Another little piece of bad game designing, to many needless : V - Skyrim

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:47 pm

I swear I'm the only one who played new vegas on the forums here...

Most of the quest characters in new vegas were inside, which meant they only died due to a Player Character ACTIVELY trying to kill them. They implemented many things much better than bethesda tbh (Altho the bugs were ungodly). I mean, why didn't bethesda have obsidian make the companions? They own them right? They do companions far better than bethesda. and their writing isn't "generic fantasy excuse for you being godlike by the end"

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:06 pm

I still play New Vegas. Will I be playing Skyrim for this long, that waits to be seen in what Team Howard implements later on as the game grows in dlc.

[edited for spelling]

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:42 pm

in good old Gothic 2 you could kill everyone, then if they were essentials you could use a resurrection spell, simple

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:29 am

in good old Gothic 2 you could kill everyone, then if they were essentials you could use a resurrection spell, simple

Yeah because Gothic is not a poor man's RPG, except for Gothic 4 which completely failed.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:02 am

Yeah because Gothic is not a poor man's RPG, except for Gothic 4 which completely failed.

agreed, they all had bugs tho, mostly broken quests, but yeah it's "normal" in every open world game

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:38 pm

NPCs are not essential because the player might kill them. NPCs are essential because the game might kill them.

I don't see how making them only kill-able by the PC's finishing blow was really that hard for Bethesda to implement.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:43 am

I swear I'm the only one who played new vegas on the forums here...

Most of the quest characters in new vegas were inside, which meant they only died due to a Player Character ACTIVELY trying to kill them. They implemented many things much better than bethesda tbh (Altho the bugs were ungodly). I mean, why didn't bethesda have obsidian make the companions? They own them right? They do companions far better than bethesda. and their writing isn't "generic fantasy excuse for you being godlike by the end"

Fallout NV has consequences for everything. You can kill 'essential' characters at any point (apart form Yes Man, who just transfers to another securitron) and it will affect the story as a whole. It's all been thought through. I didn't like the game at release - the bugs killed it for me, but I've been playing it again recently, patched up and bug free (mostly) with all the DLC, and it's great. Massive amounts of content. It's much more story/dialogue driven than a Bathesda game, which are more action oriented, so you have to play it with that mindset. The DLC have some really compelling story lines and vivid characters - better than the base game IMO.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:42 pm

Says you, I am sure you can program a better game? If killing them ended up breaking the questline or another questline indirectly you would be the first one to come here and complain that the quests are broken, and quest breaking NPC's shouldn't be killable! Either way they go they can't win. The game is so big that one or another something else would be affected.

No I wouldn't, I don't go round killing important characters, I also make plenty of saves. But there are many ways they could have quest giver npcs, as people have said.

Saying 'you go and program the game better' is such a ridiculous thing to say, I'm allowed an opinion on the matter, which most people seem to agree with. What me or other people have suggested is perfectly doable, and is easily superior than lazily making the majority of quest related people essential.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:40 pm

I agree with the OP that Skyrim has too many Essential Characters but in an open world RPG with Dragons randomly spawning, some characters that are important need to be essential.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:16 pm

I agree with the OP that Skyrim has too many Essential Characters but in an open world RPG with Dragons randomly spawning, some characters that are important need to be essential.

As many others have said, important characters could be set to be killed only by the player.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 6:30 pm

If you want the game to feel like a world then let the world affect the NPCs. Better quest design is key. See F:NV and Arx Fatalis for examples of better quest/faction design.

Morrowind let the player kill any NPC. The game just tells you the MQ is busted if you kill the wrong people, though you may still be able to finish it if you're clever with exploits.

I think the real reason for essential NPCs is to limit the number of possible dialogue lines that need recording. I really can't wait for the day when computers are good enough at sounding like humans to eliminate the need for voice actors.

» Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:14 am

I get a feeling that some PCs are essential just in case the random Dragons kill them too.

But I heavily agree that the Devs were lazy. there`s no reason why they couldn`t have had a second or 3rd etc NPC come in and take over from anyone killed. A little extra work would be needed for more important NPCs just to change the names.

Also, important NPCs that shouldn`t die should be heavily protected so that the Player would have a hard time killing them even at level 50.

Of course, the irony is that some people would just type `kill` in the console and for `teh win` anyway, but if they screw their game that`s no one`s fault but their own and they shouldn`t complain.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:13 pm

Three words.

Maven [censored]in' Blackbriar

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:21 pm

The legates in the legion camps (and the stormcloak equivalents) are essential, which is ridiculous. I wandered into a camp earlier on and they threatened to kill me (I've started the stormcloak storyline). So I kill all the soldiers, and the legate is essential so cannot die.

Why couldn't the game just create a new legate if I a certain quest needed him? If I changed side to the empire for example.

I don't usually kill important people for no reason, this is the only time it has bothered me, but why couldn't they just have the crucial main quest people essential for the period of the main quest like fnv.

It's so stupid having most of the people involved in a side quest essential, if I kill someone I shouldn't be able to do their quest, end of. The same with quest items, to many of the items are 'quest items'. I honestly think if you lose the item you shouldn't be able to do the quest (or open up a new avenue for completing it), I can manage crap like that myself.

Yeah, really annoying that you can't kill the Legates...guess I'll have to wait 'til Spartacus actually kills that s.o.b. on the show to get my satisfaction.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:53 pm

On one side people lament that towns are empty after a few dragon attacks, on the other side people lament unkillable characters

Aside from this game bug (not being able to dispatch the officers in the legion/stormcloack camps) I think Bethesda should have balanced things in a different way because, as is, people are unhappy either way.

But people dying from dragon attacks is from another flaw in game design. As soon as a dragon shows up EVERYONE tries to kill it. The blacksmith, the alchemist, the kind young girl who wants to become a merchant all become bloodthirsty lunatics as soon as an enemy shows up. Guards should attack dragons, the Companions should attack dragons, soldiers should attack dragons. The peasants, the thieves, and the other random bad guys should flee.

But as people have said, just make essential characters killable by the player only. It's easy to do, evident that there is already a mod that does it.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:54 pm

Agreed, to a point. Let's say Esbern wasn't essential, and is killed by a dragon attack - the main quest will be permanently broken. But I agree with the Legates and such - I would've loved to slaughter an imperial camp on the behalf of the stormcloaks, or vice versa.

Then there should be a plan b to continue the quest. But oh well.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:25 pm

But people dying from dragon attacks is from another flaw in game design. As soon as a dragon shows up EVERYONE tries to kill it. The blacksmith, the alchemist, the kind young girl who wants to become a merchant all become bloodthirsty lunatics as soon as an enemy shows up. Guards should attack dragons, the Companions should attack dragons, soldiers should attack dragons. The peasants, the thieves, and the other random bad guys should flee.

Yes. Makes me wonder why Bethesda simply didn`t flag civilians as cowards so they run indoors. Strange.

I remember when I was attacked by a Guard in the middle of nowhere (yes while walking through the wildeness) because he tried to arrest me for stealing. I thought since we were in the middle of nowhere that my Follower and I could easily beat him and move on. But he was Protected (essential I guess). He just wouldn`t die. eventually I gave up and was arrested.

I don`t understand how a simple guard was Essential.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:06 pm

That's Commander Caius, I'll bet. He's required for a Thieves Guild quest, and your indifference to his mortality is exactly why essential actors are needed in the first place.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:51 pm

That's Commander Caius, I'll bet. He's required for a Thieves Guild quest, and your indifference to his mortality is exactly why essential actors are needed in the first place.

Did you even read my post? Commander Caius is in Whiterun, I'm clearly talking about legion/stormcloak camps with needless essential legates/officers. Even after you complete the civil war questline, the opposing legates/officers are still essential in the camps.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:15 pm

Did you even read my post? Commander Caius is in Whiterun, I'm clearly talking about legion/stormcloak camps with needless essential legates/officers. Even after you complete the civil war questline, the opposing legates/officers are still essential in the camps.

Random NPCs can't die.

Followers die with ease.

Makes total sense.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:54 pm

Three words.

Maven [censored]in' Blackbriar

That's a huge oversight error on Beth's part.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 1:55 pm

I did find it a bit odd that Legate Rikke was telling me to wipe out any Stormcloak camps I came across upon finishing the Civil War questline, and yet the Stormcloak officers in the Stormcloak camps are still flagged as essential, so any attempts to wipe out the camps are pointless.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:12 pm

I did find it a bit odd that Legate Rikke was telling me to wipe out any Stormcloak camps I came across upon finishing the Civil War questline, and yet the Stormcloak officers in the Stormcloak camps are still flagged as essential, so any attempts to wipe out the camps are pointless.

This is exactly it, same for me but against legates. Just lazy.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:44 pm

This is exactly it, same for me but against legates. Just lazy.

Definite laziness, should've lost their essential status after the final quest or heck just leave then unessential with a note on them telling the DB what to do.

» Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:29 pm

I did find it a bit odd that Legate Rikke was telling me to wipe out any Stormcloak camps I came across upon finishing the Civil War questline, and yet the Stormcloak officers in the Stormcloak camps are still flagged as essential, so any attempts to wipe out the camps are pointless.

Lol exactly!

Damn. I sure hope the developers over at Bethesda read these forums.