i dont mind the way we are wearing armor in skyrim...but the day TES has the same armor system as Fallout...an Oblivion gate shall open in Bethesda's HQ

Actually armor slots can have an impact on the game rendering. Each piece of visible equipment has to have its data pulled and equipped once the enemy is rendered. One single piece of armor will pull one set of information as to two pieces with two sets of info. Small difference but it can have an impact, say during the cival war battles when there is a larger number of NPCs being rendered.

1. The engine used in skyrim is only used in skyrim, comparing another game to using more armor slots is apples to oranges.
2. The game has to function on the consoles, so there is another reason where the slots and data management on rendering matters.

Basically they had a vision on how they wanted each component to look in the game. They made adjustments/sacrifices to various components to make that vision work with what was to be the lowest denominator in the hardware standpoint.

It could have also been laziness.

I don't know much, but I do know this thread is making me feel armourous. ba-dum-ching!

It also completely defeats the purpose of wearing 10 rings if only one of them can be active, making needless redundancy, which is what Bethesda is getting rid of.

I don't disagree that it wouldn't hurt to bring back some armor slots, but it's really not necessary either.

Does nobody remember in OB when you couldnt find the pants to the current armor set? You looked quite silly with no pants or the wrong pants

Le sigh.

Remember in Morrowind when you could wear a robe over your armor? Clothing under your armor? My character looked like one bad ass samurai with his Dai Katana.

The ability to mix and match to find what you like, or suits your character for RP purposes was amazing.

My thoughts exactly. If it had been presented as anything other than opinionated polemic which was under the assumption that it represented everyone elses views, then it wouldn't have read half so badly

In all seriousness, who knows? Makes sense as an easy way to limit the number of enchantment slots. But I did like the idea of limiting the number of active enchantments, and selecting which ones to have active if that cap is breached.

Of course, this would also be moaned about "what's the point of being able to wear all this enchanted stuff if I can't use it all!?" etc etc lol

Exactly.

As for the topic goes - I mean, ideally, yes, I preferred Morrowind's system of having so many individual pieces... chest, pants, each hand, each shoulder, clothes underneath armor, robes above armor, etc...

There is a minor problem it presents though... If I wear clothes underneath my heavy armor, then as I do combat, my Unarmored skill goes up, and that may be something I don't want if the clothes are purely for aesthetics.

That said, yes, my overall preference is still Morrowind's extra slots. But I don't feel that those extra slots are worthy of being that upset about. I mean, I am rather shocked that an RPG - TES of all games - has so few armor slots, but what's most important to me is still the fact that I can wear any armor I want - heavy, light, clothing, etc... and that all of it shows up and looks unique. Even with only 6 slots (well 7 altogether, but I don't use shields) I still feel Skyrim offers more versatility than any other RPG out there, which ultimately always boil down to "You're a mage? Well you better throw on robes and just forget about wearing plate armor" or "You're a warrior? Well forget about wearing light weight armor that allows for agility, because you're meant to wear the SUPER WARRIOR ARMOR RAWR!!!" or "You're a cleric? Well forget about that badass two handed claymore you just picked up, because you can only use TEH MACEZ HAHAH!!"

When compared to past games like Morrowind, yes, I definitely see some of this minor stuff that has been decreased from previous games, but in my opinion, it was all minor stuff that yes, added up to make Morrowind great, but minor that it's loss isn't really a significant detriment to Skyrim.

I do believe that what we lost was minor compared to what we gained, and even if all you do is look at what was lost, I still look at what is there, compared to other RPG's on the market, and I still see a game that offers way more depth and complexity than other RPG's out there that simply say "pick a class, but don't even think of being able to make a character of your own design, because we're telling you what you can and can't play as".

Lol another bad move by bethesda keep the crafting skills besides alchemy out of skills and please remove perks. Attributes worked better along with the perks gained when leveling up a skill to 25, 50, 75 and 100. Anyways to stay on topic Bethesda is obviously lacking in quality each game although imo oblivion was a great game, skyrim doesn't really hit that catagory due to less armor slots and other streamlining results.

I apologize, that is my opinion as to why this series is going downhill. Where in my post is what I stated wrong?

Am I the only person who thinks this?

How can nobody else see the removal of so much content from this series as a bad thing?

Edit* I just don't understand how they can sit here and simplify the series, break down all this content and give us so little in the new games, compared to the great big content we received in older games. It doesn't make any sense to me. I don't want a simple game where someone holds my hand and walks me through it, I am not a child and I find it to be insulting.

You can see the same mess with FO3 in comparison to FO1-2 and FO:NV.

Speak for yourself. I feel that perks are far superior and offer far more character specialization and ability to create a unique character than attributes, and I certainly don't want Smithing and Enchanting left out as skills.

It's not so much what you said, as how you said it.

"I think this, this is my opinion" ok, fair play. "bethesda doesn't care what we want" and spouting off about "the consumer" like you think you speak for everyone is another. And that last sentence isn't meant as harshly as it may read btw.

I dunno, I was stunned when I saw they'd removed attributes, but I've grown to enjoy the perk system all the same. In all honesty I'd like to see the speed and agility attributes re-introduced somehow. I want to prowl the rooftops again!

I explained it in my prior post, but in my opinion, what we lost was minor, while what we gained far outweighs what was lost.

The way I see it, we lost individual pauldrons, and a few armor slots, spears, medium armor, athletics and acrobatics, a few spell effects and Spellmaking, none of which really made any significant difference (save for Spellmaking, but I am of the mind that Spellmaking would not work with the current gameplay mechanics).

What we gained was Enchanting and Pickpocketing returning as skills, which offer character depth. Skills like dual wielding making it's debut, which offers character depth. Vast new styles of casting other than just "target", "touch", and "self" which offer a far more dynamic gameplay experience as a mage including finally being able to use legitimate necromancy of raising dead corpses (I will concede, however, that this didn't live up to its potential with the omission of many spell effects - and I'm not talking about Open Lock - and the fact that combined casting didn't make it in until hopefully DLC implements what we saw in the GameJam video). We gained perks which offer far more complexity to each individual skill that just a basic 1-100 grind (you can now specialize within specializations, meaning 2 level 100 Conjuration characters aren't the same - one may focus on necromancy, one may focus on atronachs, one may focus on bound weapons; Destruction characters may specialize in fire, frost, or shock; Heavy Armor characters can focus on either damage reduction, or utility, etc...). We gained full fledged equipment crafting with Smithing, which offers more depth than just Armorer did which again gives more options for the character.

We lost some basic stuff, yes, and it's sad to see a lot of that stuff go, but in the end, I feel what we gained far outweighs what was lost and gives me more control and flexibility over how my character develops than ever before.

Well Enchanting happened to not be skill in Oblivion but it still had more customization. With the addition of perks in general Skyrim feels less of an "Elderscolls game" and more of an action rpg. If anything the perks just watered down skyrims game play with unneeded content. ( Example: Master Smither with no perks can make at best iron or steel armor, While with perks can do so much more. These perks obviously only limit the game play, while not even really compensating for anything.

Again, speak for yourself, I feel perks offer far more to gameplay than ever before. I don't think gameplay is watered down. I think it's vastly improved.

I don't feel that Skyrim is "less TES" because of perks. I think it improved on what I loved about Elder Scrolls to begin with because of perks, and that is character development and design. I can't just mindlessly grind every skill up to 100 and be a jack of all trades, master of all now. I actually have to make choices and invest in my character with perk distribution, and those perks allow me to truly specialize my character and make my character feel unique.

@Nell2Thalzzay validate me the lockpicking perk tree then? Half the skills there are completely pointless.

It looked silly when mixing and matching in Oblivion. Morrowind's system was the best but I can imagine it would be hard to fit a bunch of enemies on screen wearing different sets of armor and clothing.

I thought Skyrim would make up for the lack of greaves and pants with twice as many armor sets, but that wasn't the case. Hopefully more in DLC

Like i said perks didn't add to the game since they were already there(in oblivion), Skyrim just added more and limited the amount you can have on one character. And in my book limiting the amount of perks able to be obtain doesn't improve a game.

But on topic taking away some armor slots was for the benefit of skyrim, Without a doubt with the new generation console the amount of armor slots will not go down.

Do they limit, or do they force meaningful choice/consequence? It's similar to the way attributes defined you - now perks do so instead.

Except there was no limitations on attributes since you are able to max out all of them. (besides luck i think)

And yes the perks still limit you. You can't justify the limitation by "meaningful choice/consequence" because these perks should not be a limitation on what you can do with the skill but just the customization of it. Such as smithing perks. There's a lot of good perks but there are more poorly created ones.

Then what is the point of them defining a character? If you can do that, it's a broken system. At least this way there is more customisation. Two warriors in oblivion played a lot more alike than two warriors in skyrim. One could dual wield and rely on his movement and overwhelming attack power, whilst another carries a shield and has the shield bash and slow-mo effect.

You could spend the perks to do both, or spend them elsewhere; smithing and enchanting seem popular, maybe archery, sneak or restoration? Decisions decisions...

for smithing they're only 2 routes you can take to get the last perk light armor or heavy. Its really more of a limitation then customization really. While in onehanded there are perks that increase your damage, this should not be in the perk tree since damage should not be limited by perks but by the actual skill. The past elderscroll games skill meant more than just leveling it up for perks, it actually truly affected how you were in the skill. In skyrim this is less significant with the perks(which limit you on the skills)

Personally, I'd prefer a system that incorporates attributes, skills and perks, though their implementation would be a bit different than they are now or have been in past games. I've outlined my ideas before, but this isn't really the thread to outline those ideas again, because this thread is suppose to be about armor.

So, about the combined armor. I remember two reasons the gave. The first had to do with their design direction. Something about the armor covering up the legs in a way that covered up the greeves. Hence their exclusion. I can see that. I can also see that most of them have a distinct top and bottom to them and can easily be split up. In fact, I believe there's a mod that does exactly that. I'd have to look for it again. It was for a body mod I wasn't using at the time.

The second reason they gave had to do with performance. There really isn't a decrease in polygons, so if there is an improvement, it'd have to come from where others have stated. Fewer armor/clothing pieces means fewer item calls to worry about and track. That would save resources, though I have no idea how much. If it is true, why did they feel the need to do it?

Probably because while Skyrim looks better than Oblivion, it's still designed for the exact same hardware as Oblivion. Better graphics requires more processing power, but with the it being the same hardware, there was no more to be had from the system. There are a couple of ways to get it, though. The first is by optimizing the engine. The faster and smoother you can get operations running, the more resources it frees up, which you can then spend on more operations. How well Skyrim was optimized, I have no idea. The thing about optimizing, though, is that no matter how well you do it, there is a very real limit in what it can give you.

So if they reached the limit of what their optimizations could give them, and they still wanted to do more, they would have had to resort to the other option. It becomes a matter of give and take. In other words, if you want to improve some aspect of the game, but you don't have enough free resources, then you have to cut something from somewhere else in the game. That's likely where the reduction in armor slots comes from. They had an improvement they wanted to make, but didn't have the resources. So, they chose to reduce the number of armor slots, thus freeing up some more resources, so that they could make those improvements.

And there you. The most likely reason I could think of. Whether or not you agree with that decision is another matter.

Well different metals behave hugely differently when being forged. Bronze and Iron are very very different to work with, for example. The perks, for me, represent a conscious effort to learn how to work with a particular metal. It is a shame to miss out on daedric though, but seeing as that is derived from ebony armour, it figures logically that you'd need to be able to work ebony as a prerequisite.

As for skill level having an effect on one-handed, it still does, you don't have the skill level, you can't take the perks. And the damage still scales with the skill - for me, taking the +20% damage perks feels like getting a +5 strength increase in oblivion. Attributes and skill level working in tandem, perks and skill level working in tandem.