as well, perks do not replace attributes.

you can't get any more fundamental than attributes. it's the other way around: THEY govern the perks.

at the very least, i would think people can agree that attributes can effectively add more depth to the perks.

swinging faster for more damage involves more than just strength. that's why there are basic, fundamental attributes that allow us to operate as human beings, ie. player characters.

And Fallout 3/NV already shows a viable perk+attribute system.

Indeed there are perks that makes no real sense.

Like the perk that removes armor weight and sound in both light armor and heavy armor. There should be a distinct difference in using light or heavy armor.

The entire lockpicking tree and pickpocket tree could easy be one skill, these skills both goes about how good you are with your fingers so they could be combined into one

Weapon perk tree's could be greatly improved, adding weapons like Hand to hand, daggers and Polearms. Make choice of weapon have both advantages and disadvantages, for instance Daggers could be less effective as a weapon unless you get right up to them. Try to block a guy with daggers standing in your face and you are wielding a axe. Polearms and two handed weapons would be good for range, but not so good as close combat weapons

Acrobatics could be a skill again that would improve your character as a monk. for instance it could mean if you don't wear armor you would have a "natural" armor bonus for being fast on your feet, easier to dodge attacks etc.

The perk system is far from perfect. It's a good system, but could be improved a lot.

Yes, I'll link you if needed (HEY I don't play COD Bukee, i would never commit such betrayal lol)

And I avoid your Trap Card, because Morrowind had more than Both, wasn't streamlined even if not optimized and played a larger impact and a part in what you did and did not do in game more extensively than COD/MW3 and Skyrim. Yes Like MW3/COD you're good at everything, and can only get better, you don't have a weakness or supreme disadvantage beyond The amount of health you have before you die.

in Morrowind its less so, and inb4 dice roll combat, no thats not what I'm talking about. your Char as a Char was limited in game, if you pushed them, that is your doing. in MW3/Skyrim every thing is nearly a fart in the wind, either your dead or your not dead, you are no more or no less at a loss for how you grow your character.

Makes sense?

That's kind of a different system really.

I don't think that would work with TES's "learn by doing" leveling system, especially if the attributes would be just as static as in Fallout.

That's not how it works.

I mean, yeah, in the beginning you are equally good at everything, or better yet, you equally svck at everything, but thanks to level scaling everybody else svcks just as well.
But as I have said, that won't remain for long, in the end you have to focus on something, sneaking, spells, or swordfights and other things will be left out. Yes, the starting healing spell can be a godsend at the beginning, but if you neglect using it, because potions, and you don't buy any newer spells or raise your magicka, you'll notice that later levels with more health that healing spell is really not that effective, even though it was at the beginning.
Even better example would be the destruction spells.

If this would be true, you should be able to beat up Ancient Dragons and Giants at level one...

I agree that its not a good RPG in some terms. But Skyrim being a bad elder scrolls game.... that is debatable considering it has stuck with what makes this series so great. The ability to go and do what ever you want in a fantasy open world!

Skyrim is an RPG because it still accomplishes the same ends as those Attributes you are ragging on about.

You still control a character - playing COD you are not controlling a character. As someone said before, it's the difference between playing as the character, or just guiding the character. There is no character in a game like COD. You are generic soldier #4190495, there is no differentiation between you and the millions of other people playing the game, because the game is not about developing a character. You unlocking new goodies for your gun is not character development, it is no different than collecting loot. And I'm sure (at least I really hope) that you realize that there's more that goes into making an RPG than just collecting loot.

Skyrim is an RPG because with or without attributes and stats, you have full control over the development of your character. You control his path, you make choices for the character - as the character - and you invest the time into developing your character's skills and taking him from the beginning of his journey (level 1 "criminal" escaping an execution) to fulfilling his destiny (Dovahkiin), or completely ignoring that destiny if you so choose to. You decide if your character is going to be a mage, warrior, thief, or anything in between. You choose the areas that your character is going to specialize in. Your actions determine if your character is a good guy or bad guy, you determine how your character interacts with the world by choosing guilds to be a part of.

In Call of Duty... you get a new sight for your gun...

That's the difference. That's the difference between stats and RPG.

An RPG can exist without stats, because it's not the stats that make the RPG - they are a means to an end. It is the result of those stats that makes it an RPG... and Skyrim has taken a route that accomplishes that end result in a non-traditional way.

That doesn't make it not an RPG. It simply means that there is more than one way to design an RPG. Not everything has to follow the Dungeons & Dragons design. That is but ONE RPG design. Not the be all end all of RPG design.

You may have an argument that certain aspects aren't as done as well in Skyrim as they were in the past - you may not like how the guilds work, you may not like the NPC interactions this go round, or whatever it is that you might not like - and that's okay. But those dislikes don't make Skyrim not an RPG, it means that you don't think that Skyrim was as good in a certain area as it could have been.

Perks, attributes and major skills would have worked well together. Increases in attributes from within the perk tree would make sense. The problem with the "learning by doing" leveling system is the lack of major skills. Buying, selling and lockpicking is leveling up enemies against my mage ...why?

Skyrim is not a TES style game because TES has no style, their modus operandi is to start from the ground up EVERY SINGLE TIME!

Other than the Arena to Daggerfall changes (which did upgrade the previous game) they have reinvented the TES game.

Morrowind took advantage of new technology and took out a lot of sub par features from DF instead of building on them, Oblivion made an easily appreciated game that (imo) had a bit less mileage than Morrowind but better gameplay. Skyrim is a whole new ballgame just like MW and OB before it, it's a shame Bethesda doesn't build on their past titles but, oh well.

Good job I didn't disagree too much then, lol. I don't doubt that combat gets easier. Even older RPGs that were more heavily stat based get easier later on.

Because it's a FPS withlight story elemnets mostly in the form of fetch quests.

I like the perks, I think they did good with them, do the offer the exact same thing as ..they offer the meat but peoe are argueing that that attribute do offer more rp value and I show some examples.

Ok lets say u roll a mage that has maxed out int and wisdom. Ok yes the perks cover the amount of mana, the speed in which magic regens and sta regens..wait so to get the sta Regen I gotta either use an enchant, wear lihht armor, or use a potion. What if I dont wear la, then I cant be a speedy lil mage running away constantly because to get the same effect I would have to use perks from la in which my mage dosent use. Also the mage is maxxed out in str because he likes to carry alot of stiff, think that hes muscular, be able to get that extra umph in his enchanted dagger he pulls lut when the [censored] hits the fan and to prevent staggering or getting knotched down. Well the extra carrying weight thats covered in the new lvling system but to get the stagger my mage would have to be wearing heavy armor, to get the extra umph that str woulda included into his dagger he would have to be maxxed out in one handed to benefit whereas nefore he could of had a low score seeing its brought ouy in rare situations, but now instead of just being strong he have to be a one handed blade master.

Like I said I like the perks for reg aying, but for rp purposes, they are severly getting limited in which why people are complaining.

Hopes this clear up some things. And yes I uses oblivions atributes scale since that was most recent before, dont sshot me lol

If there is any flaw with TES leveling system it's that non combat skills allow you to levelup and make you weaker in the progress.

Its neither a great RPG nor great Elder scrolls game. Its just an open world action/adventure a shadow of what it once was and what it could of been. Bethesda sold out. They designed the game for 12 year old ritalin addicts.

An RPG needs stats if it wants to be a good RPG and not some watered down game like Mass Effect 2-3 and possibly Skyrim too, although the latter is more of an RPG then the former.


I wouldn't go as extreme but I do agree. Skyrim has certainly been dumbed down from what Morrowind and Oblivion did. Still better then what 95% of the industry pumps out but that's not what I want from a TES game. Beth can certainly go this route and I'll still buy their products but not day one/full price.

so, you're agreeing with me, right??

Somewhat, I still consider Skyrim to be an RPG just not a good one at all and it has no depth. I've had more enjoyment from my last 10 hours with Oblivion from a Roleplaying perspective then I did playing Skyrim.

ya, i'll admit that i've used a bit of hyperbole when talking about this issue, lol.

skyrim's a rpg, but, definitely lightly so.

In a true RPG you are allowed to do as you will within the limits of the rules. It woks in P&P because there is a human being taking on the role of NPCs, and that human is vastly more capable of reacting than a programmed AI set. So we have to start with the realization that CRPGs are necessarily limited by their medium.

Now that leaves us with "How close does Skyrim get?". The more comprehensive the RPG elements in a CRPG the less you will feel like you are playing on a computer. This is where IMHO Skyrim could have done so much better. There are so many quest lines, so many NPC interactions that just fall short, and not just short of the ultimate but well short of that which has already been done in the medium.

There are any number of game mechanics that could be improved, and any number of changes from previous titles that I don't care for. Attributes is a big one. Lack of any differentiation at start is also IMHO not good. However, that does not stop Skyrim from being an RPG. There is plenty in the way of character development that allows for differentiated builds. What stops Skyrim from being a better RPG is the lack of NPC development. In the end the role that a character plays is greatly defined by his interactions with the world around him, and Skyrim could have been much better in this regard.

One last point - there is nothing to stop Skyrim DLC from producing a great RP experience. Nothing in the code in any way prevents it from happening. It's about the writing and the willingness to develop NPCs. So here's hoping for the best, if not from Bethesda then from some intrepid and talented modder.

Definitely agree, New DLC could reintroduce Spell Creation, better dialoge with the NPC's in that area and probably a couple other features that I'm forgetting at the moment.

I read these threads and see so many peoples limited visions of what is an acceptable RPG and am so glad I am fexible enough to have loved and played to death Morrowind and Oblivion and soon Skyrim. They all have different weak points and strengths which are crazyly exagerated by their detractors and admirers. All three are great games for me just different.

I remember virtually that same post when Morrowind came out comparing it to Daggerfall. I remember it when Oblivion came out comparing it to Morrowind ( although the Oblivion haters tended to be less civilzed than present company or the Morrowind detractors)

Morrowind more than Skyrim it is almost required to join a guild and take quests if you want to advance faster. In Skyrim, quests can actually just slow you down. The Art is so nice in Skyrim that I forgot to do any Guild quests until I hit level 40.

In Morrowind, you are much better off doing the MAIN QUEST for a little bit, then the guild quests. IMO the best thing to do is pick one, fighter/mage/thief guild and go as far as you can in it, do at least half of the main quest. The Blades hook you up.

I like to hit Bloodmoon at like level 25, and do a few Tribunal quests at that level as well for the nice rewards.

Also note, TRIBUNAL AND BLOODMOON are very very important to enjoying Morrowind in 2012. In fact, Oblivion took a lot from Tribunal and Skyrim is ripped right out of Bloodmoon.

Morrowind is a very difficult game starting out, but with a Wiki and a MAP it's almost as "easy" as Skyrim. You get no glowing arrows pointing you to the right cave, but with Wiki, the in game quest system is much more manageable.

This is probably the hottest topic I've ever seen here. 11 pages for part 1 and 5 pages for this one since yesterday.
It's overwhelming, I've given up on trying to read it all.

Great, now it's forever marked with a double-bubble...