I agree, add those things from New Vegas in and Skyrim would be perfect, probably even better than Morrowind.

It also had the hardcoe mode.

Not perfect, there will be bugs.
But it'd be awesome.

I would love to see Obsidian make the next TES game. Hopefully Bethesda would allow them to do so.

Maybe something in the ES universe(Return to the battlespire) but a full expansion probably not.

New Vegas did some things right but got a lot of things wrong.

Also I find it funny you say Skyrim waters down roleplaying and then request for builds to basically be watered down so the player can become the master of everything.

Is this referring to me? Because I never said that or implied that.

Your third point is complaining about character builds being in the game and being defining.

What? I'm complaining about the disproportionate power of perks relative to skills. I want a 50/50 split in power, instead of the roughly 90/10 we have now.

Why is it bad that perk choices define your characters ability to do something well?

hey your the one who got my nickname.

Honestly, from a game mechanics and story presentation perspective, Bethesda is one of the worst AAA studios out there. Almost every RPG in existence and every story in a game is better paced, designed, and thought out than Bethesda's "half" attempts they often do for such things.

However, Bethesda excells in creating worlds, a deep lore, and open-ended gameplay that is superior in the sum of its parts compaired to any other game company out there (even if the smaller aspects of the gameplay are poorly designed, and even if some of their systems are flawed). There's no other game series like it in existence, and they are the few who can do open world games rather well (GTA series for example is a [censored] open world game, but a decent linear game, because 99% of the gamplay just involves linear mission completion in a world that is open. It's fake "open world").

I'm convinced that Bethesda is just a studio of about 100 world designers, with nobody on the team who's seriously experience in game design, and has ever played or worked on a game other than Elder Scrolls because it's as if their game design happens in a bubble, because there are some terribly amature designs put in place that make me go, "Really? Someone actively put this feature in like this and thought it was good design?" (such as the werewolf totems).

I agree but if Bethesda should be taking notes from other games New Vegas should be at the bottom of the list, especially for gameplay.

I don't mind perks, in fact I think they are a great addition to the series. My problem is that skill level is somewhat useless (other than for unlocking perks). I would prefer if both had an equal emphasis on your total power in a skill.

You arn't answering my question, you just keep repeating yourself.

Probably because your question is vague and my third point about skills and perks has nothing to do about me hating character builds and wanting everyone to be the same.

Yep, these are the two I find myself agreeing with the most.

I've said it before, but I believe a simple toggle in the gameplay section of the options would cure the "necessary" NPC issue. If the player could either turn on or off immortal status in the options then everyone is happy.

Morrowind is another example of a game with decent scaling. You could rush out and try Azura's daedric quest at Level 1 if you wanted to. On the other hand, you could also try relatively easy quests for new characters in Morrowind ... if you wanted to focus on leveling or try DID for example.

I find it kind of ironic. They cut out attributes because they were sort of just middle men. You raise your Int because you want more magicka. You raise your stamina because you want more HP. And so forth. So they cut them.

In the new system, though, look at skills. In and of themselves, skills are pretty much pointless and don't really do very much. Yes, there is some improvement from them, but it's pretty insignificant. What skills do do is unlock perks and contribute to your overall level.

Basically, they've put skills into the exact same position attributes were in. So, in TES VI, are we going to lose skills, too?

What is vague about that question?

I hope not, then there would hardly be any kind of system left.

Player dialoge: Agree

Handholding: Agree

Perk/Skill ratio: Dissagree. I like how most of the power in the skill comes from perks. It makes character building and perk selection much more important and makes for more unique builds.

Scaling: Partially dissagree. Skyrim have a bery good scaling that will punish you for messing with the wrong creatures, while stiff allowing you to explore the entire land. Having more secluded areas with really dangerous enemies(as in dangerous for a level 50 character with a good build) that did not care about your level with unique and powerful loot would be awesome though.

Companions: More interresting companions would be great, but wouldn't matter if they didn't make it easier to fight alongside them without killing them.

Reputation: I wasn't overjoyed about the repuation system in NV, but that is mostly because wearing faction armor would screw everything. Having a similar system would bother me.

Exactly. This master of everything Fallout has going on is terrible.

My god. I have never thought about that. Skills are the new attributes, therefore Todd Howard wants to cut them.

"Well, we found that skills were really just indirect ways of obtaining perks. People didn't raise the alchemy skill to be better at alchemy, they did it to get the required level for the perks. We found this to be a bit spreadsheety and redundant, so we are pleased to announce that all skills have been cut out of TES VI and all future Bethesda games. Perks will take their place, don't worry! "

Master of everything? What are you talking about? Even at level 50, which can't be achieved without all the DLC, the most skills you'll max is 6. In the normal game, capped at 20, you're lucky to max 3.

You sir are a fool Skyrim needs to learn nothing from Vegas. Vegas was the biggest pile of crap i've ever played the game was empty pointless. It is an insult to Bethesda to even think of comparing the 2 games. Vegas is one of the biggest fails in this gen gaming even Fallout Tactics was far superiour to Vegas. The Dialoge in Vegas was repetative the story pointless the faction system failed big time the Dlc's were over priced junk. Skyrim barring a few minor flaws is the best Rpg to date and also to call Vegas a Rpg shows you to not even understand what a Rpg is Vegas is a fps aimed at the CoD generation not true Fallout fans.

Couldn't agree more.

I do like the variety in companions in skyrim though, a lot more than FNV. But you had the backstory with FNV, maybe they could just have some with solid backstories and quests associated with that story.