Oh my god. It's an excellent use of sarcasm. The point is valid. I'm glad the moderator isn't a robot. Your expectations are not of the highest importance.

Text is not the best way to convey sarcasm, where tone cannot be accurately judged.

I'm just putting my two cents in real quick again, it would be fun but like CCNA said, it would take skill away from the combat. Just hitting a button to target a specific area would be drab but if you hit the targets arm and then it fell off, could be nice. Not every single time though, if I wanted that I would just play Saw or something. And let's not turn this into a squabble. I like me some healthy debates.

I agree. Let's hope TES never uses anything from any other games ever!
See how that level of exaggeration does nothing to further the conversation?

Why so against locational damage like FO?
I see you say it was sarcasm...

I usually find it rather easy to judge the tone of a post just by the context.

This seems like an odd argument to make.

I could argue Fallout never had post-ending gameplay and therefore never should, but obviously a lot of people disagree with this, hence Broken Steel.
I could argue TES never had perks and therefore never should.

It's a moot argument. What the real issue is is, how does it hurt TES to include hit detection? It doesn't. Does it improve it? Some people would definitely appreciate being able to get headshots with bows, at the very least. So why not include it? One might say "time restraints" or "not that important" but it seems like it'd be fairly simply to do since they've done it before in Fallout 3.

It's been a gripe from day one that a head shot is no different than a limb shot, but does it ruin the game? Hell no! It's even hilarious when you get a chance to inspect your kill to find two arrows in the same nostril.

Combat is fine without kill cams. In fact its one of the games strongest points. Learn to utilise the shield bash to counter an enemy's attack. Master that and the combat becomes awesome.

But you can get headshots with Bows, it's called practice. I've gotten my fair share of them and I loved it but it would ruin the game for me if I just had to press a single button to lock onto their head and kill them. No skill at all.

TES would be fine with no combat?

So... you want a hiking simulator?

And pulling numbers out of my ass... really, have you played the game at all?

Though admittedly, that's just the shield. I think the point is that all other forms of combat (two handed, dual wielding, bow, magic) are by comparison very dull.

That was in response to his post where he said "Fallout had locational damage". That is why I responded that way. It was a weak response to a weak argument.

If you want an argument about locational damage and this game here is one:

If you watched the series Connections with James Burke, there was one episode where he took a sword and whacked a side of beef a few times. The damage done was large 12 to 18 inch long gashes about 6 to 8 inches deep. Basically, combat with swords, axes and maces ends not because someone dies, but because someone no longer has muscles and tendons that work so they can't swing a sword or stand. They just lay in the field of battle and bleed out.

It does not matter where you hit someone with a sword, a few good hits and the fights over, even if their life is not.

That's VATS. No one said Skyrim needs VATS.
We're talking hit detection recognition, as in, a headshot should do more damage than a shot to the arm. You can hit someone in the head obviously, but it's no different than shooting them in the toe.
We're talking being able to shoot an enemy in the knee to slow his movement speed, being able to shoot him in the head for more damage, etc etc etc.

One thing I feel I should point out is that there is still a valid point to be made here: how much of an evolution was Skyrim's combat from Oblivion's?

Morrowind to Oblivion was a major change. They threw out the old chance-based system where how much damage you dealt was determined by how long you held the attack button down and which attack you used and changed it to a system where every blow connected, damage was determined by skill level, and which attacks you could use were determined by your skill level, as well. They also added a bit more variety in the various attacks by allowing them to do different things (stationary power attack deals a lot more damage, sidestepping attack can disarm your foe, etc.). Furthermore, blocking changed from a passive chance-based skill into an active tactical skill. Those were some pretty big changes.

What did Skyrim do then? Kept everything above as-is, and added chance-based finishers (which are only flashy animations) and active bashing. Now compare that to the Morrowind to Oblivion transition.

See why everyone is so underwhelmed by Skyrim's combat now? Instead of trying new things like they did with Oblivion, Beth played it safe and stuck entirely to that same system that had been in place for the Elder Scrolls game everyone has been playing for the past five years.

Ok, my mistake for misunderstanding. ( Not sarcasm, touchy subject here. ) It would be nice but for me right now I'm happy with the game. If they did an update for it sure I wouldn't mind, I would probably enjoy it for awhile but I would hope they would add a function to turn it off.

Since the game can be played with no combat and some people do just explore the world, some can play it as a hiking simulator, if they want to. The game does not need to be changed for that.

TES has never been solely about the combat. Combat is just one of the things you can do and usually just one of the ways to solve a quest. But, it is not the only way to play the game. Most of the quests going back to Daggerfall can be resolved without violence. Only some quests force violence as the required path.

it be awesome if combat was improved but doesn't detract from the game being awesome.

Are we talking about the same Skyrim?

Playing a pacifist in Skyrim is damned near impossible. That is, if you actually wanna do anything interesting.

Apparently I can find tactics in anything because I think anyone who says Skyrim combat is just button mashing is not playing the same game I am. Combat is just fine and lots of fun. I like the power attack dynamic with locational differences. I like the perks and finshers. Its not perfect but seems pretty darn good to me. Thank thegods we don't have hit 4-5 button in aspecial order to do a relatively simple attack or even combo attack style combat. Hate that.

Yes more reaction to injury and locational damage would be nice but I'm just fine without it,

Not particularly.

I think you're purposely being blind to the fact that while you can make it a hiking simulator, all TES games are built with the idea that at some point the player will engage in combat. Not just the few "forced" times, but all players. Playing as a pure hiking simulator is an extreme to the norm that the design has put available to players. Combat is very much one of the major purposes of TES.

Maybe in another thread, we will see people asking for red dot sights and grenade launchers.

I personally enjoy Skyrim's combat system. Doesn't feel repetitive to me in the slightest - whenever I run across a difficult enemy, I'm using the environment to my advantage and trying new spells, or a different strategy. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. But at the end of the day, isn't combat in ANY video game little more than button mashing?

I am not blind to anything. Combat is an option for most quests in these games, but it is not the only way to do things. TES has never been about Combat as the only way to do things. Alternatives are in place for most pursuits in these games.

You are the one who wants TES to be all about the combat. Most everything you complain about is combat related. That's fine if that is how you play the game, other's can and will play it differently.

In a poorly designed game, maybe.