There's not a big chance for Skyrim to top Oblivion because Oblivion is the best game ever created. But then if someone possibly can top it, it ought to be the sequel. I can't tell you how amazing Oblivion is. Morrowind is too, but Oblivion reached a new dimension. If Skyrim is even close to that I will be in heaven again.

lol'd at your sig. There is someone who knows how to push the forum's buttons.

*sits back with popcorn*

First of all Diablo is a Hack & Slash/Action game, not an RPG. The Witcher 2 will probably a great RPG and yes it doesn't have skill or attributes, but we don't know much yet about choices and consequences in TES V (which are the things that make the Witcher 2 a good RPG if you believe the released info about it).

I wasn't referring to stripping attributes, though I think it would be a very bad choice.

Yes and that's why the leveling system of TES needed a change.
Personally I would like 'static' attributes, from 1-10 which can't be increased (except with spells probably). Sure in real life you can increase your strength, but most attributes should be static. Your intelligence is basically static, you can learn more, study etc. but you don't get 'smarter' you simply increase your 'skills' basically. Just like agility, sure people you train a lot can get more agile but your agility should more represent the potential your body has a quite agile guy with an agility of 7 who never trained (acrobatics and athletics of 5) would be a very bad athlete, while a more average guy with 5 agility who trained hard (50 skill of acrobatics and athletics) is quite a good athlete. If the 7 agility guy would choose to develop his abilities he would eventually beat the average guy.
The attributes should be more influential, intelligence actually determines the intelligence of your character, not just his magical ability. A thief should have a above average intelligence if he plans to outwit his victims, a knight should have a decent willpower or he might not be able to stand all the horrors he encounter in deep dungeons.

Basically the extreme scores are not necessary, even for a not jack-of-all-trades character. A score of 1 for example would mean you are crippled or mentally [censored] or something in the case of agility and intelligence, 10 would mean somewhat demi-god like, like Assassin's Creed kind of agility and King of Worms intelligence/magical ability, a good mage should have enough with 8 intelligence, and good warrior with 8 strength (or 6-7 if you are more of a speed/flexible fighting style guy). But if you want a very strong character in a certain specialization, or want to make the game harder for yourself the extremes shouldn't be blocked from choosing.

While attributes should determine more than just the weight you can carry, your magicka and health (and stuff like that) your skills should actually determine what you can do. There for we need more skills, not less.

Though classes shouldn't determine what skills makes you level up. Since attributes are static, you might even not need levels at all or make them symbolic or something your skills determine how strong your character is (not strong as in strength of course) no need for levels actually. Levels or nice though since they represent how good your character is and there for a GCD kind of level system where all your skills smoothly increase your level (just not your attributes as is the case with GCD).

That's why I don't like perks by the way, because suddenly you will be able to do something that was impossible for you a (skill) level before. Like in Oblivion where at 25 marksmen you didn't have a fatigue cost for drawing your bow. You could argue about whether this should be able in the first place but if you decide that at some point a skilled marksmen will have no fatigue cost, than it shouldn't be a specific skill level (where you are granted the perk), instead 25 could mean a 0% fatigue cost, and 1 would mean 100% every skill point between 1 and 25 would mean a little bit less fatigue until it reaches 0. For some things it should never reach a full 0 or 100% (even at 100 destruction you have 1% change of failure if you are wounded and tired for example).

And like I said the smithing stuff is new and indeed increases role playing (though we don't know anything about it yet), but even though there are awesome features added it simple seems Bethesda is going the Oblivion route with cutting RPG features and making it casual/console/action only.

It seems it will be a very good free roaming, open world, fantasy action game, but so far the information doesn't suggest it will actually increase the role playing (will we be able to solve things without just killing something or sneaking past it for example?)

Only played Fable2 so I can't speak for the whole series.

It was a nice journey and it has some fun features, but the problem is that everything is really easy and poorly balanced.

maybe im just gonna buy it for PC that way i can have the amazing graphics and mechanics and MOD IT BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL STATE WITH THE CLASSIC SYSTEM STYLE

Yep, thats what i fear..

Though, we dont know much yet, and havent seen it in action either, so its too early to predict it being anything as big as "best rpg".

Well, we need more Oblivion lovers on these forums. I liked your post above me. Good point (about the +5 +5 +5 leveling up paranoia) that shows that even the hardcoe player benefits from new design choices that Todd decides to put in the games, it's not all made for the casual players in mind.

Planescape Torment, now 'that' had an intriguing setting and a good, original story. Definitely the best DnD-based RPG off all time, just because of it's high quality writing.

But can't really decide which RPG is my all time favorite though.

Planescape, Morrowind, Fallout 1&2, Vampire Bloodlines and Chrono Trigger are all very different RPG's and excellent for their own reasons.

And the opposite is also true.

Just because SOME people feel the need to be powergamers and maximise their characters to the utmost at every opportunity doesn't mean the game should be altered around that, or was already flawed because of it. That's their problem and it's quite likely that they'll do the same no matter what the system is. They'll just spend the time now coming up with the tip-top most effective selection of perks to maximise their character instead.

I would agree with you if the power gamers were a tiny minority, but we're not. The problem is not just OCD anxiety either. Past TES games' levelling systems have been horribly open to exploitation, the reduction of which you'll notice is a major focus of the shift. BGS are making it so that the levelling system is harder to abuse and the stupid skills are cut, and it just so happens to make it a hell of a lot easier on us poor power gamers.

As for obsessive perk selection, how is that the same? Now I can plan the perks I'll take when I level up. That's fine. I can deal with that. I enjoy that. Under the previous system I had to play the game opposite to how it was intended to get the character I wanted. Now I'll be able to just play the game and pick the perks most beneficial to me as I level up. How is that not a better system?

Morrowind, Oblivion, and Fallout 3 were all game of the year. I doubt Skyrim will be any different.

I watched Todd make a Character and level him up in a Fallout 3 demonstration. However, I never really knew how the level system truly worked until I played the game.
You can't assume something bad just by looking at it, you have to try it out a bit.

Sorry Bethesda but Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn is the best RPG of all time and you have no chance of beating it.


still gonna be a great game tough.

its in the bag

the game will be awesome, only worried about my PC I guess I will have to get the laptop cooler hehe, since it can handle games like crisis but the VGA just overheats and it auto shuts down, hmmmm and maybe get a better VGA card altogether! but I know that laptop stuff is way more expensive than normal desktops.

Don't get me wrong, Skyrim is going to be GREAT.

But the best RPG ever? Hardly. I can't se how Skyrim possibly could trumph Star Control 2 (Ur-quan Masters). Both Bethesda and Bioware, the top contenders of RPGs, doesn't really understand what really could make an interesting RPG. Elder Scrolls is all about treating the world like a candy store and Mass Effect is about choosing between black and white.

well i finally had a chance to see the screenshots and such and it does look really cool especially the undead, so i hope they add my lich thing it could be very cool cause the zombies are wearing armor and such. pretty cool actually.
the only thing i dont quite get yet is say i only want to master magic attributes and the blade one which is what i've always done, am i going to be able to master the other ones or do i have to choose from the start what kind of player i want to be, cause if thats how it is and i cant learn other things then what the hell?

Even Adoring Fan? Is that even possible? I thought he was immortal.

Best RPG of all time? Probably not. It looks like a good step in that direction so far, but it's got a very long history of very spectacular games to beat before it can really approach that title and "a good step" isn't really enough to get it there.

I voted no but only because our retention and excitement for what they give us now will not be nearly as great as in the next 5 - 10 years...the entertainment world is about to take us off our feet with the next ensemble of technology...it never stops...

nothing will dethrone the mighty Daggerfall imo.

i just hope to christ you can still create custom spells, if not than i am seriously shaking my head at this game

Only until TESVI comes out

Pete Hines confirmed that the "over 85 spells" mentioned in the GI article are spell effects rather than just standard spells, and it seems odd to keep spell effects without allowing players to combine them in created spells.

Don't think so , if it can top morrowind on my list then it will be . Then again we all have different opinions so the best RPG to one person can be crud to another person.

so your saying they will still keep the feature, cause rolplaying a dark sorcerer or necromancer, needs custom spell creation, its what separates normal wizards from dark ones to combine spells in an ingenious fashion that render them dark arts spells, example: paralize+damage health 100pts+soul trap = a very nasty spell. EDIT: and they damn well better ofer the spell deletion feature, i dont want to be a master dark sorcerer and have the stupid weak fireball spell lagging my inventory

I think it will have a good chance, looking at all the previous TES series they have all been very highly regarded! Its kinda hard to compare though through the different styles of RPG's, I mean how do you compare Skyrim to titles such as Mass Effect? If ME3 is as good as ME2 or better then it would be a tough call to say Skyrim is better, but then it is a totally different style and setting, one is Medival one is futuristic, one is sandbox one isn't?

I loved all the TES series and given the freedom of the TES series IMO it will have a very good chance