You haven't proven anything and you've just stated your opinion on the matter which other people have disagreed with and agreed with. O.o

When something is different it doesn't always mean it's regressed, it sometimes just means that it's different.

jack- can you please follow the thread in it's entirety. the mini in oblivion had an auto function option. skyrim does not. that is fact. the mini has only changed to a different player-controlled form. the argument is now proven to be a regression. simple logic.

So now that we're finally getting somewhere, yes, it regressed in that sense because an option that was previously available is no longer available. In that sense and ONLY in that sense has it regressed, which to most, is not a big deal. You can no longer spam your auto attempt key with a Skeleton Key, whoop-ti-doo.

Anyhow, I have followed the thread, and you mentioned this all of one time prior to this particular time. A grand total of twice in a 6 page thread which is now quite bigger than it used to be since the forums have changed format. o.o ... *Shrugs*

In any case, if we're going to go with that argument you could argue that Blocking in Skyrim has regressed from Morrowind because the game no longer auto-blocks for you. I mean, in it's entirety, it's a silly argument and just used to mislead the public into believing that your position is stronger because the other position has "regressed".

I'll agree with you in this regard: eliminating the auto-pick is a regression. I don't use it, but there's no reason to get rid of it and a lot of people do use it.

I prefer the actual lockpicking mechanic in Skyrim over Oblivion, though, so in that regard I think it is an improvement. I also think it is better than FO3 with its arbitrary level requirements, which should be handled by scaling the difficulty, not 'invisible walls'. I also think it's a regression to eliminate lockpick quality, like they had in Morrowind, but I think it's an improvement that they've started turning it into a full-fledged skill with perks. The perks are not terribly good, but they could be improved and made more useful by ramping up the difficulty.

Skyrim lockpicking is a mixed bag, but I think it's heading the right direction. They just need to tighten it up so that the 'classic RPG' elements receive adequate representation and add more variety (more interfaces presenting different challenges) so that it is more enjoyable to use. With a bit of work, it could be a great mechanic. Again: the baby is still having a bath, please don't throw away the bathwater.

You're assuming that the current state of lockpicking actually is progress, which is debatable. The way we see it, such things should be solely dependent on the character's skills and abilities, and a system in which this is not the case is not progressive. Of course, exactly how you measure progress in this area is itself a subject of debate; for me, it would be allowing the character more freedom to attempt harder locks than was previously present. Measured that way there has been significant progress, as early games automatically refused the attempt if you didn't have the skill and/or gear necessary to open the lock, however the character's skill was always retained as the governing mechanism as the ability (or lack thereof) to open more complex locks was part of the character's role. Mini-games go directly against this as they basically remove character skill from the equation, which should never be done as the whole point is that what happens to/with your character is a direct reflection of his/her skills. if that means that a character with a low lockpick skill misses out on a bunch of loot, so be it, that's called choices and consequences, something most modern RPGs have an appalling lack of.

I know I'd like it, if my character is severely outclassed then by all rights I should get obliterated in combat. Since higher-level critters are meant as opposition for higher-level characters, then a low-level character really shouldn't stand a chance against them, but I do see where that can be a problem with an open-world design. I'm not objecting to the use of tactics or (where applicable) superior gear to stand a chance against a superior opponent, but there should be a point where their level superiority is too much for even both to overcome, due to sheer power differential. As to where that line should be drawn, well, that's really up to the developers, but IMO 20 levels is well beyond it. Then again, I grew up playing games where even 5 levels was often too much of a gap, so the idea of being able to take someone +20 to me is a tad ludicrous, as that's two orders of magnitude greater in power. Of course, it's actually nowhere near that much of a difference in Skyrim, so might not apply, but that's how I see it.

I like how it is, but I wish the different types of chests had different locks, like a simple door lock should not be the same as a dwarven container or falmer clam shell....a bit silly if you ask me.

I don't really like the lockpicking in this game. It's too easy. I don't intentionally level up lockpicking , take any perks, etc. and get by just fine even as a thief. It kind of puts a damper on my imagination that I know already there is not going to be any lock in the game I cannot get past with ten lockpicks.

Maybe I play too many articulate video games or have an affinity for valued pie slices. In either case, the skill is an after thought for me. I am a fan of straight skill checks more than mini-games anyway and wish lockpicking was a skill check with a spin of luck more than it was based on player skill.

If you think the current implementation is too easy then certainly a skill check would be far easier. It would be a mindless affair with no real player interaction.

There never has been, and never will be a purely character-based RPG. Even turn-based RPGs that perform every action according to the roll of a die can't eliminate the player's native intelligence: a stupid player will always pick worse strategies than an intelligent player no matter what his Intelligence attribute says. The same argument may be made about a player's intrinsic luck. No matter what his character's Luck attribute says (if one even exists) it's not going to change the player's actual luck. You can add wisdom, personality and willpower to that list, things that appear to be sorely lacking in these forums. Hermetically sealed designs don't exist, so people should stop pretending that they do.

Given that every design is essentially a hybrid then, I'd much rather spend my time making a better hybrid than further approximating an impossible ideal. What difference does it make if a small amount of the player's manual dexterity trickles in along with his native intelligence, luck, wisdom, and willpower? It's already there in the combat and I'm enjoying myself quite a bit there. I tend to measure my appreciation for a game based on how satisfying it is to play as opposed to how well it approximates some philosophical ideal.

I just find this whole thing amusing because I had almost the exact same discussions with people about level scaling. Probably the same people come to think of it. People argued passionately for their right to explore regions and receive rewards well beyond their character's level if they found a way to do it which would seem to be anathema to the 'classic RPGers'. Personally, I think I ought to be able to try my hand at any challenge, no matter how difficult. If an enemy beats me, that's fair, because it's an organic rule, it's not an artificially imposed restriction. The same goes for the lockpicking mini-game. Removing my choice to try my hand at a harder lock is an arbitrary interference: it removes choice without adding anything. The lock should just be really hard to pick without the right level and perks. That's an organic limitation defined by my actual skill. It's anologous to an experienced player using his native intelligence to devise a strategy to overcome an opponent which is much higher in level. You can't control it, so adapt the system to it. Most players won't be able to devise the strategy or will lack the ambition to try (regardless of their Intelligence or Willpower attributes) but the possibility should be there for enterprising and intelligent players.

And, as always, add an auto-pick option. Now everyone's happy.

I like the enthusiasm, but lets be realistic, there will never be a scenario where everyone is happy. Especially not on these forums... >.> o.O ... O.o ... o.o ...

Other than developing your character's skills to get to the point where opening a lock is just a click away.

It was just as satisfying in Morrowind to approach a lock that has been alluding me all game as I finally got my skills and equipment up to snuff and hear the clicks of the tumblers as the chest opened and revealed the goodies to me as it would be to grind through a mini game that has no reflection on my character.

That's not the kind of ease I'm talking about. I'm referencing the ease in which your character surpasses these obstacles. A skill check abstracting your "picklock" value would put your character in check more often and clearly define what is easy, what is hard, and what you lack sufficient skill for. Because it is almost completely based on player skill, my dumb-as-nails barbarian orcish werewolf can get into any lock ever devised in Skyrim that can be picked in the first place.


Those are exactly my thoughts as well. When more emphasis is put on skills as opposed to player ability you can clearly define what you can cannot do. With a clear sense of limits comes a clear sense of reward vs. failure. It becomes easier to set goals for yourself and then work for them.

That's not really player interaction from my perspective. I like it about as much as I like the inconsistent chance based power attacks of Oblivion. Which is to say I don't like it at all.




If you don't feel that your "dumb-as-nails barbarian orcish werewolf" should be able to open a lock, why do you even attempt it? If you're so hardcoe in your role play that you feel this way, then why even attempt it? You don't have to open every lock that you see.

@The Magician:

How much of a hybrid is it, really, when character skill means almost nothing? Right now, one can pick Master locks with a character skill of 15 with no chance of failure (save for running out of picks, which is really rare), so as far as I'm concerned they've gone completely to the 'player-centric' side of things in this regard. In order for it to be a 'true' hybrid, then equal elements of both 'parents' must be present, and that's just not the case. Since player dexterity so far outclasses character skill, I don't see a way for a proper hybrid to be made without the controls feeling like they've been dipped in molasses and left to congeal, which would raise a whole new litany of complaints (and mods). As such, I advocate removal of the mini-game, since the way I see it the player's part in the action is making the decision to undertake it in the first place, while the character's part is the actual performance thereof.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I'm not saying one should be unable to take on opponents out of his/her league, but rather that there should be a limit on how far one can push it, and that I feel that 20 or so levels is too far. After all, the whole point of leveling and improving one's skills is to be able to take on progressively more powerful opponents, which loses meaning if you can defeat them without having done so.

QFT

Honestly, it sounds like The Elder Scrolls series is not your cup of tea, outside of heavy modding. Sounds like you would be more interested in a turn based game that has heavy focus on dice rolls and stats and far less focus on the player side of things.

The responsibility for role playing is not solely on the player, otherwise we have no need for video games and just use our imagination. An RPG is an effort to meet the players halfway with this. All of the elderscroll games are in an auspicious position being torn between the genres of RPG and FPS; which are on the opposite levels of interaction vs. skill respectively.

Lockpicking was completely skill based in morrowind and back, then it became skill and ability based. It is my opinion that sectioning off of game play elements by a skill requirement is important no matter what aspect it is, even for lockpicking. It can be balanced between player ability and character skill to leave hard challenges in the game but still make the player feel like they're accomplishing something themselves.

Currently, I feel no reward for picking locks on any character, barbarian or thief, nor do I consider any sense of accomplishment for being able to pick locks. At the moment they're just an annoyance in my way that I know I can get past in under a minute. For creating an atmosphere of challenges and reward this doesn't stand so well in my eyes.

Well, it doesn't look like The Elder Scrolls series is going to change into some hardcoe dice intensive game any time soon, in fact, as you stated it's quite moving away from that motto. Can the lockpicking mini-game be improved? Yes. Can the lockpicking mini-game be made more difficult the less skill you have? Sure. Is the lockpicking mini-game perfect? No.

Skyrim isn't a lockpicking simulator and it's sole focus is not on lockpicking. For the tiny role it plays in such a massive game, I believe it's more than adequate. I honestly don't see how you'd feel much more rewarded if a random dice roll decided to be in your favor as opposed to you doing something manually and succeeding in a consistent system. Then again, I've never been a fan of random dice rolls and I see them as something that had to be used because technology wasn't quite up to par.

Because at least I'd have put the effort into building my character, and got rewarded for it with loot I wouldn't otherwise have been able to obtain.

And do people honestly believe computers ten years ago weren't capable of doing a minigame?

The game doesn't need to change into hardcoe anything, but it should be consistent with other aspects of the game. I can craft items with soul gems, but I am limited by my skill level. That +20 health enchantment on armor? Yeah, it's not going to happen with 15 in enchanting. Casting firestorm? Again, it's not going to happen unless I have a 100 in destruction. There are hard skill caps all over the place, but lockpicking doesn't have it. Why?

Actually, lockpicking is a major part of the game. It has its own unique skill tree, unique associated item, and is throughout the game and even required for certain quests. Making it such an integral aspect of the game but not giving it the same action vs. reward relationship as the other skills raises the question on its own.

Dice rolls are essential, nay, required in a game that brandishes itself as a role playing game simply because you are not playing you, you're playing your character. That character has a different set of skills than you, maybe even a different personality. Enforcing who they are in relation to the world around them shows consistency.

Obviously we are coming here from two different trains of thought, but both sides of the RPG vs. FPS equation need to be accounted for regardless. Flip-flopping on what is and isn't skill based without a real reason does not display integrity, in my opinion.

I actually quite like TES games, I just wish they would revert, to an extent, back to the old model where character skill meant a lot more than player skill. The way I see it, the player is the brain and the character is the body, thus it is the character's skills and abilities that should be the determinant of outcomes since the player is the determinant of which actions will be undertaken in the first place.
Because that 'random dice roll' is based on the skill and (where applicable) perks said character has invested in according to his or her role, which gives said role meaning and purpose. If I build a character to be a Master Thief I expect to have an easy time cracking even difficult locks (and I will), however it's only easy because I built the character that way. It doesn't work that way in Skyrim, though, because my manual dexterity is such that I can pick Master-level locks fairly easily with my character having no lockpick skill or perks whatever, which means that that character's role is diminished to some extent because one of his key (pun intended) skills as a Thief no longer matters.

Consistency isn't something you'll often find in an Elder Scrolls game. For example, you can smith an iron dagger and receive the same experience that you would if you smithed a daedric dagger. The same doesn't apply for Alchemy, where if you mix up a potion of higher value, you get more experience. Does it prove anything in the grand scheme of things? Not really. Yeah, The Elder Scrolls isn't the most consistent thing in the world.

And lockpicking is not a major part of the game. That is hyperbole if I've ever seen one. It's 1 of the 18 skills in the game. You engage in lockpicking far less than you do in things like combat. Combat, for example, has a ton of things assigned to it. Now that's a major part of the game. Archery, One-Handed, Two-Handed, Heavy Armor, Light Armor, Enchanting, Destruction, Dragon Shouts, I mean the list goes on and on.

Lockpicking, compared to something that is actually a major part of the game, like Combat, plays an absolutely insignificant role in the grand scheme of things. It's implementation is adequate enough for the role it plays in the game. This game isn't a lockpicking simulator, just an FYI.

Dice rolls are not required for role playing games. Besides, I'm not going to get into it with you with the whole "what defines an RPG". In any case, last I checked I couldn't throw a fireball out of my hands and there's no dice rolls needed for that to occur in an RPG. O.o ...

You underestimate the mind and like I said, the likelihood of The Elder Scrolls series regressing back to the days of Daggerfall and Arena are slim to none. You might want to find another series that puts more importance on this outdated model that you seem to like so much.

Saying that elderscrolls isn't good with consistency is not really a strong argument. The enchanting and alchemy relationship is something that should be addressed as well. However, those are only aspects of the skill. The entire skill of lockpicking is in question here. Skill versus component of the skill, I'm sure you see the point.

For the mere fact it is one of 16 skills means it is an integral part of the game and shouldn't be ignored. What I said is no hyperbole. You may be right in that some skills are more important than others, but if lockpicking is so unimportant as you say, then why not remove it from the game? That seems like a more elegant solution overall. If they are going to define it as a skill, make it something attributable to classes, give it perks, magical modifiers, unique items, and require it in quests then why not make it more worth while? Of course it doesn't play as large a part of the game as combat, but you still need it regardless.

Dice rolls is a misleading term. What we're getting at is really abstracted formulas; which can include dice rolls . There is no way to say how you could throw a fireball, because you can't. So, calculations are done to see how you would throw a fireball if you could. If the game was based purely on player ability and more realism then you wouldn't be able to pick those locks, fight those dragons, cast those spells etc. In fact, form your ability as a player probably wouldn't be able to do anything at all. That is where the abstraction comes in to give you more leeway in the world than you technically have.