Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim announced

[WDeranged]

I don't get that really. The leveling up in Oblivion was absurdly fast -- your character could gain 2 levels just falling down a flight of stairs.

 

Even in Skyrim, despite hearing some good things, it's still the typical Bethesda/Todd Howard all-gamers-have-ADD approach to game design.

 

Yeah and in Fallout 3 it got worse, I remember using a mod to reduce gained xp by 4x and it was still too fast, I hope they use a Dragon Age type system where you can spend points retroactively, rather than being slapped in the face by a level up screen every ten minutes.

[Tigranes]

Sorting out the attrib system might have involved streamlining how skills and attribs affect the player - e.g. DEX increases ranged damage & BOW increases speed & accuracy.

 

Certainly I'm excited by Skyrim in a lot of ways but what they're doing with character development threatens to suck the fun out of exploratory rampaging that is the greatest strength of TES. I wouldn't want to level up every 5 minutes, spam my points in "HP" and "Sword", and blam. (Is magic customisation/creation still in?) Also remains to be seen whether Dragon Shouts are cool and imaginative things or just gimmicks, and whether you can get them all or make choices, etc. If there were some good choices in the game about which shout to pick or the cost of overusing shouts it coudl stil be interesting.

[Slowtrain]

Sorting out the attrib system might have involved streamlining how skills and attribs affect the player - e.g. DEX increases ranged damage & BOW increases speed & accuracy.

 

Certainly I'm excited by Skyrim in a lot of ways but what they're doing with character development threatens to suck the fun out of exploratory rampaging that is the greatest strength of TES. I wouldn't want to level up every 5 minutes, spam my points in "HP" and "Sword", and blam. (Is magic customisation/creation still in?) Also remains to be seen whether Dragon Shouts are cool and imaginative things or just gimmicks, and whether you can get them all or make choices, etc. If there were some good choices in the game about which shout to pick or the cost of overusing shouts it coudl stil be interesting.

 

 

Perks, which Beth seems to be focusing on as the one of the key areas of chaarcter development in Skyrim, could potentially do a lot of interesting things, without the need for stats. A perk could increase running speed or jumping distance or strafing speed. Or anything really. One could build their character based on perks and the skills they use. It could be an interesting approach to character growth.

 

That being said, Fallout 3's perks were for the most part utterly unimaginative, mostly just consisting of +x skill points, and unless Beth does a much better job coming up with perks for Skyrim, then the perk-focused approach isn't going to be too interesting to me.

 

But it does have potential. If done well.

[Tigranes]

I forgot about perks - I do feel they are a good inclusion, though we'll likely get one perk every level, and with even faster levelling speeds, well.

 

You can't rely on perks too much as your chief source of character power or satisfaction, because they're usually not systematised in the way attributes or skills are. That pushes all character growth in the game towards unplanned, hodgepodge and whimsical, taking away from people that like to 'powergame' to varying degrees, or just derive roleplaying satisfaction from a planning and sketching out a character through those stats. It's also a question of whether perks become uselessly weak to compensate for their large numbers, just plan overpowered, or simply perks with multiple tiers, making them, in essence, skills.

 

We will see.

[HoonDing]

Problem with attribute system was that all characters eventually ended up the same regardless of their racial traits.

 

A Nord/Orc with 50 in axe should always be better than an Altmer with 50 in axe.

Edited April 19, 2011 by virumor

[Slowtrain]

Problem with attribute system was that all characters eventually ended up the same regardless of their racial traits.

 

A Nord/Orc with 50 in axe should always be better than an Altmer with 50 in axe.

 

 

Yep. In the ES system characters became more similar the longer you played rather than more different; however different they might be at the start, they all grew to a common endpoint, so to speak.

 

To me, personally, that result shows a broken rpg system right there. Character development should work exactly the opposite: characters start similar but the longer you play them the more unique they become.

[mkreku]

The Gothic games always had very few attributes and it works very well. I am not worried and I would not necessarily consider this as "dumbing down" as much as a step in another direction.

[entrerix]

so long as they don't do this to fallout then I don't mind them experimenting with TES.

 

I've LONG thought the system in TES games was problematic at best (total disaster at worst), this game seems like a drastic overhaul and it can't be much worse than what they had before and it stands a chance of being much better, so i'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now.

 

and i totally agree with slowtrain about how characters should start similar and become more and more different over time instead of the inverse like TES has been. i could write for hours about all the stupid problems I have with the mechanics of morrowind and oblivion.

 

JE Sawyer seems to have a good grasp of mechanics, seeing how the F3 system was adapted for the better in NV, i would love to see a spinoff TES game by obsidian, probably won't happen though.

Edited April 19, 2011 by entrerix

[HoonDing]

I don't think Bethesda will throw any more breadcrumbs under their table.

 

Since Peter Hines mentioned in a recent interview that FO:NV = Fallout 4, there's only one more Fallout game to come anyways and that one will never be outsourced.

[Slowtrain]

there's only one more Fallout game to come anyways

 

 

WHy is that? Is there a limit to how many FO games Bethesoft has the right to make?

[HoonDing]

there's only one more Fallout game to come anyways

 

 

WHy is that? Is there a limit to how many FO games Bethesoft has the right to make?

I thought they had the rights to publish 3 Fallout games, unless that's some Herv

[Wrath of Dagon]

Pretty sure it's BS, of course it depends whose lawyers are better. He was claiming the rights would revert to Interplay unless Bethesda lets them make the MMO.

[entrerix]

yeah.... bethesda owns fallout IP (at least for single player games, gets a bit stickier if you start talking multiplayer/mmo/etc).

 

expect many more fallout games (so long as they keep selling as well as they have so far). not 1 more.

[Enoch]

I've LONG thought the system in TES games was problematic at best (total disaster at worst), this game seems like a drastic overhaul and it can't be much worse than what they had before and it stands a chance of being much better, so i'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now.

Yeah, I agree.

 

Bethesda are good at recognizing after-the-fact that they've made a broken system, and they don't shy away from fixing their problems in later games. Sadly, to-date, the fixed versions always seem to come with new and different broken elements. Fallout 3 is probably the least-broken system of theirs that I've played, so that's a good sign. But returning to the core learn-by-doing mechanic for TES is probably going to be a step backwards.

 

Anyhow, the best news about Skyrim I've heard so far is that they're going to continue their policy of modder support. Skyrim should be a solid experience after the mod community has had 6 months or so to tinker with it.

[Slowtrain]

Really though the bottom line is pretty simple: ANY changes Beth makes to Oblivion's mechanics are positive changes since nothing in Oblivion was worth keeping around for this next iteration of the ES series.

 

The new perk based high speed leveling system of skyrim may not work at all, but it's still better than reusing a system that we all ready know is completely broken.

[Rosbjerg]

I'm actually starting to get excited.. mostly because, as Enoch said, mods can really save a game these days.. and F3/FO:NV was pretty good after applying a generous amount of mods. I'll continue to buy Beth games as long as they allow the modders access to their tools.

[Guest Slinky]

I'm actually starting to get excited.. mostly because, as Enoch said, mods can really save a game these days.. and F3/FO:NV was pretty good after applying a generous amount of mods. I'll continue to buy Beth games as long as they allow the modders access to their tools.

What mods you used with NV? In my opinion it's a great game straight out the package and the only mod I'm planning to use on my next game is some UI mod, and maybe some graphical improvements.

 

Unlike say Oblivion that needs a truckload of mods before I could enjoy it.

[Lexx]

Since Peter Hines mentioned in a recent interview that FO:NV = Fallout 4

 

In what interview he said that?

 

Bethesda fully owns Fallout now. So like written in the above posts, they can do as many Fallout games in whatever genre they want to.

[Rosbjerg]

I'm actually starting to get excited.. mostly because, as Enoch said, mods can really save a game these days.. and F3/FO:NV was pretty good after applying a generous amount of mods. I'll continue to buy Beth games as long as they allow the modders access to their tools.

What mods you used with NV? In my opinion it's a great game straight out the package and the only mod I'm planning to use on my next game is some UI mod, and maybe some graphical improvements.

 

Unlike say Oblivion that needs a truckload of mods before I could enjoy it.

 

I have over 30+ mods installed with everything from simple terrain fixes to advanced game altering mechanics.

 

Here are some of the most popular.

 

Enhanced blood textures (which make blood splatter look quite realistic)

Electro City (which combined with darker nights make the wasteland a cool place to exlpore)

Neveda Skies (adds sand/electric/radioactic and thunder -storms, and makes the sky look truely beautiful - it also makes NPCs run for cover when storms come)

Populated Casinos (which makes the Strip come alive)

Realistic Portable Tent (My favorite - it adds a personal tent that takes some time to set up, you decide how long, which is worn like a backpack)

Project Nevada (which makes helmets, glasses and headgear restrict or enhance your sight and gives the game a more FPS feel with a reactive crosshair)

More Perks (which adds a few dozen new perks that make sense within the setting)

Bounty Hunter (fully voiced quests where you hunt down some of the worst scums of the Wasteland)

Real Time Settler (allows you to build your own village, where you scavenge for resources, cut down trees etc and try to keep order and food production high)

 

All in all I try to choose mods that make sense to the setting instead of those that add Space Marines and naked foxes.

[LadyCrimson]

Hm. The way they're describing the leveling of enemies/world makes it sound like I might like this game more than I initially was thinking. The skill/chr method doesn't bother me much, as long as the gameplay is fun (obviously). Agree that it's not necessarily dumbing down, depends on how it works/feels.

 

The world screenies are decent enough I might buy it for eye candy alone. I could use more open world eye-candy.

[RPGmasterBoo]

I couldn't care less about the system as long as they make a game-world that doesn't suck. Oblivion and F3 were completely, mind numbingly, boring to explore due to moronic NPC dialog and interaction, repetitive dungeons and mostly stupid quests.

 

And lets not forget the Oblivion lockpicking.

[Minchi]

O.o;;;

 

Fallout 3 is not bad to explore but Oblivion lack tasted in exploring but the game is fun though...And i totally hated the lock picking in oblivion but loved the one that they introduced in fallout 3 and nv besides that its not that bad...

[Wombat]

About the game-play, they seem to have tweaked stealth system. Also, it seems to be faction system, too. Judging from that "last witness killed" message, I think it could be rewarding to play both assassin type char and, hopefully, no-killing intel spy type one, which I personally like (There cannot be a single witness if the "job" is done successfully, can there?). At least, as for game-play, Bethesda is doing decent job, IMO. What bugs me is, of course, the content.

 

As for comments on perks, I think Beth seems to be listening to hardcore RPG fans, too. IIRC, Codex wrote a critical review, on which, they mentioned the lack of additional dimension to the game-play through character progression. On the other hand, they won't be happy with the some "simplifications" of the character development system but, as long as the core-game-play is like that, rather than detailed numeric stats which may not be well-translated into the context, more intuitive approach would fit it.

 

Again, the problem with Beth, Bio or Bliz I have is that they decidedly take the games as escapism, giving up doing something which can stimulate players brains. You may call it something like art or literature but I'm not into mind-boggling experience and don't like to ask myself why I am spending my time. Whether it is Diablo or Oblivion, while their game-play attract quite many people, and personally, I like the stealth game-play of Oblivion, but the lack of the content is so severe to me.

[WDeranged]

Bethesda are excellent at giving you lots of OCD tasks that ultimately add up to very little, I'm not complaining, hunting for Nuka Cola Quantum in Fallout 3 right now is very satisfying, even if I know it'll just get me a slightly different kind of hand grenade when I'm done.

 

So far I've agreed with 90% of what I've heard, mechanically speaking I think Skyrim is going to be a game I'll enjoy, I do hope for another Morrowind type love affair though, when you find yourself lying in bed months later, pondering a character's nature and eventual fate; you know something deep happened, it's much like Planescape: Torment in that regard.

Edited April 23, 2011 by WDeranged

[LadyCrimson]

Oblivion and F3 were completely, mind numbingly, boring to explore due to moronic NPC dialog and interaction, repetitive dungeons and mostly stupid quests.

I don't know what it was exactly, but I found Oblivion very dull to explore too. It was (at the time) all pretty & shiny but something was missing. I'm not sure if it was repetitiveness or just a sense of generic, empty blandness to the overall "look". Grass, trees, running through a town. At any rate the exploration boredom is the main reason I didn't get terribly far into that game. I kept trying but after a few hours I was bored.

 

Another reason to buy Skyrim for me is curiosity about the new engine & of course any modding tools/abilities. Hope it's like FNV where any small things that might bother me, I can mod more to my personal tastes. Always a plus for any game. Just never did it for Oblivion...

 

edit..typos & stuff

Edited April 23, 2011 by LadyCrimson