Deus Ex and Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines handle these thing just fine. Arguably better than how Skyrim handles it, as it's actually possible to miss what you're aiming at without the necessary skill.
It's not about realism, it's about providing the player with tactical options resulting in combat that's more interesting than simply whacking an enemy until it's dead.

I wouldn't mind seeing locational damage in the next game, but not because it would add to the realism. Hitting a tough bandit in the head nine times with a battle axe before he falls is about as realistic as chopping away at his health any other way. With that said, some interesting variation in combat is always welcome.

It's jarring sometimes, but I don;'t want the game to become any easier.

I think that's pretty dumb, too, but it's all about design and practical use... instead of realism. Sigh.

As the same tactics can be used against you, nothing should become easier. Instead everything simply becomes more lethal or less forgiving.

For something to be "dumbed down" it would of had to have the feature in a previous game that was better implemented. TES has never featured area damage. Therefore it is not dumbed down.

I would not mind a little change. i find sword shield battles way to boring because its just hack and slash. But if you go down the stealth tree you would see how much more tacticle the gae could potentially be, like observing your enemies, planning attacks and useing your surrounding for an advantage

There's a mod out now called Locational Damage which is just plain awesome

I don't believe Bethesda is capable of programing proficient enough AI to use it.

If they can program the AI to hit you now, clearly they have some means of targeting. Does it really require substantial changes to go from "target the enemy" to "target the enemy body, target the enemy arm, target the enemy head"? It's an honest question. I have no experience with programming video game AI. Still, it doesn't seem like there'd be much more to it. You provide multiple potential targets instead of one.

I should stay away from forums (fora?) when I'm in a crappy mood. I apologize for sounding like your arthritic great grandpa who hasn't had a good BM in four months.

You don't need VATS for body specific hit boxes, you could cripple enemies body parts without VATS in fallout. It's something that could have been done, a blow to the face would do more damage and stagger the enemy in a different way to a blow to the leg (less damage).

Angle and direction aren't needed, just areas of the body that take more damage and stagger in different ways. I'd like to see the cripple system in skyrim also, I enjoyed that in fallout.

That's unfair to people who don't wear helmets. This was already discussed before Skyrim came out. Not every player wears helmets and most NPC's don't wear helmet's. They didn't want to make it easy to kill enemies and they didn't want the player to be easily killed.

I'm surprised they didn't use the cripple system from Fallout. The unrealism of the combat actually led to me really enjoying stealth-based characters recently. Seems more realistic to be able to slash someone and instakill them.

Bingo.

I'm not saying wearing helmets makes your head impossible to cripple or take damage, I didn't even mention helmets.

Wearing a helmet should decrease the chance of your head crippling and you take less damage overall (due to the increased armor rating), but with the same damage bonus than if you were wearing no helmet (each body part has a specific damage modifier).

If you don't wear a helmet, then you should be more susceptible to head crippling, it's your choice.

What would be the point then? Headshots will always do the most damage, so why would the AI do anything but? The AI just wants to kill you, so they wont do crippling shots because they are just going to kill you, period.

Locational damage is only good if there is a valid use for the AI. Crippling in Fallout was pointless because, again, you and they were just going to kill one another. In the end, its all about killing. Thus locational damage is pointless. Headshots only matter in shooters where each side can do it and its equally as deadly. RPGs have no need for it since the end result of EVERY battle is death, and most enemies die in 2-5 hits anyway.

Because heads, being smaller targets, are harder to hit. Taking out an opponent's leg or arm opens them up to more devastating attacks. A character might be wearing a heavy helmet that also offers greater head protection, minimizing the bonus to a successful hit to that area. In that case, more hits that do less damage, but simultaneously reduce the opponent's ability to counterattack are a smarter option.

Beyond that, NPCs would be designed to fight in certain ways. Unskilled bandits are more likely to run in charging at the torso. Trained knights would have the skill and understanding to take a more measured approach, with each attack being more precise.
I stated in a previous post that I'm more than happy to not increase damage for targeted shots. Have a head shot do just as much potential damage as a foot shot. But I want the tactical effects: stuns, knockdowns, penalties to skill and damage. I want individual armor pieces to matter, instead of a single defensive value. There is no room for smart thinking in Skyrim. Either I'm capable or I'm not. In the former case, it might take a reload or two, but eventually I'll win simply because I'm luckier with the damage rolls. I'd like the option to outsmart the enemy, to find that weak spot and exploit it. I mean, adventure stories are kinda boring if it's all just equally matched opponents squaring off head to head.

So ones ability to dodge has no value here?

Ive had many times where ive only managed to get trhough because of skill rather then luck. Taking on 3 deathlords by funneling them through a doorway, taking out the mages before the brawlers.

The game already has stuns and knockdowns, so what you are proposing is... pointless.

I'm not sure I follow. It would have value regardless of whether locational damage existed or not.
Again, this is possible regardless of whether locational damage were implemented.
You can knock someone down with a weapon blow? Notice that you've also ignored part of my argument: skill/damage penalties. Preventing an enemy from effectively retaliating can be just as important as killing them outright. Do you intend to respond to the entirety of my post, or can I expect you to continue sniping half of my argument?

No. TES is an RPG, not an FPS.

There's no actual cranial matter inside the 'head' of enemies that you are fighting in video games. So there's no real point in headshots doing more damage whatever kind of game it is - FPS, RPG or whatever. Might as well have damage increases for kneeshots, it's just as hard to hit.

Headshots don't always just have to be for shooters this is a common and quite annoying misconception. if your an archer it would be quite annoying planting a bunch of arrows in the face of your enemy and a huge immersion breaker to see him run up with an arrow sticking out from between his eyes. as your said all battles in RPGs have death as an end result look back on that and tell me that isn't the same for shooters. the end result in shooters is to kill the opposing team if you put it as simply like that then RPGs are roughly the same but with more substance. not everyone uses a bow and not every one has the kind of aim to take some one out from a distance with magic or archery. warriors don't need locational damage because the reach of there sword is in front of them. archers and Mages could potentially use locational damage as a tactical stand point of survival. assassin based characters could use it to quickly dispatch the guards of there contract mind you its only a damage boost not an instant kill so it would be more practical to the RPG setting that skyrim has laid out already. you said there would have to be a use for it, well there are plenty of uses for it as i have stated and probably are even more uses for it outside of what i mentioned. that is for the player to decide. in fact a potental use for it is being able to disarm your opponent by shooting the hand that holds his weapon.


what dictates that FPS is the only type that gets locational damage? there are plenty of uses for it in an RPG stand its just more of an option of if you want to be an archer or a warrior or even a mage locational damage doesn't apply to everyone and the people it does apply do only benifit by getting a damage boost or a disarm depending on where they hit. at no point in time does this make it an FPS should this be included