I think the UI is perfectly fine the way it is. I do not know what all this complaint about the UI. I've been playing games for years and still have plenty of information from the UI and control as such. If I were rating it on metacritic I wouldn't complain about the UI from fallen enchantress. That said it is about the reviewers on metacritic that decides what it is about.

Let us stay focused on what critics do... I know historically some critics miss the ball on what is going on. For example swan lake got very very bad reviews when it daybued. Also, the editor who rejected the Harry Potter series.

I didn't have problems with the UI on skyrim, but then again my standard for a UI is that it's better from a 1983 game.

So too is the UI extremely flexible modding wise. If you really need a spoon fed interface, make one. The majority of gamers will be satisfied with the current one.

Most 1983 games have better UI then skyrim.

I'd second that.  When Oblivion came out, one of the first things that got endlessly modded was the advancement system.  With Skyrim, it was the UI.

Plus, both oblivion and morrowind have vastly superior UI to skyrim.

That's because they were made for PC and Skyrim was made for console. Porting over console UI should have given their metascore a 70. The Metascore is illogical and corrupt. There will be many reviewers that give the game extra points for the narrative of FE's development and other reviews that take away points just because it has the same name in front of it as WoM. Just as Skyrim got +20 points for the quality of the last few games that had the same name.

Does anyone wonder why robots are so intent on destroying all humans? 

While over consolized, this doesn't explain 90% of the horrible design. Why are there just word labels instead of icons? (consoles suffer from low resolution and looking from afar so labels are WORSE on TV).

Why do lists start at the middle of the screen forcing you to scroll the window (on console or PC) even though there is enough room for the entire list to fit if it starts at the top?

Why is over 50% of the screen wasted space? (especially in magic where you just see a colored sphere)

Why can you see the individual item but not your character and how items are worn on him?

Why are items not sorted such that worn items show up first and are outlined (like in the last 2 elder scrolls games) to clearly indicate they are worn.

Almost every single problem with the UI is NOT related to it being a console port and if solved would make the UI superior for both console AND PC. I would say the reason the UI for skyrim is horrible is because it suffers from the same problem as fable... An "artist" in charge who places their artistic vision above usability and above criticism and would not allow the unwashed masses / underlings to tell them why it sucks

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/11/pc-skyrim-is-a-frustrating-messand-will-soon-be-the-best-version/

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/EricSchwarz/20111114/8890/User_Interface_Analysis_Skyrim.php

I have 3 (three!) different mods just to address Skyrim's UI. SkyUI, Better Sorting, and Categorized Favorites Menu. Without these three, frankly I wouldn't be playing it, in all likelihood.

Skyrim really is a weird beast. If it was for the UI, it should have tanked. Hard. I still hate that every time I want to add a perk, I have to cycle through *ALL* the abilities....

But moddability saved it. 

I use the same mods

And it only saved it on the PC, there are no mods on the console so the PC has vastly superior UI thanks to the mods... (oh, and there are things the mods can't fix)

So all claims of "console port UI is not bad UI" run into the problem that the PC is the only platform with an acceptable UI while the absolute worst of it is inflicted on the console players

Anyhow, the UI is not where FE will lose review points. It's the untested campaign and download integrity that are the biggest risk factors for next week.

Actually... this raises a great point.

Why is the campaign completely untested? Next week they should release the campaign as a beta and fix the bugs we find it before going final. (even a 1 week beta for the campaign could mean a big difference)

The campaign isn't completely untested. It has only been inhouse tested. I wouldn't mind play testing the campaign. It just requires us to play the campaign as quickly as possible to give them the bugs so they fix it before other players get far into the campaign

The campaign is a one shot feature. No one will likely play it more than once. If it's not perfect on release, it's not going to be retried. People are just going to play it once and go on to sandbox. There is no patch for this. Thus it must be perfect on release.