Then I'm sure glad I'm not "people". Afterall, most of what you're saying rings false to me.
Afterall, my sense of accomplishment and satisfaction is far greater if I VASTLY overpower the enemy.... as opposed to merely scraping by and frankly being worried that luck wouldn't be on my side next time.
And as I've said plenty of times before... if you need to look to games for your difficulty, your life is too damned easy. All this crap is why games are relying more on pointless grinding rather than actual content... Afterall, if players have to spend 5 hours just getting through one fight, trying again and again and again ... then the game doesn't need as much content per unit time, does it? Oh heck, why not give them an opportunity to watch paint dry or bash their head against a brick wall until it bleeds?

I get enough grind at work.
I get enough aggro in the streets.
I don't need that crap at home in my bedroom too.






Lolwut? 600 magicka or health? You spend that much on magicka / health?
I usually end up with like... 300 of each and put the rest into Stamina... so I can sprint for pretty much forever. Barely makes up for the loss of the Athletics and Acrobatics skills...
As for the armour / spells / whatever... like I said, those are particular skill-based. They aren't level-based.

Those would be excellent ideas for the modding community.For the vanilla game no.Morrowind did many things well but the alchemy was not one of them.

There seems to be two groups in this matter
1Those that wish to be punished for not doing something
2 Those that wish to be rewarded for doing something

If I havent slept in 34 game days that does not bother me in the slightest.If the game starts telling me every (pick appropriate amount of time)you are sleepy (pick appropriate penalty) that would bother me.

The chance to fail on high level enchants would be pointless if you save prior to the attempt and I believe a fair chunk of players would do just that.

I'm hoping the dlc will have higher level monsters and beasts to fight off. I can't wait for the dlc!

Yet more irony.
I usually run out of patience when it comes to levelling and reach for the Oghma Infinium... and likewise lose patience with the complete lack of gold or being forced to drag huge amounts of dwarven metal through ruins just to get pocket-change, and instead start duping expensive items on the mannequins. Because only once I've upped the skills to a reasonable level and got a stock of gold can I finally relax and enjoy the world without the grind. Enjoyment isn't about levelling nor slaving for cash.

Not that I expect gold to just fountain out of the walls and levels to appear for nothing... but that isn't what I want my whole damned game experience to consist of.

For my pure mage I do a 3 - 1 ration, magicka / health, works very well, and of course enchantments for more magicka and magicka regen, but yeah, by 81 I will have 600 magicka at LEAST, and I dont need stamina for a mage, i can just use restoration to regen my stamina.

You must grind the [censored] out of every crafting skill, because on master at level 60 with my two handed glass greatsword that did 230 damage plus 50 shock damage did not make short work of alduin. Obviously if you have a bow that does that much damage it will do a [censored] ton of damage as a sneak attack, but its not impossible to read the description of the perks, now is it?

I play a mage too.
I just happen to have enchantments that nullify my casting costs for my school of choice... and don't like changing spells around just to ensure I have enough stamina to keep running. Rather have my offensive skills to hand for the moment something jumps out to wind me up.

It's probably a lot easier to change your approach to the game than to have these changes ever implemented. Enjoy the game for what it is... or find a game more to your liking.

You're just not getting it.

Listen closely.

If the game includes a mechanic that allows you to make a sword that deals 50,000 damage, then that game needs to be balanced accordingly to include that mechanic.

It's simple design. It's Design 101 actually.

I use all schools of magic, so i need that magicka, dont feel like making THAT many different things to nullify magic cost. Everything from illusion to enchanting, im on it.

So if you had 50 thousand pounds of cocaine in front of you, you'd do it all at once just because you could? Its called self control, and a design oversight, there is a reason they are going to cap the damage output. I get what you are saying, but its common sense not to loop that hard to make the game that easy. Common. Sense. And design oversight. Comprende? You think it would be fair to the majorityof people if enemies had 2 million health? No, all you are concerned with is the people that loop to their hearts content, and don't stop to think.

That's exactly the sensation of cheap thrills. It's satisfying, but brief and forgettable. Lasting memories are created by games that require some mental investment on your part and fill you with accomplishment when you succeed.


If only my life were easy. No, I just like to combine entertainment with some kind of challenge. Sometimes I also just like to relax and watch an episode from my FOTM TV show or play a hack 'n slash game that requires less involvement, and it's fine if you enjoy that. But pidgeonholing everyone into the category of casuals who will quit a game in frustration because they had to load 2 minutes back because they couldn't manage to implement some basic strategy into their otherwise dull combat is unfair. You also appear to confuse challenge with grinding, the latter which is yet another zero-brain activity.

One, you're terrible at anologies... but let's run with it.

It's my 50,000 lbs of cocaine, is it not? Did I buy it? Is it in my hand? Was it purchased with money I earned? Then I have a right to do with it what I want.

Next up.

Self control? It's a video game. It's not food or water rations in the desert. It's not your wife's sister that you think would look amazing sans clothes. A video game, one that I purchased.

That video game is made up of game mechanics, game mechanics that should be balanced because that's the developer's job (I would know... I'm a game designer).

If I create a mechanic that allows me to make a weapon that can do 50,000 damage... it's my job to make sure it's balanced, not the player's.

Why?

Because I want the player to be able to do everything in the game. I also want the player to have an incentive to keep playing while they do everything.

Y'know one way to keep players wanting to play the game?

Challenge.

I'm the same way, if there is no penalty, why would I waste time and gold to find a bed? But if there was a penalty I would have to fit that into my strategy... where is the closest inn to the dungeon I'm about to trapse through, what loot should I take with me, because I damn well can't wait around Belethor's shop for four days to pawn it off... everything you do will become more significant: man, I really want to enchant this Orcish Bow I just found, but it might fail, I should purchase a potion to Fortify Enchant to help me out and maybe get a few more points out of it. Damn the potion is expensive though, maybe I should chop wood for a little bit. By the end, you earned that bow and you can be proud of yourself for having it.

And that's where the distinction lies.

Some gamers want to overpower everything, they want to be gods, they want to win in everything they do. This is completely fine, but it doesn't foster strategy, effort, or creativity (generally speaking, don't flame me). Other gamers want to earn their power, they want a challenge and they want to feel like what they did mattered because it took them considerable effort to manage all the different facets of their success. This is ok too, I'm part of this group, obviously.

For me what it really comes down to is are you happy? Niether style is wrong, but whichever one you chose, did you come out happy? I wasn't happy that I could clear a dungeon in under five minutes, but then spend a game week selling off what I found, when I really didn't need to pick any of it up in the first place. That's where this post comes from for me.

This is a excellent point. And it's precisely why I don't use "realism" mods. And why I probably wouldn't use a hardcoe Mode (if one were to be implemented with an expansion). I dislike being penalized for actions that I have not taken. That is not fun to me. I want to be rewarded for taking actions. That to me is fun.

But more than that, I dislike being the only actor in the game who is penalized. If I am going to be penalized for not sleeping or eating I want those penaties to apply to all the actors in the game. In Oblivion I use a mod called "Running Revised" which slows my character down to walking speed when Fatigue hits zero. One of the reasons I like this mod is because it applies that rule to every actor in the game. It's very rewarding to be unable to run away from strong enemies at a low level, but to be able to finally outrun enemies at a high level - to turn around and watch them drop down to a walk while my character is still able to run.

I would like to be rewarded for sleeping (Skyrim's system is a step in the right direction for me), not penalized for not sleeping. But if I am penalized for not sleeping I at least want all actors in the game to be similarly penalized.

10 posts before the "casual gamer" is looked down upon with the "me so l33t" sneer.

Then don't just curse the darkness, light a candle....

http://jobs.zenimax.com/

So you contradict with your second sentence what you wrote with your first. Nice.
Though perhaps failing over and over again and only eventually getting through by fluke the 52nd time qualifies as "mental investment" to you... To me, it just qualifies as a freaking annoying waste of time. Accomplishment? Hardly. If an enemy beats you 10 times and you beat that enemy once, that doesn't make you better...



The methods of "challenge" that people always talk about here DO amount to grinding.
If it involves greater probability of failure, it just means it has to be done more, for longer, to succeed... i.e. grind.
If the enemies are tougher or hit harder, it just means fighting them longer or more repeatedly... i.e. grind.
If it involves more trips back and forth over the same ground or more repetitive button pressing... yes, grind.

I'll state it straight out... Increasing the difficulty in a linear fashion will always equate to a grind in some form or other.
The only way to change the difficulty without adding grind inherently to the system is to actually change the content. To stop moving forwards and take a step sideways... and even then, whether the difficulty goes up or down isn't predetermined.


Now, if I really must say it.... there is more at play in my arguing against this than I'm letting on..

Apparently you've never played sports... or even Street Fighter.

So you would do all 50 thousand pounds at once, and would die, good to know. Now I know I don't need to even reply to you anymore.

Thank you for being immature and not responding to the actual point that was made.

Also I don't want this to turn into a flame war about how games are supposed to be and who is a better gamer. It's all irrelevant to the discussion. I'm not faulting the game developers for anything, or any of you for your opinions. I think this game is amazing, and I think Bethesda did an outstanding job and we're all having an awesome time playing it in our own ways. Even if the game is a bit easy (for me) I still love playing it and devote hours of my time per week doing so. This was my opinion on how I think the game could be improved, but I'm just one person. Bethesda put out a heaping-success of a game because they appealed to the widest audience. That's their job. Do I want Bethesda to actually make any revisions? Yes. Do I think they will in the slightest? No. My ulterior motive here was to inspire some conversation and what you guys would like to see made more difficult and maybe inspire some modders. I want to know if I'm alone here... lol.

I've quit quite a few games because they were too challenging.
Heck, for Dead or Alive 4, I actually snapped the game-disk in half in a fit of rage because I couldn't even complete a single playthrough ... Not one of my prouder moments, honestly. Games shouldn't be treated that way... BUT I digress.
Challenge alone isn't incentive. To be able to enjoy a game at one's own pace is incentive.


I have. Not fond of sports at all. Wouldn't do that for fun.
As for Street Fighter... assuming you don't mean the first game so much as the series.... well, I play against the AI. My method is to find a strategy which will reliably beat the AI and stick with it. I don't play against other people as things get unpredictable. Not fun.

I agree, and the disturbing trend would appear to be "superhard master boss" because some game developer actually listens to what 3 or 4 incessantly complaining people on a forum are whinging about. I enjoy a challenge. I enjoy having to think about my tactics. I most empahtically do NOT enjoy having to restart a level 47 times because "superhard master boss" farts in my direction and kills me. Bugger that for a joke, and if people actually do want that, well, TES isn't the game series for you. Not that type of game.

As for the "self-control" argument, if you don't want to exercise any, quit whining about the consequences of your choices. Please.

...

I don't even know what to say to a gamer like you.

Challenge is one of, if not the main core, of games.

Milton Bradley didn't make board games so that when people open the box, set out the board and pieces, just to have all players pick up a card that says "Congratulations, you won! Game over."


A "disturbing trend?"

You realize some of the hardest games in the history of games were made in the '80s and '90s, correct?

"Superhard master boss" isn't exactly new.