People like to throw around the word streamlined for anything they don't like, it seems. I do agree, however that it would've been nice to have spears in the game. It's not that difficult to add....at all. I've played lany oblivion mods with both spears and unique animations for spears. Made by third-party community members for free. If they can do it, so can you Bethesda

Yeah can't wait to see the next game, we are kinda regressing here. No crossbows and spears....I can't fathom why not.

They would need more animations for spears, death scenes and such. Still was it that hard? And before you say use two handed animations, you know very well people would jump on Bethesda for not making new animations.

Yes if they implement spears again they need separate animations. Spears were the only weapons in Morrowind for which I would tick the box saying "always use best attack" because otherwise you would have your character trying to wack enemies to dead with a spear every now and then which is plain stupid and looked dumb. Although perhaps they could have used the 2-handed animations for Halberds.

Spear attacks like the battle between Achilles and Hectors in the Troy movie.

Who even uses maces?

Those things are not only ugly but they are slow.


Milk builds strong bones.

Polearms could go in Two Handed but Spears would need their own skill Catagory. If that was done you would have 7 combat skills, not exactly an even number. Spears isn't that big of a feature anyway and how would the animation work in a way that doesn't make the weapon overpowering.

Spears and Polearms are redundant. Currently, there isn't enough distinction between weapon classes as it is (Maces, Swords, Axes). Arbitrarily adding two more because they "look cool" is not a compelling argument for the work that would need to be done. These are the types of things that should be added with mods, not with the original game. I think Spears and Polearms look great also, but I can see why they were not introduced at release. I wish that the current weapons had more distinction however. I just don't really see much of a functional or perk difference between Swords, Maces, and Axes. They need to be vastly different, which they are not.

there is an animation of a guard holding a spear, at one of the castle. except he doesnt have a spear, so it looks weird.

so maybe spears are coming back. after a patch or something

not following why they should be added by mods....are modders the onyl ones capable of making new animations? Seems like Bethesda could have just rocked on and kept going when making new animations for everything else. If Modders do it it will be amatuerish. Sometimes this stuff comes out right, but mostly it comes as Japanese anime animations and such.

You are downloading the wrong mods then.

Because it is not necessary for the game. That is like saying Scythes, Claws, Shurikens etc. should be added. They are redundant to what already exists. The only difference would be the model, animations, and whatever values you want to assign them. Now, you would either have to make an entirely new perk tree for them, or have them share one with an existing class (so Halberds would be considered axes or something equally silly).

It does not make sense for them to go to that trouble. Normally I do not agree things should be reserved for mods, this is an exception. Not because I do not think it would be cool, but that it is extraneous. Here is a simple question, why outside the fact do you think that Spears and Polearms should be included and what Perks would you associate with them - further how would this be any different than Axes, Maces, or Swords?

I'm familiar with the Varangian Guard, but that's the Byzantime Empire and the Empire we see in-game is usually closest to the older, "proper" Rome. I guess it's not definite though, since the ES universe is hard to compare to the real world in terms of time. And if you count the Byzantines then it's correct, since the Vikings were everywhere in Europe after they rose. But Rome proper never got very far north as said and abandoned any such plans after Teutoburger forest, and the stay-at-home Scandinavians' reach didn't extend very far before the Viking age, when the classical/stereotypical Rome was gone, at least in my eyes. And reading his/her post I took it as referring to the Scandinavian kingdoms rather than migrating tribes.

By that logic, the game should've been released with just swords and a single suit of armor and modders could've added the rest. More than one face per gender per race? Let the modders add them. I don't mean to offend, but I have to say that I find your reasoning to be infuriatingly terrible.

See above. Axes and maces add nothing that swords don't, except for some resemblance of sanity. If you want to make a world that seems alive, you better not [censored] everything up by making it a living bizarro world. Spears and clubs are the most basic weapons imaginable, and their uses are many in a world without firearms, so not having them around is a brain sore unless the angle of the game is very narrow. Needless to say, an open world game with plenty of guards, a regular army, loads of horses, dragons, bigass bears and cats, and the odd troll is hardly the place you'd expect to not find a single [censored] spear or polearm.

If that doesn't scream bizarro world to you then I'm sorry to say this, and I mean it in the least offensive way possible, but then you would buy any excuse for a world, no matter how garbled and senseless it is. Nobody in their right mind would get into any kind of swordfight with an angry bear and given the amount of bears in Skyrim, the lack of pole weapons is beyond bizarre. gamesas are essentially asking players to accept that just about every single damn NPC in Skyrim is either bat[censored] insane or massively suicidal.

And please, don't give me nonsense about how Tamriel isn't medieval Earth. It doesn't change a damn thing, as long as bears are bears and humans are terribly vulnerable to high force impacts from sharp or blunt objects, be those bear clows, giant clubs, mammoth tusks, or a sabercat tackle + bite + claws combo.

This is true. It does not make sense for them, from an economic point of view. A sensible, deep game world that makes the least bit of sense is a quality they don't need to sell millions of copies of the game, because the average casual gamer wouldn't notice even the most glaring inconsistencies in the world. Consequently, it's good economic sense not to waste resources on something that isn't important for achieving success.

Economic sense, however, is not something that anyone not hired at gamesas has to give two dog turds about. We're customers and as customers, it is our job to make realism critical for success, assuming we don't want some Ducktown realm of crack-inspired nonsense.
Heh, what perks? As if the sword or axe perks are even remotely significant? The blunt perks add armor penetration, which is ridiculous since the armor penetration is a question of physics and should happen regardless of perks. In that line of reasoning, you could've given spears a stagger effect or an "extra damage vs piercing-vulnerable targets" or maybe just something as "lame" as a damage bonus vs animals? It's not like any of the specialization perks aren't more or less useless anyway, so why does it matter?

As for why spears are different from other weapons, well... I, for one, think poking stuff with a long stick is HUGELY different from stupidly walking right up to it and waving some damn knife around in its face. That's just me, though. I mean, what the [censored] kind of question is this? Either the world makes a tiny bit of sense or it does not. If you have mounts, a Roman themed civilization, and a lot of large game to whom even large men are really just squishies, then a solid supply of long-range weapons to keep the "squishies" of out "squish"-range is a hundred times more necessary then half a dozen kinds of [censored] sugar treats or what have you.

It's a simple question of basic survival, something your garden variety Nord certainly wouldn't do for long if he was to take on trolls, mammoths, giants, bears and sabercats at sword range on a regular basis. You might as well take out fire or food or freaking houses, because we're talking about a tool just as essential for survival.

@Black Spider

The point I am trying to make is that they have homogenized the game hugely. For things to "make the cut" they need to be unique and worth the time to implement. The fact is that they chose Axes, Maces, and Swords each with a one-hand and two-handed counterpart. Spears do not have a one-handed counterpart. I am not arguing against you. I think Spears and Halberds are more unique than how they have implemented Swords, Maces, and Axes. My issue isn't that Spears or Polearms are not in the game, but that the Weapons that they did choose to include are not unique enough and do not control differently from one another outside of swing speeds. My fear is that if they implemented Spears or Polearms, it would be done the same way - half-assed.

this gave me some lulz

Well, you don't need to tell me why gamesas decided to cut out spears. I know that already. I have a degree in econ and business administration, after all.

What you do need to explain to me, preferably like I'm a ten year old, is why I, as a paying customer, should accept and be satisfied with their cost-cutting choices? Why should I give a rats ass whether some feature is easy or hard for them to implement? That's their headache, not mine. Just like they want the most profit they can get (and to hell with everything else), I want the best product I can get. In my eyes, accepting senseless design choices from gamesas simply because it saves them money is like accepting discount ingredients being served at a gourmet restaurant.

This is quite simply not true. Spears were used with a shield back when the Greek hoplites kicked ass (hoplites, by the way, are spear-troops named for their type of shield - the hoplon). I believe Alexander's phalangites used two-hand pikes, though. It would thus have made plenty of sense to have one-hand "shorter" spears as a 1H stab weapon and pike-like weapons as a 2H stab weapon.

Even so, I fail to see why there has to be symmetry between one-handed and two-handed weapons. The whole concept that all weapons are either one-handed or two-handed and that all those weapons in such generalized groups have synergy effects between them is a load of rubbish so stupid that I hope the balls will fall off whatever person conjured that terribly bad idea. So what if there are more 2H weapons than 1H weapons? 2H means no shield, which is a trade-off in itself. 1H means defense, 2H means offense. So what if there are more offensive weapon types than defensive weapon types?

In that case I'm sorry about any insinuated insults that would seemingly be better directed towards my failing reading comprehension. One of these days (or years, or decades even) I'll probably learn not to argue on a forum when I'm overly tired or suffering from a headache, though I'm afraid it won't be tonight.

A fear I could share. Even so, I still think it's gamesas's job to actually create a proper, deep, and reasonable world, even if it doesn't seem too likely at this point that they'd actully do it all that well.

The world itself is great! It's the weapon selection that's lacking.

I also think swords, axces, and maces should have different sets of animations.

I loved how different one handed swords had different sets of animations in Dark Souls, AND I could use a two handed grip with any weapon at any time, on the fly. Attack one handed with a shield from the front, roll around to the side of the enemy hit them and stagger them and switch to a two handed grip and decimate them.

A longsword shoud be usable with one or two hands and you should be able to switch on the fly with a single button press.

I've never understood this apparent need to balance the number of skills within the warrior-thief-mage dynamic. There aren't any classes. You aren't penalized for playing hybrid characters. Why do we need to remove or rearrange of add various skills solely for the purpose of evening out these arbitrary archetypal options? Who cares if there are two dozen weapon skills under the warrior tree. You'll very rarely see anyone choose more than maybe a couple weapon skills. It's not like it would give them any sort of advantage in the game.

Haven't had them since Morrowind. You can thank "streamlining"

And didn't have them before then, either.

Actually, its going around that milk actually takes calcium from your bones. Not sure if its 100% true.

Drink soy/almond/rice milk. Tastes waaaaay better, no PUSS, and is healthier.

That's no reason to remove something that worked. And Staves were present in Daggerfall. No longer as melee weapons, since Morrowind.