It depends on implementation. Seeing as how attributes are not included (Besides Health, Stamina, and Magicka), I imagine that Bethesda didn't like their implementation and that it didn't fit in with what they were trying to accomplish with their new system. I'm okay with that. In a perfect world, Skyrim would have everything a gamer can dream of (Spears, Crossbows, Dragon Riding? ), but it's not perfect world.

I don't have a problem with attributes, but you have to admit that they're redundant in a game where it's really only your skills that matter.

It's still a three-part system, anyway. There's just five fewer attributes this time around, since they've been combined.

It's just that too much relies on this totally unknown variable called "perks". How this will play out is entirely dependent on the functionality and implementation of each individual perk, which is 280 ways to screw up. And although there are 280 perks (including the ranks) - once you made up your mind which kind of role you want to play, I'm confident you can get every perk you need. :shrug:



I agree. I don't have much sympathies for the Oblivion system, either.

Oh I don't doubt that either. When I heard they were introducing perks I was like :drool: but then I heard they axed attributes and I was like :down:. Perks are good, but they don't and shouldn't make up for attributes.



Problem is that those are actually possible, and as far as attributes go, I'm willing to bet they went in intending to rehash some of the perks from Fallout 3/NV, and because of it, and what I'm about to put in parenthesis', they made attributes (Which I'm also willing to bet that they never bothered to try and flesh out so that they have more of a presence in the gameworld) redundant.

All I can see as far as this system goes (and before the buzz-word debaters come along, No, I am not referring to every aspect of the game, just this one) is a lack of creativity, laziness, and purely bad ideas in general.



Thats cause for making attributes have a point, not for removing them. Another example where that logic would have worked is in separate weapon skills. Separate weapon skills were only redundant because there was a relatively small pool of weapons available. Same with armor.

They're designing the game's system around what they are willing to put into the game's content as opposed to designing the game's content around the system. Earlier games did this a bit better in certain areas, and Skyrim is doing it better in certain areas, and both are/have done worse in other areas.

Unknown is a keyword. But 280 ways to screw up? Really? That's just straight up negativity. Instead of thinking of the possible ways that it could turn out great, you go ahead and think that it's 280 ways to screw up.

Anyhow, a lot of the perks and this new system are unknown, emphasis on unknown, so I'll just wait and see. New information is bound to come out within now and the game's release. Patience.

Well i think perks will more than cover for what we have had as attributes in the past and add more of what i would expect from a more in depth attribute system even with attributes not being adjustable .What id want out of a more defined attribute system is more unique charicters ,I think we will get that . I definately wouldnt argue against adding attributes if i felt they were done in a way that made a noticeable unique differance .Maybe next time we get a combo :shrug:

Making attributes have a point is not really worth it when the skill system is already well established. I guess it was evolve them or scrap them, perk system sounds more fun and so I am happy they just trashed them.

Its not an either/or situation here. Its a "why not both" situation. Anyone here can agree that perks are a good thing, no matter what (unless they're just bloody stupid, but thats a given), but the thing is that if attributes were introduced and done the right way, it would create a system that can appease both vocal groups here, as well as most anyone else.

Not to go off on a tangent about myself, but thats what I've been arguing for on these boards ever since I started posting in Skyrim General. A system that can appease almost everyone, which really isn't that unfeasible to suggest.

There are a large number of people here that are of the variety that no matter what news we hear from Beth, no matter how ridiculous a cut or tes history ruining decision....their response is: "I love it, best thing ever!"

Unfortunately, a tech tree bound to skills that also unlocks abilities is a stupid supplement for a fully functional attributes system. For those of you arguing that this fully supplants attributes you have no idea what you are talking about. Just noting the loss in cross-skill interactions is enough to make it painfully obvious that perks cannot fullfill this role. You would need to reduce skills or risk being stuck with dozens and dozens of redundant perks.....(oh wait....that happened!)

Oh yeah....stat bars are not attributes. No matter how much the PR folks at Beth try to spin it....

I agree on attributes being far from pointless, heck they were vital to helping improve your character. However, just throwing it in that I *loved* level scaling. I'm not the type that ever wants to become uber-powerful able to take on all comers, I always want a challenge. After all, my characters are mortal, just like the dumbash bandit, so technically, he could get lucky

By most conventions, strength, agility, intelligences etc are the primary attributes while health, mana, stamina, bonus damage, jump height etc are derived attributes.

The way I see it, they are merging intelligence and wisdom into a single primary attribute call "mana" which just also happens to equal the mana pool you get while at the sane time is used to derive your mana regeneration rate.

Similarly strength and endurance merged into a primary attribute call "health" which also just happens to be equal your health pool and used to derive your health regeneration rate. Weapon damage bonus will most likely be derived 100% from your skill instead of from both strength and skill as in oblivion.

Then endurance and agility/speed are merged to "stamina" with running speed and jump height based it.

This means your derived attributes will simply be derived from these 3 + skills instead of the normal 8 + skills.

I'm not the type that ever wants to become uber-powerful able to take on all comers, I always want a challenge.

This is possible under a non-level-scaling system. The point is in making it so that you can only become uber-powerful if you really work hard to do so. Someone just playing the game shouldn't just become powerful naturally in due course.

This is actually one of the few good things I saw in the concept of the Guardian Stones. Once modders unlock the leveling system (IE, we can move past 50 or 100 or whatever in levels, skills, etc) then it will become very possible to create a system where the Guardian Stones become essential to raise your skills higher than what you would get through normal gameplay. This would also warrant levels of Guardian Stone, with the best ones being locked away in hard to reach places, with only the worthy and/or the dedicated able to reach them. (or indeed, the extraordinarily lucky), and lesser ones (the ones players just "playing" would want to put to use more often) being more scattered and abundant.

But not for an action adventure / shooter

I hate attributes!

They killed my father.

:whistling: Having a simple-minded and cartoonish character development like what they are developing for SR would be convenient for games where the action is the point and the story is second fiddle.

Make an even more direct comparison and notice DA2 had full attribute system in, and still svcked.

Problem is that attributes were hardly the problem with DA2.

Fiddles in TES:
First -- Exploration: Big sandbox to explore, with lots of neat stuff in it
Second -- Lore and story: Various plots and subplots, all tied together by interesting lore that gives the illusion of a living world with a long and storied history
(various) -- Action and RPG elements, mixed in various quantities from one game to the next. RPG elements are usually fairly weak in that there's almost no choice and consequence to speak of, but hey, more numbers is always better, right?

People have various tastes and reasons for playing this series, but don't think for a moment that at any point in the series RPG play has ever trumped action play or vice versa. What's always attracted people to the series is not just the fact that you can make your dude up any way you like but the fact that your made-up dude can explore a massive world that has tons of things to do in it. hardcoe RPG fans don't universally like it; hell, lots of the people at RPG Codex (a lovely website full of wonderful people that was blacklisted from these forums due to how insanely rude they are) consider Morrowind to be a pretty terrible RPG since its mechanics were so poorly-designed and because pretty much every last quest has only a single solution to it, not to mention the total lack of an actual dialogue system, just an online encyclopedia that you can access at various people-shaped terminals.

They are a non factor compared to what can go wrong, like DA2's horrible case of copy/paste dungeons and 1 city, restricted classes compared to DAO, simpler combat, underwhelming story. Notice how Skyrim is superior in these facets when compared to even Morrowind.

Stuff like that is important, not numbers or attributes, of which the effects were just retooled into new systems.

Welcome to the forums!

Many miss the philosophy behind the new system. In the end I predict that attributes are well and truly in the game. They will have actually taken the form of perks. Here's the downside to the 280 perks everyone is so excited over -

Many of these will be stat modifiers. In essence they serve the same purpose as attributes they just have a new coat of paint. The main problem I have in that is that it is a copy and paste of all the other poorly crafted "RPG's". The "talent tree" system or whatever you want to call it is beyond overused and over exhalted. Zero creativity and thought. That's not to say that there won't be good and creative perks buried in the deluge of the 280 and as long as I can cherry pick what I want that is fine. It's pretty much the same dilemma fallout 3 had with it's perks. Many of them were simply stat modifiers. If the system had a somewhat creative spark each and everyone of these stat modifiers would have at least a visual cue or reward for taking it to make it tangible. I don't see that happening.

Ideally I would love to see at least half of these perks wiped in favor of something that feels more rewarding and decisive. The perks should be abilities that are spectacular and help define your character even more based on your profession use rather than a replacement to the attribute system.

All of it is important. Not just the stuff you think is important.



Which is the problem. They shouldn't have and perks have no business governing what they shouldn't be governing.

I honestly agree. I wasn't a fan of the attribute system design. I.E. trying to maximize profit on gain per level. But I truly feel the perk system isn't nearly so defining as attributes. Perks should have been just that - Perks. Unique abilities that you could learn provided you had the skill and possibly attribute requirement to obtain. And I definately would not have put them on a damn star chart for someone to blatantly pick out. If you were to learn these abilities there would be some actual work involved so there could at least be SOME reward to the game,

Edit: The more I think about it the more the starchart annoys me. Fundamentally that should have been a "Lore Cookie" and not a feature. It would have been more rewarding to the observant lore fans of the series at least. Oh well hindsight is 20/20 and I ain't developing the game.

You can't tell yet because the game isn't released yet.

And your post has no point because we're all arguing based on what we already know and what the implications of said information are.

I'm not going to comment on the subject at hand here, but I think I should point out that your opinion is no more valid than his is, and what's important to you is not objectively what's important to the series, due to the fact that it's inherently a matter of opinion. Kindly stop talking down to people.