Exactly, and a good RPG gives the player the option to opt out of combat. I think a lot of people, including myself, like to play as more of an agent rather than a warrior. Players can be given both those options, so long as developers stop allocating so much time to advancing graphics.

I think Skyrim is a great example of how a game can be for casual gamers and hardcoe gamers at the same time, so why not give more opportunities for both types of players in the future?

Yes becuase making games easier for peopel to play is SOOO WRONG.

Only people who spend days upon days learning all the systems should be able to enjoy a game.


/sarcasm

Haha, of course! After all, why not?

I'm sorry but you absolutely CAN get 100 in every skill, but NOT max out perks.

So everyone's character ever made can attain 100 in every skill.

How does that differentiate me from you? Only in perks and the 3 attributes. and race choice. Done.

So, I won't call it what you are calling it......you are right it's not dumbed down......

It is less than what we had in past TES games........and less for me is never the same or MORE than what is now.

There is less character development now. Less math possibilities and dice rolls in the engine combat game......
and until someone from the devs comes here, or the ck is released, we really aren't going to be able to break down the combat
(I can always hit an enemy not blocking mechanic) to prove it.

I don't completely disagree with your post here, I do agree with your magic theory......but the combat......I am second guessing.

Just sayn

And this here is the fundamental difference.

*DISCLAIMER* I am not saying I -don't- want NPC response and reaction to my actions, in fact I totally believe that more in that regard would be better. However, games that have "more" often sacrifice player freedom for more "scripted" and linear choices, that while perhaps offer more significant consequence, but offer less choice for the player to make to customize their character in their vision.

Now to my point:

-Why do I care what an NPC thinks about my character? It's an NPC, artificial intelligence SCRIPTED by developers to respond a certain way.

What I do care about: The ability to create a character, and develop that character FULLY in my vision. Bethesda games offer me the ability to do that moreso than any other developer, The Elder Scrolls series being the leading franchise in that, and Skyrim arguably being the deepest amongst the bunch*

* = I don't count Arena or Daggerfall, because I have not played them in depth enough to have a valid opinion on them. My brief experience with them wasn't positive, but I haven't given those games nearly enough time to have a valid opinion, something I fully intend on doing at some point when I can get both games to work on my laptop.

I'm going to compare my 2 favorite developers for a second - Bethesda and BioWare.

In different ways, both of these developers do what is, in my opinion, the epitome of good RPG's. They both offer character customization, player dictated specialization, and choice throughout the course of the game for the player to direct the character's course.

But they do it in completely different ways.

Bethesda offers more on the "character building" aspect, giving you absolute control over the vision of your character. There is nothing stopping you from being a heavy melee combat warrior who also shoots fireballs at your enemies. Or being a fully learned mage who sneaks into people's homes and murders them in their sleep. The world is completely open, allowing you to go anywhere you desire, at any time you desire. You can go into whatever dungeons you want, whenever you want. You can go to whatever town you want, and you can become a citizen of that town, or you can terrorize it's inhabitants and unleash full fury on them in broad daylight, killing them all. You can choose to do the main quest, you can do it at your own pace, or you can ignore it all together. There are factions for you to join, and you can advance in those guilds as far as you want, or you can just join them, use their services, and never put any effort into the guild. 2 of the 3 Elder Scrolls I have played have political sub stories that you can get yourself involved in. It is totally about your character, and the choices that the player makes for that character.

BioWare, on the other hand, limits the character development aspect in exchange for deeper plot, and a "choose your own adventure" style of progression through the story. Consequences of your choices are often far greater than anything you'd see in The Elder Scrolls, but your choices are always limited to a limited number of pre-determined options. The world isn't open - while people complain about essential NPC's in Skyrim, there are tons of NPC's you can't even choose to engage in a BioWare game, even if you wanted to. The game guides you through a pre-determined story, there is no open world, there is no self pacing, you must go through the story, and there is a good level of character choice when customizing your character, but significantly less than anything that a Bethesda game will offer you.

Both styles are great. Bethesda is my favorite game developer, and BioWare is #2. Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, and Dragon Age: Origins are some of my favorite ever RPG's, with Mass Effect being a pretty good honorable mention (I'm not into sci-fi nearly as much as fantasy).

However, why I prefer Bethesda to BioWare is because in Bethesda games, I feel like the character is -mine-. I created the character. I directed his development. He became something -in my vision-. Everything about him. The game is less about the story, and more about the player's character.

BioWare games on the other hand are far less about the player's character, and more about the story. When playing a BioWare game, I don't feel like the character is -my- character. I don't feel like I directed his development. I felt like he was simply the main character in a story, and the "choose your own adventure" aspect of the game allowed me some choice in how the story played out, but ultimately, the character was still written and determined by the developers.

And that is why I will take Bethesda style games over anything else out there any day of the week. I feel the experiences in the game are more -my- experience, and not the developers dictating an experience to me. I am telling the game who my character is, instead of the game telling me who my character is.

And I feel that Skyrim goes even further in that regards, with the introduction of perks, which allows for even further customization and specialization, more so than ever before, because -NOW- characters actually DO end up unique, because of the limited nature of perks.

This is why I'd like to see a few more skills brought back in the next game. The perk system is wonderful, but it feels like players could specialize their characters even further if the game allowed it.

I don't like it. I'll be honest. Making the game, and hence the RPG system, easier to understand for people bothers me.

EDIT: I still like the game, I would just like it more with a more complex and spreadsheety RPG system behind it. Think; 7 page character sheet, Attributes with sub-attributes, skills with sub skills, several layers of renknown, reputation, faction reputation, locational damage, realistic inventory with grid based item distribution in your backpack and specifiying where each piece of gear is kept, traits and background information for characters with negative and positive effects, birthsigns back the way they were, more racial differences including dialogue and quests, multi layered level progression with separation between combat levelling and social levelling and merchant/crafting levelling. No level scaling for enemies at all, ever. More focus on skills, less on levels, less on perks. Slower levelling, hardcoe mode always on. GPS compass locaters, never.

I would even be happy to just see a minor compromise in the direction I mention as I am fully aware that the game I really want to play will never be made unless I make it. I could make the RPG system and help with NPC behaviors and quests and story but I would need a big team to help with and do most of the rest of the stuff. If it was just pencil and paper I would need someone to do the artwork for the rulebook and edit.

Numbers and dice rolls do not an RPG make.

As far as perks go, I will tell you exactly how it is more unique.

In Morrowind and Oblivion, your skills were a simple 1-100. Everyone who was 100 in Conjuration was the exact same. But in Skyrim, you may have 2 people who are 100 in Conjuration, while one is a specialist in reanimation, another is a specialist in Atronach conjuration, and a third is a specialist in bound weapons.

In Skyrim, you can have 2 characters who are 100 in One Handed, but one is a specialist in Blades and power attacks, but another is a specialist in Axes and Dual Wielding, while a third is specialized in all weapon styles (and as such, specialization is taken out of other skills due to perk investment).

In Skyrim, you can have someone who is 100 in Heavy Armor, and specializes in their armor bonuses, giving them maxed out protection, while another is more specialized in the more agile branch of the Heavy Armor perk tree.

In Morrowind and Oblivion, all level 100 in are the same. In Skyrim, perks allow for further specialization.

Honestly, Skyrim (and any game) isn't that complex. I mean, what would you like us to talk about? Please, good sir, the floor is yours.

That's just... I don't even...

Yes. This is true. But the combat system and the way the calculations are made is still "foreign ground".....

It seems after several play throughs for me, that no matter what race i choose or stamina amount given, a sword's damage is the same
across the board......so.........how does damage get calculated? How is it factored in?

I m sorry it just bugs the heck out of me, but these things could be figured out with the numbers in hand.


And that's why when a poster says the dice rolls are gone, that's what they are talkin about.

My mage swinging a sword with 100 stamina will do the same damage as your mighty Nord Warrior with 200 stamina?

Can you show me the proof in the damage output or strength somewhere?

I hope for the sake of the series that the devs did NOT make it the same for everyone across the board.

I guess in the end all knifed weapons from the kitchen knife to 2-handed sword will be put under `blades.`

No wait, Bethesda could go one better and put all weapons under one skill- `Weapons`.

Yea.

Would it matter if one handed and two handed were merged as long as the two handed and one handed perks were both put into the new "melee weapon" skill?


NOPE, becuase nothing could be lost.

Perks are a dumb word.

I am not a big fan of streamlining and what they did to Skyrim, although I still enjoy the game. However I have noticed what thye did with the attributes is intergrad them into the 3 main ones now. I have noticed that the higher my stamina, the less I get disease and so on.

Ah, it`s my stalker friend again. I always get the odd one like you that follows me around like a puppy.

You need to give it up, pal.

EDIT:- wall of text condensed to.. times change... it svcks sometimes.. some enjoy it, some don't

Lucky for me I like skyrim more, it could have so much more init in place of things it does... but... let that be in the next game or w/e this will do for ￡40

because as im too poor to get an awesome pc and get the awesome stuff pc's get... this is the one of the best rpg's on xbox for me.... or at least... its new and i havent played it to death

hop on the skyrim bus or wait for the next one I guess <- i love this guy haha =]

Yes, I agree with most of this.........what bothers me is the combat mechanic and how damage is dealt with mathematically.

The father of Role play is not video game related, and it is all about rolling the dice my friend.

Dungeons and Dragons started the whole thing for me......once the dice rolls completely go away, rpg will remain in lower case letters for me.

So, "numbers and dice rolls DO make an rpg when it's not video game related?"

I think you meant to say: Numbers and dice rolls do not a CRPG make......

Lol, I am not following you, your not that important.


I just cant stand it when people make up BS claims in order to insult games, unfortunalty thats most threads so I have to be in many places at once.


I am on 8 or so diffrent forums right now.

That doesn't make sense, because you need speechcraft to determine if a person will crap itself, or punch you in the face.


Oh god thank you, I thought no one was aware!

No it's not the same, because your mage with 100 Stamina probably doesn't have any weapon skill perks, which increase damage, where the big hulking Nord with 200 Stamina probably does.

Proof?

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:One-handed
http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Two-handed

Tons of "increase damage" perks, that will allow that hulking Nord to do more damage than your little mage.

It is literally the same exact thing as increasing Strength as a Warrior, or not, with a mage.

And if your mage does have the One-Handed or Two-Handed damage perks, well then, you invested in it, and yes, you should do the same damage.

That's the beauty of Elder Scrolls, is the ability to make a lowly Wood Elf just as strong of a warrior as the strongest of Nords, or making the brooding Redguard just as powerful a mage as even the best of High Elves.

Duke Patrick's Combat Magic managed to successfuly implement a Ward-equivalent spell into Oblivion, so you are incorrect there.
And reanimating... did you even play Oblivion? http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Reanimate

For me, the new magic system is interesting, but not enough got changed. About 85% of the spells work exactly the same way as before (cast spell for X magicka for an effect that lasts X long). Spellmaking has been replaced with dual-wielding and dual-casting, but it should not have been replaced at all, spellmaking had no reason to be removed (and since it is so easy to break the game balance through smithing and enchanting that argument is invalid).

As for the new stuff, we traded 22 spell effects (more if you count the bound weapon losses in Conjuration) and half of a skill (which was removed in name, in reality, almost every magic skill got stripped down). We got 6 new effects, three new casting methods that are under-used, and one effect revitalized from Daggerfall in return.

I am willing to embrace the new system, but I do NOT believe in any stretch that what we traded it for was a fair deal. Magic got a major dressing-down for Skyrim, as options we had available to us previously are gone when they had no need to be removed.

I still don't agree. I've played D&D sessions before where the dice rolls were kept to a minimum, and the experience was all about us making choices and decisions for our character, not rolling dice. Those were the best ones.

Co-Op I wouldn't mind, but if they added in gun powder, then I would would never buy a TES game ever again. Just look at what happened to Mount and Blade, in the latest installment.

Mods are not Bethesda game design or mechanics. That's not a valid argument.

And the reanimation was from one rare, hard to find item. It wasn't a spell effect.

EDIT - My bad, there were 2 ways to obtain the effect, one of which was to get the Staff of Worms by beating the Mage's Guild quest, and the other was to finish another quest. Neither of which made the effect a regular spell effect in the game. In Skyrim, there are entire builds based around it.