Tip: Don't put your forum handle on your resume.


(I jest).

I will if it's attached to a game mechanic Bethesda decided to use

That's a cool story bro but I never said anyone had to be happy about the direction Skyrim headed or The Elder Scrolls series for that matter. I never said that they will not voice their opinions against it. And the current direction is not one people enjoy? Depends on who you ask.

Comparing Skyrim to Dragon Age 2 just reeks desperation, truth be told.

It's clear, however, that you speak as if the direction they headed in wasn't intended. It was very much so intended. Personally, I don't really care for your suggestions, regardless of the direction Skyrim headed in.

Furthermore, you're all over the place with what you're arguing against. You start claiming that your suggestions aren't very different from vanilla Skyrim then you start arguing that the racial bonuses aren't very significant henceforth your suggestions are a necessity. Please keep the flip flopping to a minimum.

I can't bring myself to agree with this.

Rather, the way it was in Morrowind and Oblivion was better... in that there are limitations based on selected (or created) player class... which essentially means that it will always be easier to play a particular way in accordance with the skills selected. It doesn't involve pigeon-holing anyone into any role besides the one they selected right at the start for themselves. But just that gave a greater feeling of character, rather than Skyrim's fusion of the previous Class and Sign systems in a most horrifically annoying way (i.e. You can be "A Thief", "A Mage" or "A Warrior"... and switch at will but only between those three bundles, or none at all).


For that matter, I'm annoyed at just how completely separate from each other ALL the factions are in Skyrim... Each one is its own little minigame completely independent of any other part of the game, so it feels less like an immersive world and more like a checklist of things to do. It stands to reason that, above and beyond the piddly little "tests" to join the various factions, there should be higher requirements... INCLUDING not being part of certain other factions, or limitations based on progression in those faction quests.
Just to give the most obvious example... The Dark Brotherhood questline should severely interfere with taking the Imperial side in the Civil War questline, and vice versa.
As it stands, pretty much the only interaction we have are Delvin's remarks when you go to him for Dark Brotherhood purposes while already being a member of the Thieves Guild. That, so far as I'm aware, is the sum extent of all interaction between player faction membership.

At least Morrowind restricted you to only one of the Great Houses (well, two if you exploited a bug) and stopped you joining the Thieves Guild if you'd gone through the Fighters Guild main quest as normal.

Yes, because comparing the fact that one group of people cried out against changes from one game to the next one to the fact that one group of people cried out against changes from one game to the next one is clearly comparing the actual games to each other and thus "desperation."

Riveting tale chap. Yes, it's fully clear that I say "oops um... Bethesda I think you accidentally changed the game, could you fix it?" rather than "it's working as intended and we don't want it that way so please make it this way." "Clearly."

I guess you don't have anything to add besides cheap rhetoric. Cool story bro. Flip-flop bibity bop.

And you add so much with your internet meme usage when you can't seem to grasp what game design is and how the masses react to changes in it.

If you're done here, with nothing of substance to add, how about go play the game you love so much?

I do add the topic and bother to reply to your points instead of making a useless post full of useless rhetoric. I also have not been seen flip flopping like you have, sir. I can't help it if you're mad that not everyone agrees with your idea of game design.


In the spirit of useless and baseless rhetoric, why don't you go make a better and more successful game than Skyrim, Mr. Developer sir?

And yet this entire post of yours has been useless.

I can only work with what you give me. If you give me useless I might just give useless back.

If you can't understand what is given you then maybe you should change the way you think. Perhaps then, if you understand it's by design you too can write up your own thread about how you want that design change to change back.

Or you could simply stop posting in a thread you find "useless."

While I sympathise with that whole-heartedly (all my first characters are Dunmer too)... I tend to keep it as a necessary canon that the Nerevarine is Dunmer, the Champion of Cyrodill is Imperial and the Dovahkiin is Nord. This is despite at least two of them essentially being Outlanders. It just seems right (at least if you want the highest base disposition from as many people as possible).




Screw that. Gaming was OUR pastime before S*ny took that one last thing from us and mass-marketed it, thus subjecting it all to the lowest common denominator. v_v;

i dont believe that people realize that Bethesda games are a genre all fo thier own and have thier own rules and expectations.

TES is not a genre all to its own.

Its genre is "action RPG set in an open world."

Fallout and Fable, to an extent, are in the same genre.

I understand quite clearly what is being said in this thread. What we have hear is a suggestion being given about having racial differences being more significant. Okay, nothing wrong with that. However, you then proceed to blabber your suggestion under the guise that it's not so different from what vanilla already does. It took you a while to realize that you were herp derp and that what vanilla does is nothing too significant in comparison to what you described for your suggestion.

You then flip flopped and stated that vanilla doesn't have significant racial/stat/ability differences between races so therefore your suggestion has even more merit. In how you word this you make it sound like vanilla Skyrim was trying to achieve big racial differences, however, in reality it was not.

Your suggestion goes against the spirit of Skyrim which is why some people don't agree with it or like it for that matter. This has been pointed out many times but has only fallen on deaf ears.

And if the time comes that a suggestion made by you is implemented into The Elder Scrolls series and I don't particularly agree with it, I may or may not make a thread. However, what I will not do is flip flop in the thread and try to disguise my opinions into something that it isn't so that my argument/suggestion can appear stronger that it is.

How many times do I have to explain this?

Adding things such as what I suggested does not make end game significantly different because an Orc who becomes a Mage won't have used Berserk in the first place and thus the racial trait/ability they have makes no significant difference. By end game, while there is no significant difference, there is still a difference and it's not significant enough.

Currently there are differences, but because they are so small, they are insignificant.
Currently, if you pick an archetype that is anti- to your chosen race, their differences (i.e. Berserk or +50% Fire Resist) won't be used or can be easily replicated later, thus again making the differences insignificant.

Proposed in the OP there are differences that are not so small and thus not insignificant.
Proposed in the OP is that if the player runs the archetype that the race is "suited for," they will notice this difference because it is significant.
Proposed in the OP is that if the player does not run the archetype that the race is "suited for," i.e. an Orc Mage, they will not notice the differences anyway because, like current differences, they had no bearing on the player to begin with.

So, to re~state so you understand:

Current = insignificant whether you choose the "suited for" archetype or not because they are too weak or because they are easily replicated by other races, i.e. a Dunmer having 50% Fire Resist is meaningless because an Orc can get the same easily.

Proposed = significant if you choose the "suited for" archetype; insignificant if you don't because it is then just like if you had played prior to the proposed change. A full blown High Elf Warrior is not going to notice the +50 Magicka bonus because they don't use Magic in the first place.

I did not flip flop; races are different at end game but those differences are insignificant, which is what people (such as myself) do not agree with.

Now we're going somewhere. Agree to disagree on the flip flop side of things as I won't bother to hand-hold you if you can't even read what you spew.

In any case, my whole point against your suggestion is that it goes against the spirit of the game. I.e. making racial bonuses/abilities/traits significant in the end game. You can't say it's significant and insignificant at the same time because then you're just lying to yourself and trying to play to both crowds. It doesn't work that way, I'm sorry.

if a High Elf gets X bonus for being a Mage and that bonus is significant in the end game (Just speaking generally so that you can understand and not get confused), then an Orc who also tries to be that very same Mage that the High Elf is, short of being a High Elf, is going to notice. It's as simple as that. That goes against the spirit of the game (Skyrim) that any race can become into whatever they choose to be, even if they do not start out that way (Differences in beginning skill allocations).

I'm not a fan of this particular suggestion because of just that. I don't believe that race should have a significant impact on how a character ends up skill-wise. It should be and is about identity (role-play), background (role-play), and aesthetics (role-play).

PS.
You're making the wrong comparisons in your significant and insignificant statements as Abrinth pointed out earlier.

I agree. One of the criticisms I have about Skyrim is that there is not enough distinction between races. As one poster pointed out it the difference between races in TES is now largely aesthetic. This OP has put forth some constructive ideas about how to provide more distinction between the races in a way that would fit in with the current system where attributes don't exist. Seems like a worthy topic of discussion. More distinctions between races would lead to more distinctions between characters, which leads to greater replay value.

I would not want to see a rigid system where Orcs could not be mages and Bosmer could not become melee tanks, but some differences between the races beyond merely aesthetic (what they look like) would be welcome for diversity. If all races are the same except for their appearance, you don't have true diversity. Prior TES games had larger differences between the races because of differences in starting attributes and the magicka bonus of Altmer/Bretton were more meaningful in prior games under the attribute system, where your magicka pool was based on your intelligence. In Skyrim, every race is basically the same, except for appearance, which leads to lack of diversity.

Agreed, the not everyone gas that talent and just because you offer a suggestion does not mean hey I can do it better. Lol at people that think that. The OPs suggestion is really hood and he did not mention restrictions on what the races can and can't be like just because the Altmer gets that plus fifty magic bonus does not mean we could not make an Altmer warrior.

If the idea is given consideration we could develop a character that is even more diverse and unique based off of the racial abilities combined with perks and hopefully an attribute system.

Then there should be no differences period other than the "role-play" ones.

Giving races differences at the start prompt them to believe said race is "predisposed" for a certain archetype. If that archetype isn't going to carry on from beginning to end, or rather the "predisposition" to it, it shouldn't be there in the first place.

It would be interesting if you could pick what you're predispositions were. You could pour all you "headstart" levels into one skill, or try and balance the skills out more. It'd probably be most useful just for establishing your character's backstory by determining his or her skills.

This could definitely work in conjunction with some better buffs.

I think races should start with a bigger advantage in their favored skills. Bosmer should start at 30 sneak and 35 archery, as opposed to 25 and 20. Orcs should start with 35 heavy armor skill and 30 smithy, as opposed to 25 and 20.

Likewise, I think the base unfavored skills should start lower. Orcs should start off with 5 Destruction magic and 5's in sneak and most other magic skills.

These changes, combined with the current racial abilities would provide an ample enough distinction among the races.

I don't think powers should be changes because of balance issues.

A racial skill cap below 100 would mean certain perks are not possible for some races. This can break a build.

A better example of the system would be to allow one or two skills to be capped at 120 instead for each race. The benefits are minor, but does allow for an Altmer to be slightly better mage than an Orc.