It′s come to my attention that the world of RPG′s is dying, we have less and less RPG′s with each year and some companies have even started to lable their hack and slash games as RPG′s.
Now I′ve looked at the TES series as a kind of a last stand for true RPG′s the series has seldom really stood up to the name of an RPG but many times that has been because of technical difficulties and a lack of time, in Morrowind we had a lot of option but many were a bit clunky because the technology just wasn′t good enough at the time to make a game as wast as Morrowind with enough of real options for you to only experience a tiny fraction of the content in each playthrough, they had to allow you to be able to experience most everything and back then we didn′t have landscape/structural-changes like buildings being burned or broken and such while in Oblivion we only had a little of that. I take it is like that because unlike a game of tabletop D&D Bethesda acting as the "DM" can′t just say "the river flooded the valley and you shall live with the consequences, now if you look over here there is plenty of stuff to do". No a valley in a TES game takes a lot of time to design so they would not just destroy it and never look back, thus you are often restricted in what you are allowed to do, and thus restricted in terms of how you want to RP, one of the larger signs of this is immortal NPC′s, in Morrowind we could kill any NPC and we just lived with it, in Oblivion we could not, TES is taking steps away from the RPG side over to the Adventure/Hack′n′slash side.

But can you blame them ?

Many would say "You are dissapointing the fans!" but that is wrong, if you look at the "six, children, and marrige" thread on this side you see that nearly everyone voted against options that would enhance RP options allowing for more roles, and most did it on the basis of "This is stupid, you are the hero Dovahkiin! Why would you do anything a 'hero' would not do ?" And in many other cases such as that thread we have people saying "I am X and thus I can′t do Y, my role is set and clear." It′s a sign of how the biggest audience for TES is no longer RPG players, but people who rather want just a clear and set adventure and don′t want to take on any roles or "roleplay".

So with the biggest audience of TES changing over the years from being RPG fans to Adventure-Hack′n′slash fans who just want to play through the story as the main character, it is more profitable for Bethesda to make the adventure grand and to clearly set you as the main hero rather than have RPG elements, so if Skyrim will be true to the true and largest audience of TES can you honestly, as someone who understands the need to make good sales to profit from your hard work, can you really point a finger at Bethesda and blame them for not making Skyrim how "you" would have wanted it ?

Personally I am all for options and I′d not mind if I only got to see 3% or 5% of the total content of the game because of RPG elements (like let′s say you become guard captain and then you don′t get to be a thief or an assassin, and if you don′t want to save the world you should be able to let it get invaded, and if you want to be a merchant or a bard you should be able to lead a life like a merchant or a bard would do ending up weak yet experienced. But if most people look at it as redundant features that their "Dovahkiin hero" would not partake in, then looking at it from a financial viewpoint I can′t blame Bethesda if they change the genre of TES, it just doesn′t seem like there is such a large audience for RPG′s, but what do you think ?

I would be dissappointed but I would understand the financial reasons for changes.
Yes
No

"RPG" is a very broad term, "Monster Hunter" is a third-person monster slicing, hacking, hitting, shooting, poking, cutting, burning game, and it is classified as RPG by its developer, publisher and magazines. No matter what Skyrim will be, it is still a RPG, and technically, you can't argue against it.

Kind of a convoluted poll but I see where you're coming from.

If they made the game a straight up hack n slash, took all the races out but human, and limited magic spells to shock,ice,and fire, I don't think it would bother some.

But I have faith that the majority of the fanbase still cares.

Your poll made me question myself, so I voted not sure for everything. I'm off to re-evaluate my life now...

If you look at any of the posts in the TESv Suggestions and Ideas threads (there are/were quite a few of those) you'll realize that some people have very unrealistic expectations for Skyrim. As long as Skyrim is done in a decent way I won't be disappointed by it. I suggest people dial back their expectations a bit or expect massive disappointment.

I can see what you mean. I voted against those options in the six, Kids, and Marriage thread, not becuase I don't want role-play options, but becuase I don't think Bethesda could do those interactions justice. Those options were available in Fable and I felt nothing for the characters I "married" or the children we had.

The magic of TES is that it feels so visceral and real when you play it. Badly implemented features jerk you out of that. Therefor I believe it's better to refine gameplay and add things that can be done properly within the constraints of development. Rather than half assing things.

In the next generation maybe Bethesda will be able to somewhat replicate decent romance and emotional attachment, but for now I don't believe they can. I would say the same of any addition and change that I felt was unrealistic or feasable at this time. I still want it, just not yet.

This.

I'd be disappointed if they removed RPG elements in extremes, but would understand. I play a lot of RPGs and yes, do in fact know what that means. It's my mentality of I really love TES, but they need to sell more copies than we have people on this board to make more games. So pandering to the often unreasonable demands here would be counter-productive. However, there are plenty of people itching for a good RPG, so don't think it'll be a mindless hack-and-slash because that's not why people buy Bethesda games.

Although as a stickler for details, there's no riding of Dragons in this game

Can I blame Bethesda for creating something that's not to my liking?
Yes.

Why?
Because it's still their choice on how they want to create the game. Therefore, they're the ones responsible for how the end product turns out. So if they were to make Skyrim into something I (and others) didn't like, I have full right to blame them because they still had the choice of making the game in a way that would satisfy myself and the others, but they chose not to go with it for whatever reasons they would list.

Does that mean I should tell people that they shouldn't like Skyrim for "X" reasons?
No. People can like whatever they want. I may not like it, but I'm not going to be so selfish as to try to deprive others of their choice because it doesn't meet my needs and wants.

Would I feel disappointed if Bethesda took routes that went against my wants and needs?
Yes, but I'd just get over it and play another game instead of whining about how the game didn't please me.



As for the poll questions:

• Look at the answer about disappointment above.
  
• Not as much as I used to be. (TF2 and real life have gotten in the way of RPG time for me as of late )
  
• The "definition" of role play is subject to all kinds of meanings. There is no one definition of what role playing is, because it keeps changing all the time.

If we ride dragons at any point in Skyrim, for 30 seconds or the entire game...It'll be the last Elder Scrolls game I buy, because even Skyrim is kind of iffy. Todd's 'Crusade' on everything that is redundant is growing assinine. Soon we'll have 3 skills and we'll have a more generic story (is that even possible?)

The next step would be a companion that you actually care about. Not a person I don't think, some sort of creature. Not marriage! I have enough of that! That's why I play the game to get away from it!

I'm sorry, but "roleplaying" is such a broad and vague term that I can't really approve of this poll. Yes, I'm sure there will be those who are disappointed with the final product of Skyrim - I'm sure there were people that were disappointed with Morrowind as a final product. But that's because they take these expectations they have in their own minds and project that onto Skyrim in the hope that their expectations will be met - and sad to break it you, but more times than not, the vision of other people, especially when in a collaborated effort, is not the same as your own.

Especially considering the fact that the "RPG" genre is so difficult to define and categorize to a specific shape. Role playing could just as much be catered to actors in a play as those who play Dungeons and Dragons, and RPG is such a braod concept that it can match into ANY gaming genre - Halo: Reach could be a form of RPG in the sense that you play a faceless, nameless SPARTAN-II known as Noble-Six. Therefore, why limit Skyrim to the old traditions of RPG when it can now cater to any and every form of entertainment and gameplay?

Thus, Skyrim is less about RPG and more about its singular vision of its universe. That's why I'm more than happy to see a combat system less based upon statistics, but terrified at the notion of introducing firearms or even crossbows - because Skyrim shouldn't be limited to the old traditions of RPG, but it should stick to its iconic reputation of being a streamlined, gritty fantasy game.

Jaradin, off topic, but we already had crossbows

Do I know the definition of what role playing is.. yes I know many definitions of it.
Am I a hardcoe RPG'er yes on many scales, when you start to kidnap dunmer maidens from around the world map, bring them to your house, find console commands to keep them there.
Fetch necromatic and daedric spells as well as jewels, gems and gold, as well as lettuce.. all because your characters role demands it.
That the only games you play are RPG's, then of those you played the BI ones none stop, untill you found Arcanum then Morrowind.
I'd say crazy and bizzare role playing beats hardcoe.

I dislike pure hack and slash style rpg's, but Beth was not the first to start them, they've been around for years in computer games.
Also they were around a lot longer before then in many P&P rpg's.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again here as well.

I feel more empowered to specialize now and roleplay than I ever did in Morrowind or Oblivion, frankly.

I no longer have to be locked into a class. I can do whatever I want through roleplay, and end up as whatever I end up as. I can choose from 180 perks (100 are just ranks, they said.) Any character reaching 100 in every skill is still only going to ever seen 50 of the perks according to Todd. That means my character is going to look and act a hell of a lot differently than yours unless we just happen to play and/or roleplay in extremely similar ways.

Now I can use a shield, give it perks, and actually have that be a progression that I chose for my character on the fly rather than something that I chose at the beginning and then can never change.

Before I would choose a class and BAM. That's it. That's my character. Now my character can change and evolve over time as I, the player, see fit. That's a lot more empowering to me as a roleplayer than declaring that, "I am contrived class name X, and forever shall be!" and then being that throughout the course of the game.

Now I can actually ROLEPLAY, and have my choices change my character's progression.

For example: I can do things like pretend to be a pacifist woodsman who lives off the land, and then one day see someone I took out with me as a companion regularly killed. I can feel severely wronged by that and devote my life to getting better at maces, even though that isn't what I've specialized in thus far, so that I can exact brutal vengeance because arrows just aren't destructive enough a fate for my target. I can actually have that thought, pretend to have those feelings, and then play that out. Before I had to choose a class and could never be as good at things outside that class as I could be at the things in it.

And there are still limits. There are still incentives to specialize. If I try to do everything I'm going to end up being weaker and lower level than my specialized character would be after playing the same amount of time.

That's just me, though. I can understand other people preferring the old method.

1st I dont think they took steps back just becose you couldn't kill everyone....It was just for the game to work properly and give everyone a chance to do quest
2nd many have often said how a wood cutter cooking and all the other stuff and a lots of rpg like small choices like tattoos would be cool....if people voted against something RP like doenst mean they dont want more EP like game...just that particular thing might not work with TES games


I think you are not so sure abour RPG either....since there can be differend kinds of rp games
and TES just happens to make one of that kind



personally I wont dont think I will be disappointed since I only expect and most basicly and primaly want oblivion with new quests and places

This. Sadly.

An RPG is *not* a fantasy life simulation game! If that's your definition of "role playing", then sorry, but you're wrong. Yes, sure, ethymologically you could say that "role playing" implies certain stuff. But the term RPG has been used to define a very special type of roleplaying - that is, the roleplaying of a hero that you can create yourself. So the definition of "role playing" does not have anything to do with the definition of a Roleplaying Game.

So when I say that I want RPG elements, then I'm talking about stuff that enhances the experience of each thusly created "hero" on his way to achieving some sort of goal. The variety of possible characters determines what those RPG elements are. And everything else that is added to the game is there only for atmospheric reasons.
In TES, we never had any "Lovemaking" skills. We never had the "Emotions" attribute. As long as we don't get those, falling in love or being very good in bed would only be atmospheric extras, NOT roleplaying elements. If we would get them however, I would *demand* that there be some elements in the game where you have to fall in love for a certain path, or where you have get laid for a certain plot twist to happen. Otherwise, those things should better be removed again.

In response to the question asked in the title: I am in complete agreement with Rahu X. Of course I can blame the studio that made the game, to be precise it would be nobody's fault but theirs.

The definition of roleplaying is subjective. Those are your criteria for what constitutes roleplaying, not mine. Prove me wrong without using any subjective criteria.

Elder Scrolls has always been an RPG first.

If they want to make a hack and slash sandbox game, then make a spinoff.

It′s possible that I′m narrow minded, but as I see it there is one specific definition for role-play and that is to play a role, yes perhaps that role can be the role of the Dovahkiin, but as I look at it no RPG can call itself an RPG if it forces one role on you, so it makes me go all iffy when I see the same argument pop up again and again that "The Dovahkiin would not do X, that′s why we can′t have feature Y" I don′t like to sugar coat my opinions much, to the distain of certain forum goers (but hey at least I made an option for them too) and I think there are less people who even know what an RPG is there than those that do, else why would we see so many people voting against features that would only enhance role-play ?

Again I can be wrong on the subject of role-playing being what I say it is and it may be narrow minded not to allow it to be a wider term, however I think there are already terms to better describe the kind of game others would tie-in with what goes as an "RPG" these days.

It′s ofc unrealistic to expect a "perfect RPG", I′m not even sure that can ever exist, but there is no "perfect movie" or "perfect book" or "perfect singer", it′s all art and we like to see it grow to become "better" even if it can′t ever be perfect, that′s why I want to see more RPG′s develope to be better RPG′s. So it′s a little saddening to think about how many would pick on a game a lot of people look at as one of the few RPG series left and demand that it does not progress further to the true definition of an RPG, when there are so many other titles out there that can fit most any other definition.

To take a different example so that we are not just focused on RPG′s here, is the survival horror genre. A lot of people (at least a good ammount of them) have complained that there are always less and less true survival horror games out there, they complain that with each game you get more and more options to fight back rather than just having to scraqe forward in a horrific rush with your impending doom fast on your heels. I think of this post in a way as a similar stand, just when it comes to RPG′s, I don′t want Skyrim to turn into another simple adventure game where you are just "The Dovahkiin, dragonslayer and hero of the land", where they just slap on a few stats and call the game an RPG, because it′s not the stats that make an RPG, it′s the choices, the moral choices (Am I a person that murder for profit or would I rather work hard and help the innocent even when I gain nothing) and choices of prefferance (would I open that door by picking the lock, smashing it down, finding the key, tricking someone into opening it, or casting a spell on the lock ?), that make a game an RPG.

D&D is an RPG in the purest form of them all, sure there are stats but many DM′s even bend the rules, it′s even said in many D&D manuals that the manuals only offer "suggestions" and that it′s a game of the mind, a game of imagination and acting, you can be who you want to be within each gaming session and the possibilities are near limitless. This is something games cannot offer, but like with art you can improve it and come closer to it, and eventually have such quality RPG′s that they could be called a masterpiece, just like any other piece of art, be it a picture or a piece of music.

Call me selfish but I want TES to be that game series, I′d like to see each TES game develop to have more and more choise because I think TES has the potential to be the best RPG series for generations, just if it does not disintigrate down to the adventure or hack′n′slash genre while catering into the audience that prefers that genre. After all if TES goes down that path what series is there to further the art of RPG′s ? TES is at the top of the RPG genre in terms of single player games in terms of overall quality and there are plenty of good hack′n′slash + adventure games out there for those that are into that, for example God of War, imagine if they had changed that game series after the 1st game to be a RTS game where Kratos is just overlooking the mortals in the 2nd game commanding them, there would have been outrage by the people who liked the first game.

Just speaking a bit more of my mind (didn′t have time with the OP because I had to go to class, and now I soon have to go to the next one).

Edit: Just a quick clarification, I like where Skyrim is going in terms of being a good RPG, we get more defined character with perks and our choices matter more, I just don′t like where the community is going because it seems to dislike the game as an RPG, and who can say a company will not listen to the community that buys their product ? Oh and you can marry in D&D Fearabbit You can marry anyone you′d like, you can also have six and have kids in D&D.

Yeah, in short that is what I'm saying.

A Roleplaying Game, however, is another thing. That term has a history, more specifically, a Dungeons & Dragons history. The OP is trying to argue that stuff like marriages are roleplaying elements, so they should be in an RPG. That is manipulative nitpicking - the people here who are talking about RPG elements don't think of that kind of stuff, they think of D&D type of elements.

I want to play a game that is fun, and most of all, is A GAME. Often those on here who come off as incredibly self-entitled just want a life simulator, not a game. If that is the kind of garbage they consider an "RPG" then they can go play Second Life. That is the worlds most perfect "RPG" (at least it should be according to their definition, but we know how much hypocrisy those people spew too. :rolleyes:).

Get a grip.

What people look at as fun is subjective to their own personality, the RPG genre is kind of a dying genre because no one wants to explore it to its full potential, you can look at me as a whacko for wanting a game with a lot of choices but I kid you not there are more people like me, now I don′t know what kind of games you like but I bet there are plenty to choose from, when people come and wish the RPG genre death and destruction what are RPG fans left with ?

And second life is not a single player game, if I just wanted to play multiplayer games I′d play tabletop D&D, but I want to see the singleplayer RPG genre develop further.

I'm with the OP on RPGs dying out... unfortunately is probably all down to economics and intellectual security which is increasingly pushing publishers into console focused games.

And Yes, we can blame Bethesda, because whatever Skyrim is is because of choices they made.

Someone posted a while back that the future is in procedurally generated content, and more and more I'm inclined to agree. hardcoe RPG fans have to face up to the fact that the future of Old School RPG lies in the freeware/indie gaming scene because as computers can handle more polygons and texture maps, the cost/benefit equations for "triple A games" start to look horrendous. Set your RPG heart on games like Dwarf Fortress, and just accept that the Elder Scrolls are never going to produce a spiritual successor to Morrowind. :/