Official: Beyond Skyrim TES VI #88

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 6:37 am

I feel the same. Ultimately, those beginning segments are too short to really get a grip on deciding how you want to play. At best, it may help nudge a seasoned role-player who's winging a new character, to see how "their character" reacts to something before selecting it in chargen, and a seasoned role-player is the type of person that could do without it.



In Skyrim, we didn't really have a "live" chargen anyway. All it really was, was a delayed race/name selection. You could put that at the very start before the opening cart ride, and that's all you need to do to start the character and begin playing. Everything else is handled dynamically throughout the game. At that point, the starting sequence/dungeon only serves to act as a tutorial and start the main story. The former is unnecessary for most repeat play-throughs (and can be handled better for first play-throughs), and the latter doesn't need a whole forced scripted introductory sequence/exposition dump and dungeon that you must go through before being allowed to start exploring. There are far better ways to introduce the main quest/story than shoving it in your face before you can really begin playing (even Morrowind makes sure you know you're a special prisoner being released and you need to take that package to Caius in Balmora to get more orders, before being allowed to start exploring).

User avatar
Franko AlVarado
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:49 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 9:23 am


Then again, before that the only choice you made that matters is race/looks (and IIRC you get an autosave just before chosing name, race etc). The Warrior/Mage/Thief Stones are encountered after leaving the tutorial... And you'd be hard pressed to have leveled anything, so you wouldn't have distributed any trait points yet...

User avatar
Ryan Lutz
 
Posts: 3465
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 12:39 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:41 am


I tend to agree. I think the idea behind it was that you'd make relevant selections at such a time as what they govern became relevant to the tutorial phase, but it ended up being something of an awkward interaction.






It's unfortunate, however, that New Vegas than proceed to spoon feed you unavoidable character identity which, particularly on your first playthrough, required you to constantly re-write your own backstory.

User avatar
Harry Hearing
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 6:19 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 2:44 am

I give NV a pass there since Fallout's always given the player character a set history or personality. In light of that, I enjoyed finding out who Courier 6 was. Conversely, TES is more about creating your own character from scratch so I would have been disappointed if they ever said why the Champion of Cyrodiil or the Nerevarine was imprisoned or what the LDB was doing at the Skyrim border.

User avatar
Harry Leon
 
Posts: 3381
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 3:53 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 7:48 am

Yeah, and New Vegas had the buffer of the fact that you had been shot in the head to allow for rather dramatic gaps in memory. In hindsight, it wasn't that bad, it was just a jarring experience going through because it's such a reverse of standard RPG identity.


The more open-ended nature of TES does have some inherent problems, despite its freedom. The inability to springboard relationships, establish motivations, or even manage simple conversation and interaction makes such games a significantly different beast than more structured RPGs like Fallout, or The Witcher. It's not insurmountable, of course, just requires something if a different approach, both from the development side, ans from the Player side.


Thinking about it, I am somewhat open to a more Oblivion-Like tutorial model, where you go through creation gradually as you go through your intro sequence. I say this because it functionally lets you take things for a spin before jumping in full force... But at the same time, it would require that those character design decisions be more obviously impactful, otherwise yours still basically making choices. blind to their overal impact. And if you can skip it, you're still going to need a more traditional, front-end Character Generator. What I don't want to see, however, is one of those questionnaires...
User avatar
Courtney Foren
 
Posts: 3418
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 6:49 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 1:30 pm


We all want TESVI, but releasing TES titles at the rates of FIFA, Madden, etc. releases is a horrible idea. No offense, because I don't want to sound rude. It would greatly dilute the quality of each game. Also, games like FIFA, Madden, even with whatever new features they implement, are still a huge part just roster updates of teams. With TES, you have to do far more than just implement new characters, which is way more difficult than virtually updating rosters of real-life teams. TES games are significantly bigger.




Anyways, I forgot about Oblivion's auto-save feature right before leaving the sewers where you could change the character. That could be neat to implement again, depending on how the tutorial is in TESVI.



I'm all for having a more in-depth character creation a la Daggerfall, with some tweaks of course. Having some of the flexibility that Skyrim allowed for character growth, combined with some of the predisposed character traits from decisions he/she would have made earlier on in their lives like earlier TES games had would be ideal, IMO.

User avatar
Zach Hunter
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 3:26 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 2:34 am

It's something that I find a lot of people miss, and something I have a tendejcy to bring up a good deal around here (though, by this point i think everyone here recognises it) but, this is what Skyrims system is about. Growth. You BECOME someone, rather than start off as someone. Its entire system for identity is about building as you go, and while it still suffers from the usual Bethesda poor-execution, I think it's an amazing philosophy.


Were it not for one fact... You don't magically spring from the ground 10 seconds before the title screen. While the freeform growth of your character throughout their adventures as a massive improvement over the previous Class-Driven progression dynamic, the total lack of any differentiation system to influence your starting point was a huge step backwards. And that's something that really should be addressed moving forward.
User avatar
The Time Car
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 7:13 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:37 am

Even that's debatable. I'm kind of fond of the theory that the LDB didn't exist until they woke up on that carriage and everyone's memories were tampered with. You have the favor of Akatosh and almost certainly Talos so it's not out of the realm of possibility. For that matter, the CoC doesn't even know why they're in jail.

User avatar
Alada Vaginah
 
Posts: 3368
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:31 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 4:15 am


Well, considering the state of the Empire, that's not too out there. Uriel's rule was just one step above garbage. He was like if a Zodiac Crazed hippy were put in charge of the US, and made all their decisions through Tarot Cards and the alignment of the stars. While the 3rd Edition PGE paints a rather rosy picture of Tamriel, past information from a less biased source indicates the entire Empire was going to [censored], and fast. Random arrests with no formal charges aren't too outlandish.

User avatar
Laura-Lee Gerwing
 
Posts: 3363
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 12:46 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 12:29 am

IIRC, post-Tharn was a pretty good time for him, relatively speaking. The Empire was on the verge of collapse given Tharn's machinations, and that Uriel was able to hold it together for a few more decades until his assassination by Daedric cultists doesn't show him to be a bad or incompetent ruler. Besides, you still appeared in a cell that was supposed to remain empty since it was a secret escape route, something the Blades (Tamriel's top spies) couldn't explain. While that allows you, the player, to spin it however you wish, it does also leave open the possibility that you did just appear from nowhere.
User avatar
Robert Devlin
 
Posts: 3521
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:19 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 3:45 pm

There was the War of the Bretony, which destabilised Highrock for 15 years. Hammerfell was simmering in a state of near open war for the entirety of his reign. There were multiple unsuccessful campaigns to try and consolidate the slipping control of Blackmarsh (the Blackwood company rising out of the last one). Coscades, in Morrowind, indicates that political assassinations are growing more common, there was unrest amongst the nobility because of Uriel's ineffectual rulership, and may suspected his heirs had all been replaced by impostors and Daedra. While it's difficult to seperate rumours from fact, it also seems that just before Uriel's death, several provinces (notably Morrowind and Skyrim, and Valenwood and Elsweyr) teetered on war as well.



He had lots of people conspiring against him, sure, but Uriel's reign was not a prosperous one.

User avatar
Matt Bee
 
Posts: 3441
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 5:32 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 12:56 pm


The Empire is clearly in decline in 3E 433. Forts are no longer being maintained. The roads are not safe. We are asked to investigate Imperial corruption because the Empire is not doing anything to stop it. Rumors of uprisings in other provinces are on everyone's lips. The Empire is oblivious of a well-orchestrated plot to assassinate the entire Royal family. It's clear the devs would like us to infer that the Empire is on its last legs.

User avatar
Nicholas C
 
Posts: 3489
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:20 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:50 am

Forget infer, Daggerfall explicitly says the end of the Septim Empire is near it in the opening cinematic. Given the state of the Empire by the time of Arena, it wouldn't have still existed by the time of Oblivion if he wasn't doing something right, but it was a sinking ship since Tharn. Nothing could've saved it, but Uriel was able to do something to keep it from immediately falling apart on his return.

User avatar
Marguerite Dabrin
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:33 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 3:32 am

I agree. Due to Tharn, there would always be rumors about Uriel and his descendants. Not to mention the more direct political damage that Tharn caused. Only a new dynasty could have saved the Third Empire. Incidentally, this is exactly what happened. Uriel seemed to have some knowledge of the future; it's possible he tried his best to keep the Empire together with the hope that after his assassination a new dynasty would arise and keep the continent from completely going to [censored]. Not that that plan (if it existed) worked out all that well...



Still, the Septim dynasty was living on borrowed time. Uriel must have done something right to prevent total collapse as long as he did.

User avatar
Charity Hughes
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 3:22 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 12:26 pm


Considering we still haven't seen that total collapse 200 years later... I don't really think he did. The Dynasty ended, sure, but the Septim Empire survived them, and maintained a relatively stable state for a significant amount of time.



But this isn't really the place to discuss whether or not Uriel VII was a competent ruler. The overall point of bring it up was, randomly being arrested and having no idea why you're in that cell isn't that outlandish. Waking up in a cart and having no experience doing anything beyond breathing (and, considering the dialogue options in Skyrim, even that is questionable) is a little more of an extreme 'Spontaneous Genesis'.

User avatar
Julie Serebrekoff
 
Posts: 3359
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 4:41 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:53 am


The forts in Morrowind looked pretty well maintained to me...

(The forts in Cyrodiil are ruins from Reman's era - it's even said so in-game)

User avatar
sally R
 
Posts: 3503
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:34 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 7:01 am

And considering Cyrodiil's legal system, they may have been arrested for stealing an apple five years ago or something. :P

User avatar
Alyce Argabright
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:11 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:18 am

I have always wanted to know just why the hell Jagar Tharn usurped the Imperial Throne. It isn't really specified what his purpose was for throwing Uriel into Oblivion. Whether it was just power, wanting to watch the world burn, etc. we don't know, except that Mehrunes Dagon helped him. Anyways, seeing as how Uriel ruled for 65 years I'm inclined to believe he wasn't totally incompetent. And from sources in lore it sounds like he did a solid job as Emperor up until Tharn imprisoned him. His level of competence afterwards could be debated for quite some time though, sure. But yes, such a discussion is best left for another thread.

User avatar
Casey
 
Posts: 3376
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:38 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 3:37 pm

Here's some of my ES:VI wishes, let me know what you think!



? Oblivion style local maps. A big part of the fun I had in oblivion's dungeons was the dungeoneering aspect of having to check my map semi-frequently to make my way around. I think this helped to promote a maze-like feeling and I think this was largely lost in skyrim's more straightforward dungeons.


?Oblivion style in-menu art. Skyrim's barebones design was in some regards a huge improvement in terms of manuevering quick menus and effectively viewing individal objects, however oblivion had a moderate amount of character in its in-menu art, such as weapons, level up quotes, and quest banners that I truly missed in Skyrim.


?Morrowind style equipment. Allowing clothes under or over armor can help to promote moments where players are excited to see that they can live out their ideas and wishes as they play. Adding spears, slings, and a generally wider variety of basic weapon categories would go a long way in this regard as well. Letting players do more in general can promote immersion and characer development, and with fallout 4 expanding some ways in this regard I have faith in the future of ES. The thing fallout 4 detracted from in this regard was that it had too few categories of weapons and needed, in my opinion, more characer to its weapon variety. That being said there are small fixes that can be made to alleviate this. You shouldn't find a randomized pipe rifle in a 200 year old sealed vault. You also shouldn't have found 1000 pipe rifles before the first assault rifle (see level zones below) you should find many types and have to find a way to work with it (seems fun).


?Expanding character options. I would encourage allowing players to reach, perhaps hidden, milestones that affect how they play as they progress. Skyrims perk system did this but it had too much focus on numerical values as opposed to ability, and there was no surprise in advancing in skill. Oblivion's journeyman system is a good example of the direction I'd like to see the system going; training hand to hand eventually added damage from your gauntlets as you reached a certain efficiency, and to know this you had to master it which made accomplishing it all the more exciting and promoted a need to learn about the game so you could find these secrets. Perhaps the abilities you choose in the level up menu are vague hints at your new ability that you only see once they're available ("your time spent in meditation and practicing your form has allowed your fists to pierce a new veil" could represent a skill you acquire from practicing hand to hand and having a high willpower that allows you to punch ghosts/daedra. This is strictly an example). This would promote people to think of it as "oh I have to train like a monk to become more poweful" as opposed to "oh I have to raise my one handed to become more powerful". Taking this further and applying it to the stat system also seems rewarding, an example being something akin to raising your strength attribute could allow the use of larger weapons (which brings us to...)


?Returning to the Attribute system. Skyrim promoted a simpler way of showing how a character grew in strength (use one handed =better at one handed weapons) and while this had its advantages it leaves an immersion gap where characters will have mastered a skill and be a simpleton at other similar skills, and this is bittersweet in my opinion. I think if you were to bring back the attributes it would solve this problem (train one handed =better at one handed + get stronger) and makes creating a type of character more satisfying as your skills will all come together as you grow.


?level specific zones. I dislike encountering the same difficulty for too long almost as much as I dislike being under or over leveled. I think level specific zones, or even just more dangerous zones like the minotaur area in oblivion, would help make the world feel more dangerous in areas which is really fun. I think I'm not alone in that once I'm experienced with a game I like to challenge myself, and high level zones allow players like that to test themselves against an area that would otherwise kill them, for the promise of the power that follows the challenge. I don't think removing or nerfing the harder zones with better loot makes the game less oppressive I think it cheapens the area for those who try to take them on from the beginning. There should be specific places where the game is harder.


Honorable mentions to my favorite bethesda features: magic maze in Skyrim (forgot the name), unique high level dragon types in Skyrim (especially the water dragons, please more big water creatures!!) Dunwitch cameo in fallout 4 (should've had it a bit scarier and with more squids Imo but still good), lockpicking system from oblivion (best one ever), knights of the nine dlc (need more love for paladin characters).
User avatar
Jade Muggeridge
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:51 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 11:34 am


My opinion is the exact opposite. I hated the look of Oblivion's menus. I thought they looked terrible. The design was bizarrely unintuitive, the icons were ugly, the colors were uninspiring and the map looked like complete crap. We couldn't even see the entire map. I hated having to push the map around to see where I was going. There was no reason to only allow us to see a small section of the map at one time.






This I agree with. One of my first and biggest gripes with Oblivion on day one was the removal of so many apparel slots. It still galls me, actually. Roleplaying is all about choice. The more choice the better.






Sorry, but I can't stand this idea. I want to know exactly what I am choosing. I don't want developers to play games with me. Tell me what I am choosing so that I can make an informed decision.






I agree with this completely. I bitterly miss Attributes from past games. I think it was a terrible descion to remove the traditional seven Attributes and I hope they return in TES VI. I would implement them differently than they were implemented in the past, but I would definitely bring them back.






I think Skyrim does this better than any Elder Scrolls game Bethesda has made. It certainly does it much better than Oblivion. There are dungeons with minimum levels of 24 in the game. That is more severe than anything I know of in the rest of the series. Giant camps are far more dangerous and level-specific than the Minotaur area in Oblivion.



As far as overland "zones" go, I am not a fan of MMO-style "zones" in non-linear open-world games. I don't even like the word "zone." To me, "zones" feel arbitrary. MMO-style "zones" and non-linear open-world games are fundamentally incompatible as far as I'm concerned. I don't want to be forced to postpone doing my next Mages Guild quest because it takes me to an area that is too high for my level.



It there is a solid, story-based reason for a certain area to be particularly dangerous, that is a different story. Morrowind did this well, I think. There was a story-based reason for Red Mountain be higher-level than the rest of Vvardenfell, and I support that. But unless there is a genuine reason for a "zone" to be difficult I think it is a bad idea in a series like this.

User avatar
Colton Idonthavealastna
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:13 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 7:06 am

Firstly, thanks for reading. None of this is meant to be pejorative if it sounds like it, I'm just interested in your thoughts. Been looking to discuss.



I totally agree when it comes to the dragging the screen and smaller map limitations of oblivion, i think skyrim's overworld map is in every way better. I'd refine my statement, because you're right in that regard, to being that I prefer the art style of the Oblivion local maps to the Skyrim local maps. This also translates to the menu design, I felt that Skyrim looked like a computer interface and preferred that Oblivion looked like my character's journal. But I do agree that oblivion's icons and maps could have looked better than they were, and that Skyrim improved upon the ability to use the menu and maps entirely. My ideal situation would be a combination of the two.






Sorry, but I can't stand this idea. I want to know exactly what I am choosing. I don't want developers to play games with me. Tell me what I am choosing so that I can make an informed decision.




Did you dislike the journeyman system from Oblivion, and are you opposed to the idea of hidden abilities based on your skills? I personally like the idea of hidden knowledge being represented like this but i'd like to hear your reasoning.






I think Skyrim does this better than any Elder Scrolls game Bethesda has made. It certainly does it much better than Oblivion. There are dungeons with minimum levels of 24 in the game. That is more severe than anything I know of in the rest of the series. Giant camps are far more dangerous and level-specific than the Minotaur area in Oblivion.



As far as overland "zones" go, I am not a fan of MMO-style "zones" in non-linear open-world games. I don't even like the word "zone." To me, "zones" feel arbitrary. MMO-style "zones" and non-linear open-world games are fundamentally incompatible as far as I'm concerned. I don't want to be forced to postpone doing my next Mages Guild quest because it takes me to an area that is too high for my level.



It there is a solid, story-based reason for a certain area to be particularly dangerous, that is a different story. Morrowind did this well, I think. There was a story-based reason for Red Mountain be higher-level than the rest of Vvardenfell, and I support that. But unless there is a genuine reason for a "zone" to be difficult I think it is a bad idea in a series like this.




Skyrim does do a better job of incorporating difficult areas into the environment, i suppose my implication with the minotaur camp was that it was a unique instance of this example and I preferred that unique experience to finding giant camps or wispmothers because there was an in story reason for that place being dangerous.



I don't think anyone wants MMO-esque areas, that would svck. Let me clarify that 'Level Specific Zone' is poor wording: I do NOT want level specific areas in ES:VI. The word Zone doesn't imply a genre of game to me, I think if I had used the word Area the idea would've made more sense. What I do want is areas of the game that are more difficult to maneuver where you may find yourself having to come back later once you're stronger to be able to effectively deal with it. In your example I would want my mage's guild quest to be available to any level of character in terms of being able to start and complete it, but have it be told to me in-game that It was beyond my character's capabilities because the environment was dangerous, and in that regard I'd almost be appreciative of the fact that I might have to postpone my Mage's guild quest because when I got there, there was good reason to. Then, I feel, that helps give gravity to what the NPC's have to say. Again, skyrim does this but it became to some degree, stale, because there was no reason behind these generic dangers other than "skyrim's full of giants".





Do you think it's likely to happen? You seem to be around here more often you might have more info on the course of action.




Again, no h8 just deb8 thanks for the reply! :)

User avatar
Nina Mccormick
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:38 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 3:31 am

First off, as you're new and i haven't seen any indication you've been given on... Have ahttp://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/436072390877506621/AADB0B300DBC7B6FF89882F6ADB95C7B6ABE15A0/?interpolation=lanczos-none&output-format=jpeg&output-quality=95&fit=inside%7C337:506&composite-to=*,*%7C337:506&background-color=black, it's a tradition.





it's rather unfortunate, but none of us here really have any sweet clue what is likely to happen. It's a pretty widely agreed point that they SHOULD return, though there's a lot of debate over how.






For my part, i'm against both.



While i liked the idea of functional advancement and techniques in many skills in Oblivion, the linearity and liking them straight to Skill-level was a major disappointment. I think Skyrim's Perks served a far better platform for those sorts of abilities, allowing you to shape a greater range of possible expressions within a skill, rather than everyone of the same Skill-level being the same.



I'm also not a fan of hiding things or being deliberately obtuse. It's one of the elements of Dark Souls that i hate the most (and why i argue it's a poorly made game) because i feel it overly drives the need to go outside the game for information. Save for very rare, usually story-driven things, the abilities and their functions that appear in game should be clear and concise. How that information is represented can of course vary, from in-game books to functional tool-tips to actual dialogue, but if you deliberately hide something, there should be a very good reason for doing so.






Personally, i don't like levelled environments. It may be from my start in old-school games like Ultima, Quest for Glory and even Baldur's Gate, but i like the idea of being able to run into enemies of any level, at any time, and having to react accordingly. Being told "Don't go that way because it's super dangerous" is fine in limited doses, but not a good way to build a whole world, because it limits danger to set level-challenges and not an organic flow. I definitely think that the world-leveling could be handled much better than it has in the past, but a Witcher-like approach isn't something i'd endorse.






There are elements from all 3 recent games that i like, and other ones that i don't like.



Morrowind's adjustable windows was, frankly, amazing, allowing you to set up the overall interface in a way you wanted (though it was not the easiest to use on Xbox). It's general problem was it's near total inability to present any information without directly highlighting something, making at-a-glance use almost impossible.



Oblivion had a generally immersive system with it's paper look, but tended towards being way too stylised and having your character model right there taking up 60% of the screen regardless of what you were doing.



Skyrim's system was more varied, and allowed you to individually view items (and spells, though that probably could have been expanded to make it more than just a glowing ball) and tried to move away from the traditional book or spreadsheet format... but ultimately is suffered from poor controls and still didn't really present useful information without directly highlighting things. And it's Journal was absolute garbage.



Frankly, i think they've all svcked rather equally... Though creating one that is more functional is easier said than done. While i didn't like it personally, i think Oblivion's was the most functional of the 3, at least from a multi-platform perspective.

User avatar
Kat Lehmann
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:24 am

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 12:39 pm

If I had to bet money, I would say Bethesda won't bring back attributes. They will work on perks enough to make them seem like the good idea they are, but not enough for most people to be satisfied.



I wouldn't mind being wrong, though. The perk system is a better way of showing progression than us just 'acquiring' new abilities based on our skill level, but it doesn't paint a complete picture of an RPG character. There could be more to work with if attributes are back.



That being said, the work of differentiating between what perks, skill level and attributes ought to control is more difficult than you might think. We've all been talking about our ideas for attributes and nobody has a really good idea for Personality and how it relates to Mercantile and Speechcraft as skills, for example. Nobody can agree on what, exactly, Intelligence should do. Does it make you better at magic? We have examples of idiots who can fireball with the best of 'em, and many believe Intelligence should be just as useful for fighters to invest in, so it should have other, more general benefits.



The more I think about it, the more I see that greatly expanding the quantity and quality of perks could serve to completely replace attributes, provided we have a few new skills to choose from (acrobatics comes to mind).



We could approximate 'attributes' with a more detailed, Daggerfall-style character creation system in which we pick our character's resistances, weaknesses and other such things.

User avatar
Janine Rose
 
Posts: 3428
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:59 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 5:02 am

I am equally confused and appreciative




At some point I remember hearing that, but that hadn't occurred to me today. I guess you're right in that regard, I'd have to agree.




Ahh I really enjoy the mystique of the super hidden stuff, guess that just comes down to preference. To me it adds replay-ability to some degree and it makes things like illusory walls or some hidden arcane knowledge super rewarding to find. I would even say I'd prefer it if possible in an Open world sense but that's wishful thinking to be honest, only so much can be unique in a huge huge game.




For the most part I entirely agree, I like that the game scales with you. I guess my emphasis is that I really enjoy those small, warranted instances of the game confronting you with something that is very much difficult in comparison to other encounters. Whether it's a dracolich at the end of a maze, a minotaur grove or an unique high level ice dragon, these encounters that set themselves apart as hidden and unique, challenging in comparison, and rewarding because of it are some of my favorite; scale and landmass isn't necessarily my platform here as much as quality per event. Having areas that you can't go to because of their difficulty is constricting and something I don't agree with but skyrim did a fairly decent job of providing areas where it was hard at early levels, and the change i'd make to that would be strictly in the amount of unique reasoning behind it and putting an importance or dangerous feeling to these areas. I could see how this is low on the priority list in a game bottlenecked by the amount of unique assets it uses.



Thanks for the welcome I appreciate your thoughts on this. Let me know if i explained my side better the parts we seem to have disagreed upon I mostly agree with.

User avatar
sam
 
Posts: 3386
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:44 pm

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2016 11:57 am

I absolutely agree in regards to the intelligence as it relates to magic argument, that's a good point. I'd certainly be open to another interpretation and i'm not opposed to forgoing attributes provided that they can properly represent a character's aspirations more often than not. I'd be excited about a new system and a more in depth creation process is always a plus with me.



I will reiterate my love for hidden talents and skills learned of only after requirements are met, but perhaps I'm alone in this and that's ok, I have oblivion.

User avatar
Jack Bryan
 
Posts: 3449
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:31 am

PreviousNext

Return to The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion