I apologize if there is already a thread about this, but it is kind of difficult to search for something of this topic.

Lately there has been a lot of discussion about issues that people have with Skyrim. A hot topic right now is respec'ing perks. I am not saying that these complaints are invalid, stupid, useless, or any other negative description. I actually think that these discussions are very valuable. If we have a problem with something, then we should be able to hope for something better.

However, I think that we should keep in mind that Skyrim is ultimately a piece of art created by artists who have a lot of passion for what they do. The people at Bethesda Softworks have a vision for their games, such as how the story will play out and how the gameplay will work. They have a vision for Skyrim and want to translate that vision into a game that people can experience. I think that often when we are demanding that changes be made to the Vanilla Skyrim game, we are telling Bethesda that they were wrong or made a mistake somewhere. We may be unhappy with the experience of Skyrim, but I think that Bethesda needs to maintain their artistic integrity and stand by their decisions. If they feel that allowing for respec'ing does not allow for a quality experience, then they should stand their ground with that issue. It's not like leaving out respec'ing was a mistake or something, so I think we can assume that Bethesda wants the typical player to make meaningful decisions throughout the game in regards to perk-choosing.

But we all know that Bethesda supports freedom, right? What about those atypical players who want to break all of the rules and do anything they want without bounds? Once again, it all goes back to the unfortunate fact that the majority of these players are out of luck. If someone is lucky enough to have a high-end PC, then he can do as he pleases.

My ultimate point: Leave Bethesda their Vanilla Skyrim because we can assume that is what they want. If you aren't satisfied, then hopefully you own a PC.

Skyrim isn't finished yet, it's still in beta phase. Once the last DLC is out, then the show will probably be over. So while Bethesda is still doing things, this is the time to make Bethesda take a second look at things.

While Bethesda can have a vision, it's great to combine theirs with our opinion of how Bethesda can realize that vision. Vampires and Werewolves were both highly disappointing in Skyrim, but after feedback, Beth dabbled with them with Gamejam and after the positive feedback, they realize that the fans were right. Thus Dawnguard was created and their vision has reached it's full potential in regards to vamps and werewolves.

With you 100% OP.

No DLC will ever change the core mechanics of the game. They may introduce some new things, but never compromise the core. Add in or removing a DLC will never adversely change the way the game plays.

Except, Dawnguard was under development long before we saw the game jam video.

Bah...what do YOU know...you're just a novice with 31 posts.



I kid, I kid...

Very well said. I've said it many times...Skyrim's a great game and is part of a great series. My hope is that they continue to progress forward and bring their 'A' game with each new title.

This is exactly the reason the PC users can mod their games. Bethesda keeps their vision, but lets the users decide what they don't like and allows them to change things so the game fits their own personal vision. Win-win.

Now, if mods could be used on consoles, we would not be having this discussion right now. But that's not going to happen for Skyrim, despite how much Bethesda wants it. Maybe the next TES game (I'm hopeful, modding is a major craft now and should not remain exclusive to the smallest branch of gamers out there).

To respond to the OP: I agree. Skyrim is their game, so what they do with it is up to them. If it were up to the users, Skyrim would be an utterly broken mess.

DLCs can change core mechanics, but usually that's not a good idea and I agree. My point is though, sometimes Beth doesn't go around to implementing their ideas the right way and DLCs are usually the way that the remedies spill out.




No, I'm sure it wasn't. Even if I am wrong and it was, even still there would have been no changes to Vamps and Werewolves. There were no Vampire Lords. Everything created at Gamejam was FOR Gamejam. Beth decided to use that Vampire Lord they created to show off at Gamejam and made a DLC around it.

You're right, I do think that Skyrim can and should be improved upon. But I think that there is a slight difference between giving vampires and werewolves more powers and removing all consequences within the perk system. As Echonite said, I think that the perk system is a much more "core" mechanic that probably won't be changed. New powers for vampires and werewolves were probably new ideas, whereas I think that Bethesda knew exactly what they were doing when they left respec'ing out.

I guess what we really need to do is somehow get feedback from Bethesda about how they feel about respec'ing. It's possible that they support it, but I simply don't know.

Alright, I get what you are driving at and in that case, I'd agree. If a core mechanic was changed such as perks, I might just not download the update. I shouldn't have to worry about what I'm downloading.

PC is actually the majority of the Skyrim sales (per platform) and in general PC gaming is not as much of a minority as its made out to be.

http://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2010/04/19/hear-that-knocking-sound-its-pc-gaming/
Unfortunately, Updates and what they contain are not optional. You can only stay disconnected from the internet for so long.

This is more then likely why they segregated the vampire and lycan trees from the normal skill trees. The only thing they have in common is how the trees work, but how they are implemented is vastly different. They don't touch the core perk system in any way.

1. how do you know what is and is not Bethesda's Vision?

2. to be frank, and of no offense to you or those who think alike, I think what you believe is bs to be honest. Bethesda, Valve, bioware, Kerberose I could go bloody on, have all changed aspects of their games for better or for worse for what ever reason, their a business in making games to be played not to sit in stasis and be unchanging you do not last long as a business being static and rigid

3. Do not mistake me for saying they need to bend over backwards for every little whim, that's not what I said or am Implying. simply put if consumers are buying/actively participating in a product and give feedback for alterations it would be int he ebst interest in the company to listen

4. Listening is what Bethesda seems to finally be doing, and finally I mean by not being obscure and overbearing about how they handle it, and what they are listening too. for something as trivial as perk respecing which MUST BE MANUALLY/CONSCIOUSLY UNDERTAKEN BY THE USER. you would kinda borederline come off as obnoxious as not wanting it in when you're not going to use it/interact with it. vs others who would utilize it, and that accounts for every feature, every nook and cranny in Skyrim that you haven't come across yet.

mah two cents.


I mean isn't that the motto people are ripping out of the morrowind manual now a days? do what you want when you want?

and I say it again, there is nothing momentous or penalizing about perks....at all....no consequence....that's like saying there's a consequence to picking Argonian over Imperial or Orc.....there isn't and I think you folks have REALLY short memory as Consequence is what they tried to alleviate... you know all the griping and moaning about Min/Max Skills and picking birthsigns.


now all of a sudden its a badge of Honor. seriously where were you guys in 2011?

The VL and WW perk tree mechanic also allow those fanatical lvl 81 players to enjoy the new features offered without having to start a new character. Wich you have to admit is a wonderful move. As for perk respec, I'm a big beleiver in saving before i try something out. If it doesn't work the way i thought, i load last save and invest elsewere. A little forethought saves much headache later down the road. Ofcourse this was more of a lesson learned the hard way. Had a character were I thought I should invest in archery because it made a nice backup. Only to realise i never actualy used it. lol.

Skyrim hasn't even been out a year, so how is sticking to it's original formula "static and rigid"?

ExaltedPariah:EXACTLY! Bethesda gave you the ability to hold on to perks! I think that alone tells us their opinion on respecs...

Oreo tis a statement of what I thought of the stance on artistic integrity in video game developement not on Skyrim in of itself.

I also stated they don't need to bend over backwards to everything or make radical unreasonable alterations just because.

I agree completely, I have not the skill nor the time to develop a game better than skyrim, fortunately I'm on PC(although the kinect looks very interesting)... Id probably be playing anything else right now if I could not mod the game.

When you do art for the purposes of making money you've already compromised your full artistic integrity. It's not like they were just sitting in board rooms thinking "What do we want?", they were thinking of what the player would want too. To get more money. A certain kind of player too...

Yes, the creators of Skyrim are to be commended, it's probably the best of the current iteration of games. But it would be myopic to ignore the impact of consumerist oriented marketing strategy on the end product. That tends to be a race to the bottom and conflicts with the artistic vision put forth by the creators.

Well said. I agree with you completely. It's funny how often we see posts with strong opinions about how the game should be "fixed" and how they want their terrible ideas be forced upon all Skyrim players.

i may be late to the party but i first heard of this "Artistic integrity" talk being bandied about on the Bioware forum amongst the carnage of the endings discussions, The phrase seems to have been widely adopted now & i'm certainly noticing it a lot more.
Artistic integrity is good until you wrap the product in a consumer package & sell it to the masses, Add to this the nature of choice within all Bethesda games then you have a piece of art that is all things to all men with universal & compromised integrity.

I don't know, The phrase seems to be the fashionable thing to use & seems to elevate the product beyond criticism, Hey it's art so you cannot complain or change anything.

Giving the consumer what they want & still maintaining some artistic integrity is a good balance to have, The developers cannot have it all their own way & on their terms if they want to be successful.