>>3777747
I've never heard any argument against the issues Morrowind has that wasn't just "It's not bad, you're just playing it wrong by not already knowing that what you're doing is wrong"
man, it's a game from 23 years ago. It's fine to admit that it has it's flaws.
Like I said, I love the game too, but that's only after I basically forced myself to see it through to the midpoint because I loved Skyrim and Oblivion so much. it's mechanics really only start getting fun and satisfying once you're past the annoying beginning where you're painfully slow, and need to set aside a few minutes just to hit a bug.
If you've heard anything about this game's development, you'll know just how much they struggled with budget cuts, time crunches, and playtesting issues. I don't see how anyone can think there's no issues with the core of this game with a story like that.
If I was designing this game, I would probably heavily increase the help that Agility gives you in hitting a target, and avoiding attacks, while lowering the dependence on weapon skill. Ideally, you should be able to hit a weaker enemy far more often than if you were attacking a late game monster at level 1. Making that one change would likely help make the early game feel far better for inexperienced players.
also, to give a better response than the one I gave to
>>3777684
What you were doing is not logical thinking. I tried to trace the steps of a new player reading the manual and interpreting what it says. You started with the conclusion of what the game actually is doing, and were working backward for reasons why someone should know that. That's not logical thinking.
