They can make all the improvements they want, but until they implement mounted combat the only thing my horses are and will be used for are target practice...

I think the reason that the Oblivion horses are so good is that they were done by Christiane Meister who rides in RL. You might not think they were so realistic, Cicero, but that may be because they have excellent conformation, and many real horses could be better in that department.

I've never played Red Dead Redemption, but the horses do look good. One thing about RDR is the horses look like they are from the old west, which I can appreciate, but I like a more idealized, fantasy horse to ride in TES. Something more like a Friesian horse would suit me for Skyrim. http://fairytalefriesian.com/today.html

I just want to be able to talk to people while riding a horse, that's all.

I'm certainly fine if my horse can't actually carry anything (but allows me to ride 'em if I'm overencumbered), but the fact that I have to go down just to say hi is really annoying. Why? Because you could in Oblivion, that's why. I understand that you'll need to create extra code to allow people to shoot crossbows and new animations to use spears, but talking to people doesn't really need that much tweaking, now does it?

And don't say it teaches us to be polite, you can cut off Nazeem's head.

Another thread that gives me a flimsy excuse to say : all very well, but will it be as much fun as mammoth-back jousting ?

Horses in Skyrim took a HUGE step backwards, and the main reason is forcing us into 3rd person when using them. I HATE, truely HATE, having to use a horse in 3rd person mode. I didn't like it in the Assasin Creed Games and I don't like it in Skyrim.

I don't even use Shadowmare, even though he follows me around every time I use Fast Travel. I've come close, and still thinking about it, running sword through Shadowmare just to finally be done with him.

The 1st thing that needs to be done to make horses usable is to NOT force people into 3rd person mode while using them. If they want to make it an option, than fine. Don't force it on me.

I just saw a post and now realize something. I played Red Dead Redemption and the horses in that game were 3rd person view when riding as the whole game was. It didn't bother me in that game which makes me think that somehow the horses in Skyrim just aren't moving right in 3rd person view. I don't know what it is but the horses in Skyrim just don't feel right in 3rd person, which is why I don't them. Also, in an RPG which I always play in first person I don't like the idea of 3rd person view while riding horses.

So what you're saying is "Take away somebody else's rights to exploit, but don't take away my right to exploit!"

Fact of the matter is this, bud. You choose to exploit or you choose not to exploit. It's a player's right.

OT: The whole horse mechanics need to be entirely revamped before anything else of a horsey nature takes place.

100% agree with bring back 1st person!

I think one of the things wrong with the Skyrim horses in 3rd person is that their back hooves end up being too close together when they are cantering. If you saw a real horse with this problem you would know to expect leg injuries caused by their own shoes. Plus their gait is somehow low and choppy, like they are lazy or a bit lame. But I'm probably over anolyzing.

Red Dead did it right in all the right ways. That's something Beth should have paid attention to from the start. Otherwise it would have been a better decision to leave them out entirely... Maybe for saving disk space... Enough space that the world would react to the things you did, maybe?

My pet peeve problem with horses is this:

Ride a horse at full gallop/sprinting speed into a butterfly. Or a bunny. What happens? Right. You get stopped dead in your tracks like riding into a solid wall. I'll never understand how this made it past QA.

NPCs can push you around by walking into you while you are talking with someone or just standing there ... but if you walk into a NPC its a solid wall. Sometimes I think the programmers just got it backwards by accident.
In all previous games you could slowly push NPCs around by walking into them, preventing you from being imprisoned in a room because some follower decided to block the exit ... but in Skyrim you're out of luck.

Not being able to ride over a butterfly with my horse just pours salt into this wound. I'd really like a word or two with whoever thought this would be a good idea.

That's strange. I can push actors including mammoths around with my horse.

I basically like the horses in Skyrim, frankly better than Oblivion. I think they look better and have better speeds ( Oblivion either had painfully slow or full gallop) saddle bags and a horse call would have been nice though and I did like the more detail in different breeds in Oblivion.

Horse combat would be nice but not a game breaker for me.

$20 for that?
Dude... DUDE... DUDE!!!
NOT! Cool!

Also, ALL exploits should be eventually removed from the game.
That crap about them being optional and that it's up to you to decide to use them or not is a horrible argument - optional crap is still crap and should be removed, period!

Anyway, I do like your suggestions, but you could add four more:
1 - Mounted combat.
2 - Removal of forced 3rd person.
3 - Horses shouldn't fight.
4 - Improve horse riding controls (those from Oblivion were MUCH better).

Friesians and Percherons are my two favorites. Luuuuuuuuuuv Friesians, want a whole stable of them one day.

Huh??

How the hell did you walk away with "Take away somebody else's rights to exploit, but don't take away my right to exploit!" ??

My entire POINT was to NOT remove exploits. That is PRECISELY what I was saying, as it IS a CHOICE to use them.

The only thing patches should do is FIX NEGATIVE GLITCHES that HAMPER play; they shouldn't mess with things that ENHANCE game play.

Is that clear enough now?

At least in Oblivion Shadowmere was useful.

How to get free storage in Oblivion (requiring you still play it and have made significant progress in the DB questline):
1. Get Shadowmere.
2. Kill Shadowmere. (It will only go unconcious)
3. While it's unconcious, stuff it with your weapons, armour, and other goodies.
4. It'll wake back up.
5. Next time you knock it unconcious, the items will still be in it's body.


AND I THOUGHT THEY SMELLED BAD ON THE OUTSIDE.
GET IT?
GETTTT IT?

If they should remove all exploits, then they should remove the Mods as well. Its shamefully unfair to allow one and not the other. Computer players may have mods but console players cannot have exploits? Please.

Case in point, you can create a mod that allows you to change the crafting/enchanting parameters, but you cannot use an in-game glitch that allows you to do the very same thing? Give me a break!

And removing all "optional crap" would remove 80% of the entire game play, most of which is...optional. Side quests, skills, perks, crafting, houses, horses, alchemy, enchanting--all of that can be considered "optional" since nearly everything required is available through purchase from an NPC at some point.

$20: I would rather PAY for CONSOLE DLC that improves the game than to NOT EVEN HAVE THE OPTION. Period.

Would be nice if people remembered that plenty of people play on PS3, XBox, and we don't have the options PCs do. The worst thing anybody can suggest is to limit game play even further than it already is. Additional, customizable content is always what players want.

Exploits and mods are two totally different things.
Don't put them in a same category.
Mods are good and should remain, exploits are bad and should be removed - fact - period.

What?
You honestly don't get the difference between optional and optional crap, do you? >_>

No... just no!
Never EVER should something like your suggestion cost $20!
Totally overpriced and would set horrible standards.
Your opinion is wrong - fact - period!

it is rather clear he means get rid of crap that is optional...duh


this is possibly the dumbest thing that a person could say "this brick is worth less than 1 dollar and will provide maybe a few hours of fun untill you want to toss it out, it costs $20 dollars" would you buy that too? you dont pay more money than something is worth if you know how much it is worth (if you did not know the object's worth you got swindled and should get your money back)

p.s. you miss the single biggest problem with horse, no first person, i can stand everything but being thrown into a clunky and unbarebale view point, but the controls could use a remake aswell

Hmm, yeah, an implementation that would be used for the entirety of the game, requiring a reworking of current content and the addition of new, is not exactly comparable to a one-time-use "brick." Obviously, my horse suggestion has no value to you, therefore you would and could skip it and not pay anything. I would, and will, pay for it if they make it. When he said optional crap, he said optional crap. "Optional" has a clear and defined meaning. "Crap" is purely subjective, and means something different for everyone.

The first-person thing has been mentioned over and over in this thread.

And again, you have helped make my point beautifully about PC vs. Console users and content. Two different worlds, with different content, abilities, players, and expectations. You think mods = good and exploits = bad, and if this were an online game where the economy got screwed up for everyone, then I would agree with you 100%. But its not, it is a closed world game unique to each player, and if I want 3,000 pounds on my boots, well you don't really get to have a say in that, do you? It doesn't effect YOU in any way, only ME and MY boots in MY game.

I paid an extra $20 for the special edition of Oblivion, and guess what? It contained the KotK and Shimmering Isle, that's it. Not even the permanent Wizard's Tower, which they could have EASILY included, but didn't. So [censored] all you want.

If Beth wants to create/release a content creator for the consoles, identical to the one they offer for computer users, then all this would become moot, wouldn't it? We could create whatever the heck we want, and wouldn't need to make suggestions regarding what we have no access to.

This made me laugh.

Stuff is worth what people are prepared to pay to get it.

Horses were handled horribly. At least they could let us walk backwards on our horse. The other things are a given. Saddlebags, armor, varying breeds, speeds, animations, and everything else that should have been in the legendary role playing game of legendary choice SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN IT FROM THE START.

One thing both Oblivion and Red Dead Redemption got wrong is that the horses can't back up. If you've ever ridden a horse in real life you would know that if you pull back on both reigns on a decently trained horse it will back up. May not seem like a big deal until you ride up to the edge of a cliff to look over and can't back up. Then when you go to turn the horse walks slightly forward to his, and your, death. Not to mention getting nose first into a tight area and not being able to back out. I can't for the life of me figure out why both games left that ability out, especially RDR which got everything else spot on.

True.
But that doesn't change the fact that someone who pays, let's say, a $1000 for literally a crap on a stick is a moron.

Horses went zero steps forward with Skyrim. I'm glad they felt more like Horses, unlike Oblivion where they were a tank but there's still something missing about them besides Horse Armor. I also don't like the fact that you have to use 3rd Person when riding the horse, yes it does make it easier to see but if your playing the game purely from a 1st person perspective, your going to feel cheated.

i was just helping you understand what he said, although i do think paying too much for something is a terrible terrible idea, i actually think horses need a fix (but again,you missed the big points imo), i'll ignore the next part since im on 360 and never said i wanted any exploits taken out, aaaaaaand i payed the extra money for shivering isles and kotk too but both of those provided a goo dbt of content that was worth it (it was 1/3 of what the original game cost and, together, it was roughy 1/3 the content, maybe more)

Since you never played RdR i will mention some essential things :

-better animations/mechanics

-various races of horses,each one with accurate characteristics (max speed,resistance,aesthetics...)

- the opportunity to call your horse with a simple whistle whenever you want

- the opportunity to be unsaddled if you "push" the horse too much

- horses avoid danger; i.e . they are scared even of snakes and don't fight any Ancient Dragon pretending to be the "Dragonborn"

-opportunity to feed them

Well,i don't remember all,however here's a link where you can find all the informations : (even if i'm not sure about their reliability of course)

http://reddead.wikia.com/wiki/Horse


The last time i've played RdD was almost one year ago,but if i remember well isn't like you say however apart from some eventual minor issue horses on RdD are a reference point in my opinion - and on another planet if compared to the Oblivion and Skyrim ones in every respect.

In brief: horses are (very) smart animals, not the dumb-asses you see in Oblivion and Skyrim and an huge improvement would be desirable for the future Tes game in that regard.

At the risk to repeat myself: horses at the current state are almost useless in Skyrim - in my opinion of course.