Lets see, Besides Fallout, there was Kingdom Hearts, Wild Arms, Fable II, Lost Souls MUD that offered locational damage. As I remember most of these games, they were not that good a game to begin with (other than Fallout and it only worked in that game because it was turned based and VATS is not turn based). There were a few others that offered this feature but they are even more obscure (Vagrant Story, Hybrid Heaven, Colosseum, Dead Island) . However, the vast majority of RPGs do not offer locational damage.

Hi Bukee! Hope life's treating you swell.

I agree with you, to an extent. To adopt locational damage is to deviate from the RPG canon. It's also, in my opinion, a way to make the game better, something which should supersede every other consideration.

Hi there CCNA! How have you been doing?

I'm affraid that your point is unclear to me. Are you saying those games weren't very good because they had locational damage? Are you saying only obscure RPGs have adopted locational damage and therefore mainstream ones needn't feature it? I understand you do not endorse locational damage and if your point is that it doesn't precisely fit the RPG mold I will agree with you. Bottom line, in this instance, that RPG mold is getting in the way of a better game.

Eh, whether you shoot someone in the face or the foot you still do the same amount of damage, drop a 25kg weight on your head then on your foot and find out, same damage. Guys, this concept isn't really that difficult to grasp.

Hi Dustin81! Hope you're doing great.

Perhaps I misixpressed myself. While I can understand the fear TES might loose its RPG identity that fear is not relevant. I will happily have TES loose its identity if it means a better franchise.

Hi Jonathan28! You're doing fine, I hope.

I disagree. Certain body parts are called vital for a reason. Look at it this way, if you destroy the engine the car won't run. If you destroy the luggage compartment you'll still be able to drive it.

I am saying that the games that offered Locational Damage were not great games just because they had locational damage. Plus, other than Fallout, they were not critical or commercial successes in the genre. It only really worked in Fallout 1/2 because it was Turned Based, as implemented in Fallout 3, it was just an easy way to win battles.

Edit: My bad. I finally got what you meant.

I really couldn't care less if this had location-aware damage vs. not. The combat system isn't really designed for it (no sweeps, jumping attacks, etc.). Next thing you know, there'll be threads complaining that Skyrim doesn't have the same combat system as Street Fighter.

Head shots and limb damage would be nice, especially with bows, but since TES has never had it I really don't miss it.

Depends to what extent you want to offer the most realistic, engaging combat experience. Limbs were absolutely a fair and valuable target. A slash across the back of the leg could be just as deadly as a sword through the chest, as the former would reduce mobility to such an extent as to make the latter an inevitability.

Implemented well, locational damage could offer a huge improvement. It would not have to be made completely realistic. Shots to the legs could reduce mobility, to the chest could cause a reduction in stamina and health, to the head could cause the character to be stunned, etc. RPG stats would come into play as they do now - damage, armor, health, and stamina could be combined into a formula to determine effect. In this way you combine player tactics (where to target) with RPG elements (the ability of the character to create the desired effect).

It isn't 'dumbed down', it's just how TES has always been.

This isn't Fallout, mate.

I agree with you 100% Does anyone think this could be modded in?

Its TES, if we was ALL toting guns then yes i see a reason why we would need to have location dmg, but as strickly melee or magic builds...i really hate to just go thru a dugeon and just take a swipe at one head, two head, three head, done and just walk out with fat loot. Hell even most people didnt want the instant kill if u just hit them in the head, thosepeople would still get shafted if in an intese battle they just swinging and take out 2 or 3 foes by accident really quickly just by hittign them in the head.

If they gonna do it, id just rather it show arrows bouncing off peopels heads unless its a killing blow. That would problemly have erased alot fo these threads and such.

Let me clarify something for all you people who are saying " N0 mE no wantZ LoCAtion damage bc it make game too e@sy!"

No. Just no. If anything, would make the game harder.

Now you can shoot/slash someone in the foot and get the same amount of damage as by hitting them in the torso. If locational damage was implemented you actually have to point at their chest/head.

Next off, for this of you who have never played Fallout and think "lets me shoot evb0dyin the head and insta win."

New Vegas used a damage multiplayer system, which was:

2x normal damage for head
1x normal damage for torso
0.5/75 normal damage for limbs

This was just in normal combat, regardless of perks/ sneak bonuses. Basiclly, unless you had a very high powered weapon it was near impossible to get one-hit kills out of sneak mode.

It doesn't bother me that a foot hit delivers as much damage as a head hit. The New Vegas system that Mysterious One just listed might be more fun, though.

My point was that an animation could justify survival in any case

For me personally, the day this happens is the day I turn god mode on and never turn it off. I am crap at games like FPSes and ones that depend on my skills. That's why I love RPGs - they're dependent on my character's skills, not mine. If me getting hit in the head (with any weapon - applying this to only projectiles is dumb in my opinion) means insta-death, I won't last long enough to live through one or two enemies. I get hit a lot because, to be perfectly honest, I svck at any combat that is not turn-based.

And just whacking everyone in the head to insta kill them is boring.

So brain damage and a broken foot are equally as damaging..?

As far as I know, brain damage may mean I never need to concern myself with the use of my feet again.

EDIT: Not to mention, I see a lot of people going back and forth with their opinions. "Busting heads would make the game too easy." "Wait, no! Busting heads would make the game too hard!"

My thought is more that I would die too often, but it would also make enemies that you fight one on one far easier (but you don't get that too often). Also, it'd be harder to make enemies of varying difficulty if they all die from one hit.

Me, I don't compare this game to Fallout.

I'm not about one-hitters, what so ever. But locational damage? Absolutely. X2 multipliers for the head, various body parts doing various things when damaged, armor with a point, etc.

Look at my previous post in the discussion about armor deflection with a chance ratio.

EDIT: Quoting my previous post about armor deflection: (This, to a degree. Though it would be difficult to build a "hit box" around the armor, it is absolutely possible. If your arms are exposed... Well, they're exposed and they're a fine target. Crippling should be instigated through damage to the joints, not the limbs themselves. Oh man, I'm sorry guys... But an arrow in the knee is a lot more damaging than an arrow to the thigh.

Armor would be the biggest variable to a successful headshot/crippling shot. Fur and leather could possibly have a 50/50 chance of penetration. Steel, iron or the other "hard" armors could use a 80/20 chance of successful penetration. 80% of the time, the arrow may hit at such an angle that a metallic helmet could easily deflect it.

The biggest difficulty would be balancing that with the armors themselves. Locational crippling by a successful hit is a must, but the armors should respectively follow the same 50/50 paradigm for soft armors and the 80/20 paradigm for hardened armors.

EDIT: Unfortunately, clothes or robes would offer no protection against penetration and would be entirely for the roleplay value.
EDIT2: Perhaps a thigh/leg shot could slow you down for 5 seconds, or a shoulder/arm shot could slow down bow draw speed and weapon swing speed.
EDIT3: A successful joint shot would end in a crippling blow outright.
Haha, EDIT4: How about if you get clubbed in the head it could blur your vision for 5 seconds too? That'd cause a realistic amount of disorrientation.)

Personally, I see no appeal in this. If we're asking for realism, this still isn't realistic. And, as I said earlier, I'm absolutely terrible at any combat that isn't turn-based, so this would likely either cause me to not buy whatever installment that this is implemented in, or play it on god mode, which just isn't fun.

Honestly I don't see how this can be implemented in a game that emphasizes melee fighting without it detracting from my experience. This is, again, just me, but I'm fairly sure nothing would really convince me that it wouldn't make me hate the game entirely.

I would love locational damage too, but skyrim isn't a combat simulator. Come to think of it actual combat simulators (the closest we have are street fighter, tekken, etc.) don't even have locational damage.

Skyrim (and TES games in general) are trying to do many things at once and there just isn't the time to make everything as deep and complex as one would like. But if you compare Skyrim to Morrowind then you'll see it is evovling in the right direction at least (with regards to combat anyway ) and I'm sure in the next installment of TES we'll see an even greater combat system.

I like Skyrim's combat and design the way it is, which is why I buy games like this as opposed to other products that cater to different tastes than my own.

I'm glad that people who have differing tastes than mine have products available to them that cater to those tastes. I certainly wouldn't want all those other products changed to suite my tastes, at the expense of all those who like them the way they are. It would be selfish of me to want to deprive those people of their favorite products by changing those products to conform to my preferences.

Likewise, I hope that the products I enjoy continue to provide me with the sort of experience that I expect from them, and that they don't morph into carbon copies of other products with features I don't care for.

I like games were the world is a bigger feature than the story, and the characters abilities are more important than the players skill. Skyrim is such a game. It would be a pity if the next title wasn't.