Dual wielding honestly feels like a last minute addition. If I recall correctly, Skyrim wasn't going to initially have dual wielding, so that explains a few things.

The dual-wielding dual attack is fairly useless since you can't move while doing it and there isn't much difference in doing a right hand swing - left hand swing combo as opposed to just doing a right hand swing over and over.

If you're going to play dual-wielding effectively, 9/10 times you're probably going to lolololo dual-power attack lawnmower everything down. It's not a very well thought out play-style.

You don't have to be a mind reader, all you have to do is read the thread that you're posting in. It's very simple, really.


And I'm not really asking them to change Skyrim's combat at this point in the game's release (Short of them releasing an expansion pack where a combat upgrade is one of it's selling points), but I'm not happy about the kill-cam direction. Truthfully, I was never happy about Bethesda adding kill-cam moves with their current implementation. Then they decided to add more which is a bit telling of things if you're an observant person.

The way I see it is, the time spent doing animations for the kill-cam moves and implementing them is time better spent ANYWHERE else. In any other department. Anything else. Really. Non-interactive repetitive "instant gratification" kill-cam moves are not my cup of tea.

They're not even executed properly as sometimes the kill-cam moves break, sometimes you get awkward camera angles, they don't function properly for NPCs, and every time (3rd person kill-cam moves is where it's noticeable) the transition of getting out of the kill-cam move looks bad because there is no animated transition, just lololo sliding.

I agree 100%

This is why the game became really boring for me really quickly. As you state the only new thing seems to be the shield bash. Ive been playing Oblivion on and off since it came out so then i get Skyrim and it feels like nothing has changed. Its 5 years later FFS. At least make it look like im hitting my enemy.

As ive said before, if you and your enemy are both using two daggers it looks terrible the way both of you are slashing furiously but theres no reaction to being hit, then one of you falls over, lol great!

As to the OP that would be great and would add a lot to the game, it would keep it feeling fresh for a lot longer. But ATM id be happy with my enemy just reacting to my hits, ya know so it looks and feels like im actually hitting someone.

Micheal!

Do you mean that, when you got struck in the head (HARD!) you fell down on the ground and was pretty vulnerable for the enemy?

There was no locational damage in any retail releases of Morrowind (Morrowind choosing a random part of your armor/body to hit to calculate armor damage and determine which armor type was used [heavy armor/medium armor/light armor/unarmored] doesn't count).

What you're speaking about has to do with your opponents agility and the weight of your weapon [I think it was the weight of the weapon. Could of been how powerful your strike was as determined by your strength and weapon damage] (Or vice-versa). I don't know the exact formula but that's the jist of it.

Yes, it did. But from one point of view, just like the changes made to Smithing (to bring it into line with how the other crafting profs leveled), the "addition" of kill-cams for magic and archery was more of a "finally finishing something they started", rather than work on a "new thing". (Think about it - there were kill-cams for melee combat, but not the other two types? That sounds like an unfinished feature.)

edit: also, this is patched in content. They'd never hack together an entirely new combat system (and be honest - making the combat have "realistic" physics and locational damage would be revamping it from the ground up), isn't going to happen in a patch. That's "maybe the next game" type stuff.

And since we're on kill-cams - yeah, that's another 'action game' feature that the "OMG, TES isn't an RPG anymore." crowd was moaning about for months.



The theory is that, the more you base combat on player skill (rather than character skill), the more "action" and less "RPG" it is. Putting in a locational melee combat system that's all about "whack him in the head! He'll die instantly every time, woohoo! " is a big shift towards player skill. (Not to say that the TES series hasn't had some level of player skill involved in it's combat. But the balance between the two is what the die-hard RPGer's seem to keep an eye on.)

Fair enough, I missed what you said there. My bad. and yeah I can agree the killcams are prone to clumsiness.

I think I may be scarred from the cod forums...: D

uh... welcome to every game ever...

I like the part where you forget that they added new kill-cam moves. I hate repeating myself, but anyhow, like I've said before, I don't expect a new from the ground up system. However, them working on kill-cam moves is very telling if you're an observant person. Like I've said before, time spent doing animation work for new kill-cam moves is time better spent doing anything else. Anything. Even taking a doo-doo.

And kill-cams aren't an "action game" feature. It's a Call of Duty feature.


Die-hard RPGers aren't playing Skyrim. If anything, they're playing Morrowind or Daggerfall. If a TES game at all in any case. I don't much care for these crackpot theories in either case. The Elder Scrolls has always been a first person action RPG. People tend to overlook this because the combat systems tend to svck rather badly when compared to other combat systems that are far better in other games.

Having a better combat system is just logical progression. Whether or not it adds more emphasis on player skill is moot. You can take nearly any combat system that was ever made and tear it apart and make it RPGish. Mount and Blade has proven combat and it also has RPG components. It's all about how creative a developer gets when looking at a solid combat system. Picking and choosing what to ... for lack of a better term, RPG-ify.

Skryim already does this to some extent, but the core combat system is lacking. Things like having to unlock Quick Reflexes or Block Runner. Having perks to make weapon speeds faster or more damaging. Things of that nature.

In any case, I never said I was for melee based locational damage. At least not with Skyrim in it's current state. Like I've said before (And I'm repeating myself because a lot of posters don't like to read the thread they post in), Skyrim's melee combat system doesn't support a precision aiming play-style very well. Locational damage would only be of use to archery, that's it.


Ignorance at it's finest.

Yup, here I'm going to list all the action-RPGs that has locational damage:

....



....


Fallout 3...



Deus Ex? (Not really.)

I guess people don't read what they write.

I guess I have to accept that one exception means that there are a lot of games like that... yup.

Also, there's barely any game that has locational damage outside of headshots, not even FPS games.

You said EVERY GAME. You weren't specifying only action RPGs. So yeah, I called that statement highly ignorant. There are many games that do location based damage. Including a vast majority of FPS games. What rock are you living in?

I guess you like to LOLOLOLO leave comments without even reading what you write and now you're trying to save face. Funny stuff.

Name a couple FPS that have locational damage, as far as I can tell every FPS game that I have played has only done this with the head and the head only.

Yes locational damage would have been a nice addition to the game but to include this something else would not be added or would have to be removed, then people would be complaining that, that something should have been in the game. Just except that the game is what it is and enjoy it. Compared to the games of the past the games of the present are kickass and that's probably why I am satisfied with what I got cause I remember what I had.

I'll name some old school games that have. Jedi Academy, Quake 3, Unreal Tournament, Counter Strike 1.6, Half Life. I think even Golden Eye had location based damage. More recent titles: Mount and Blade. Bad Company 2. Left 4 Dead 1 and 2. Counter Strike Source. There's more but I'm seriously not going to bother listing them because on the off chance that I get one or two wrong then I'll have a LOLOLO [censored] storm ensue and I'm all out of bubble gum.

Ah, see there's only 2 games out of what you listed I bothered to play, Golden eye( but I played the N64 version and can't remember if had it or not) and Half life but once again been sooOOOoo long since I played it. But the fact still remains, something wouldn't have been included or it would have been removed to include locational and then there would have been complaints about those things not being in the game, it's fine the way it is IMO. My question is why you cannot swing your weapon when you jump/fall?

In the context of what I was speaking it's not on me whether or not you've played said titles. And lets not bring "facts" into this, please. Why can't you swing your weapon in mid-air? It's either a decision decision or they couldn't be bothered to animate it so they went ahead and wasted their time animating kill-cam moves. But it's fine the way it is, right? Why question it? Why be ambitious and ask for something more? O.o...

Furthermore, a lot of peoples complaints stem from comparing Skyrim to the games that came before it. It's not really a good argument, but it did give me a good laugh.

What are you laughing at? I grew up playing atari to start then graduated into a nintendo then it progressed from there. Compared to what games used to be , Skyrim is Sci-Fi in comparison, so yeah I'm content with they way Skyrim is now.

Not that it matters, but I value what you have to say less because you simply sound like a person that is all like "Shut up and take my money!" [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QfSzgV1q5g%5D

When most people buy games, they normally don't compare modern games to Atari 2600 when weighing in on the choice of whether or not to buy a certain game.

Anyhow, inb4lock/postlimit. Adios. *Salutes*

Killzone 2 & 3 are excellent examples.

Now see I'm not even gonna bother discussing this with you any more cause your being a dike! And I don't care if a Mod sees that I called you a dike!! My point was, graphically,game play and everything in between wise games have come a long way, and I'm happy with that. Maybe if you played a game from the 80's or 70's for a good 10 years then maybe you would understand my point, but seeing how your spoiled with what you have you cannot see it for what it is.

Maybe because combat is not such a huge part of TES series? But nevertheless, you're full of crap, I'm sorry, but Skyrim's combat is really well done. Show me one sandbox 1st person action RPG that has such a good battle and you win, but you really can't.
God knows I think Skyrim has a LOT of flaws, but battle is not one of them, not even close.

I've never played the Fallout series, so bear with me here. I'm just curious how locational damage would work on stronger enemies, say a bandit chieftain. If I plugged an arrow into his hands and feet would he be pretty much incapacitated? Would a headshot kill him outright? Such an addition would certain make combat more visceral (and frustrating when fighting multiple opponents), especially if the same were applied to the player.