated on the ending of Deus Ex: HR when it made it seem like you barely chose anything, yet what was said in each were pretty different, other than the fact that they all seemed to say Jensen died. I felt my choices meant something in that game, whether or not they actually built up to a different ending (which they did because each swayed you towards a different ending through experience. Besides; how much can change when the game is a prequel to a long existing franchise?
(This was originally posted by me as a comment on another gaming website's post) read