In my opinion they think that the player is to decide how to proceed in playing the game. This is key. You want to the developers to tell you how to play or lead you down a path on how to play. I think, and I'm only surmising, players like having control over how they interact with the game, even if it means somethings are imbalanced. They like having the control of being able to break the game if they choose. They like having the control of being able to make it more difficult if they so choose. Despite the obvious core game design of TES towards this idea, you do not like it and rather the developer take more control over what you can or can not do and limit what you can or can not do based your skill level rather than a players choice. This is why you hear these arguments when you suggest restrictions and control measure to "balance" the game as it limits the player for making that choice him self.


I refute the premise. You are of the opinion that "a lot of people" want change. I'm of the opinion "a lot of people" do not want change.

We disagree and neither one of us can prove our opinions. With that said you are asking me to answer a question that has an implied fact of a lot of people want change when simply you can not prove it. Further, you can not quantify how many "a lot of people" are nor can I. I also do not subscribe that "a lot of people" would think "it doesn't matter". You are asking me to accept these things as fact, when clearly I do not, when asking this question. So in order for me to answer that question under your terms, prove to me how many people want change. "a lot" is not a fair assessment to draw a conclussion. You are suggesting that "a lot of people it doesn't matter" when you can not prove this either. If you can prove to me that " a lot of people would not care", I might be able to answer this question. So I refute the premise of the question. Try asking question with out sneaking in your preconceived "facts" which are nothing more than opinions. For some reason you have a issue of turning your perception into facts with no real way to prove and insist other people accept those premises you present with the question you ask.

I

You do? You must have misread. Skyrim is about Grand Theft Dragon Soul, though we have a major lack of horses and no Skyrim horse radio.... Oh well.
Personally I am looking forward to going home for Christmas, will have access to my desktop. Re-download The Withcer 2 and apply patch 2.11, then I see if I join Roche side or if Iorveth manages to win my sympathy once more.

Skyrim is one big design flaw. Probably never run through extensive game testing either. The second you start the game there are problems looking right in your face, didnt even need to play more then 15 hours to discover them.

Sop presuming that you speak for me. You're not my advocate and we don't share the same opinion. Skyrim is not perfect but we are not of the same mind, particularly when it comes to "Open letter to the Developer" threads

I found myself getting killed. constantly. At around level 15 to 18, I got murdered by everything. then my friend told me that Smithing was the answer. and that svcks. cause that means I cannot build my character my way, I have to build my character Their way! This is not what the company promised.

Crawl back to your wow forums, pandas aren't that bad. Skyrim doesn't need any balance fixes, its a single player game and it wont matter if you aren't as powerful as your friend with different build because it's so easy game that you can kill everything with normal iron gear.

I
You have legitimate gripe about lock picking, but to drag it out like its game breaking is a bit much. It is a flaw, no two ways about it. Is it really that big of deal? Not when picking locks is such a small portion of the over content and picking locks are still challenging to many people despite this issue. Further, these ideas you have, you can implement them your self. Why do you need the developer do it for you? Why do you need the developer to limit my play so you can achieve your balance which ironically would imbalance my game. Makes no sense to me.

You need a developer to limit you.....I do not need that and find it restrictive.

theres a mod on the nexus called magicka regen or something similar

Are you mad? I believe Witcher 2 came with 4 difficulties and with patch 2.0 they added even more.
Do you know why they did it to a single player game?

Too bad Im forced to play on xbox.

See, this is a case of different players, not different builds per se

At level 15-18 I never touched smithing. And I wasn't killing everything in sight. I was holding my own. But from your viewpoint, since you got killed at the same level, the only answer is "smithing"

I didn't have to build "their way" at all. I have never touched to diff. slider but my experience is quite unlike yours. At around level 25 I had to start to smith, because I'd find two bears and it was a crapshoot if I had to fight both at once. Now I have about 75 in smithing and I can two shot most bad critters; my 2H weapon of choice does ~75 pts damage

How is my experience so much different- and enjoyable apparently- than yours? I think it's playstyle...what else could it be besides our personal preference for play

Your description is Heaven according to some players, BTW, if they could just avoid "having" to smith. Smith all you like, but if you find smithing buffs to gear makes you too powerful- don't buff your gear. You can still RP smithing. Make stuff and sell it

When you interject a stupid pop culture reference, your post has a shelf life of about two seconds with me.

You're right. It doesnt matter if Im stronger than my friend. The game is not that easy. It does matter when the dest. school of magic requires me to use enchantment and potions to become viable. Stop using illogical arguments that balance is not needed for a sp game.

It's not, you just don't know how to play

Where in the blazes are you reading that into what i'm saying? It's the current setup of the game that's forcing people to play a certain way, not people asking for balance.

I can give you a concrete example from my own experience: I wanted to play a destruction based mage, I got annoyed with needing ten or more spells against every equivalent level enemy once I hit 30 because I kept running out of magicka despite wearing mages robes that give big bonuses to regeneration and having invested 3 out of 4 levelups into magicka. I went to the forums to see if anyone knew what was wrong, The answer was "Enchant your gear to reduce the cost of spells to 0". I don't really want to level up enchanting, and even if I did, not having mana costs would ruin my fun, because it wouldn't make dealing with random enemies that take a dozen or more spells to kill any less annoying, and it would make boss fights completely trivial, because single enemies stand no chance if you staggerlock them.

So how is the current state of the game not leading me away from the way that I want to play?

Sure, that's my own experience, but what it boils down to is still that the status quo, the way things are currently are exactly the thing that's telling people how they have to play their game, not the other way around.


You haven't refuted anything, you just keep going on about how nobody has any facts, but you can't make a single good argument about any of the issues being discussed by people who see a lack of balance.


I mean how do you answer people who rightly point out that destruction magic cannot keep pace with any weapon in terms of raw damage, and cannot kill higher level enemies before running out of magicka unless you use enchantment to disable the magicka system alltogether?

Seriously, I want to know how you would refute that. Point out how there is absolutely no disparity there.

LOL. I don't even play WoW. And unfortunately you're completely lost in the whole point of all this thread.

If balance is not necessary in a single player game, then why don't people play Tetris using only 1x4 pieces? Because that would be stupid? Well, welcome to our whole argumentation..

People who think balance is only for multiplayer games should grab the construction kit and try to make some dungeons when its out. You'll be surprised by how hard it is to design good content for a wide audience if you have no idea how powerful the characters you're designing for are.

I can help with that

Although let's say for argument, I have a good skill in 2H weapons and I have a good sword, it's really not all that powerful until I back the skill up with another skill- smithing

On it's own, the 2H skill is moderately powerful, but to get more out of it, you need to back it up with another skill. If you want to play a swordmaster that refuses to smith, then you need to find an exceptional weapon or item that gives your gear a buff. Parallels to destruction are obvious

I agree that the concept of the 100% destruction buff is a problem; it seems to be a glitch or overlooked exploitable situation.

But still, it stands to reason that destruction is a thing you need to support with other skills, just like swordplay is too- it was supposed to work that way is what it seems to me

"Normal" play does not equal using the HARDEST difficulty.

You want to play on "Master" to stroke your peen, yeah you're going to have to work harder, isn't that the POINT of playing on Master?

You seem incapable of coming up with a logical argument. Instead, you have just been saying how it's my fault. And how do I not know how to play a game where the marketing campaign was play how you want?

In other words...

"I want to play a mage with out practicing mage things so I get mad when I can not effectively use my mage to do mage things". or......

I want to be a thief, but do not want to level pickpocket and when I try I'm always caught and have to go to jail" or

"I want to ve a thief, but do not wnt to level sneak and when I try to get close to someone to pickpocket, I'm detected"


You are making an argument for bad play and decisions by the player and asking the developers to compensate for it by "balancing" is so you do not have to train in mage things so you can be a good mage.








So your answer is it should not matter what decisions you make as to the progression of your character? There should be no consequence for you doing non-mage stuff, like avoiding enchanting? Try getting a staff to assit your mage? I've found plenty of them. If you want to be a mage but up your skills in everything but mage stuff, is that developers fault that you are not a good mage?



I'm not he one making the contentions. You are. I'm just asking you to prove them.




I'm not here to prove anything. You are.

This thread really wants me to have an ignore button for all those people that fail to even understand the very basics of game design yet feel like their idea of what they have no clue about is the only truth.

I agree with you on some you mentioned!

Why deliver a game that has so many wrongs in it i wonder, surely i did not see it coming but it would seem that all that is really important here is the cash it brings in wether the game is bugged or not!

Seriously if you buy a stereo which does not perform as expected/intended you would not accept that now would you?

Conjuration, Illusion, Bow, Sword And Board, and DW do not require exploits to work on Master. I think 2H might, but only slightly - nothing as major.

Double-post%

(sigh)

First, games are not about challenge. That is one of many design options. Read the MDA document that was presented at the GDC a few years ago (you can search for it, it is publically available online). To offer a specific example from that document, some players feel the entire point of playing a game is story and character. They do not want challenge, they want stories and characters they can empathize with. They want an experience, a process, and are not worried about "beating the game" per se, nor are they worried about "beating the challenge of the developers."

Developers do not know how I prefer to play, nor do I know (or care) how they prefer to play. I don't want to play a game the way they want to play it. I have to be able to play it the way I want to play it. Otherwise, I won't buy it. Pretty simple.

Destruction is not UP, max damage is not what matters, etc. Been through this many times since the release, so I am summarizing.