I agree OP, especially since it's essentially the first of a new "sub-series". With OB ending the Third Age, Skyrim is supposed to be the first game of the Fourth Age. It's gotta change, so the removal of certain things and the changing of others is only logical.

P.S., to those who complain about "the removal of hand-to-hand" it hasn't been removed, just is no longer a skill.

But they did, Sapphire and Ruby did have the old ones in the game but from my understanding the only way to get them was with a cheat device like game shark or the events. There was no real way to obtain them legitimately and without attending a nintendo held event.




I'm not quite sure how people are getting this. I stated an opinion about how I feel about the cut content and acknowledged the large amount of complaint threads. Nowhere in my posts do I say complainers have to shut up nor voice an opinion.

Spellmaking is one of my favorite features in previous games. I'm not at all upset about the loss of it in Skyrim. Spellmaking literally is just combining effects, which can be done with dual wielding casting.

As far as builds go... Morrowind doesn't allow me to create a build that dual wields weapons. I can't dual wield a sword and an axe in Morrowind. There's one playstyle that Skyrim allows for that's not possible in Morrowind. Morrowind doesn't allow me to create a character that can forge his own weapons and armor. There is another build and playstyle that Skyrim allows for that is no possible in Morrowind.

Spellmaking really isn't that serious. And that's coming from someone who loves Spellmaking in previous games, particularly Morrowind.

But why are the limits only placed on hth, and not on swords axes and maces? You can't tell me those are anything close to what their limits should be if we're trying to be realistic.

I want Sk to be fun. I want to love it. I want it to be amazing! But if I can't punch through armor simply because there have to be limits, while the guy over there is blocking a daedric warhammer with a dagger...




...well, I haven't really been following pokemon much lately I guess. But if I had to attend an event to get a hth dlc I'd be there.

That's certainly a possibility for the way it could be. We have no grasp of how everything fits together or works yet. Only small tidbits. I agree with you though that things like acrobatics could have been implemented in other ways. I think the Fallout 3 S.P.E.C.I.A.L. system is the best compromise. Choose your attributes from the beginning, but only have a certain amount of points to spend. Also, different races have different base attributes. The best of both worlds. Agility skill dictates acrobatics, and speed athletics. Then they can remove the skills because of their reason, they didn't want to repetitive training method, but still include what they do.

EDIT: This is my opinion. I'm not suffering from delusions that I know what's best for the series.

Well said OP. You know, creating a project, taking it through the steps and managing the outcome to a good conclusion is not easy by any means. There was a saying my old boss used when we had to make hard decisions relating to product delivery. Good, Fast or Cheap, but you only get to choose two of the options. I am sure that Bethesda who state they have been working on this game since fallout 3. It sure seems like Skyrim is packed with cool stuff. Lots of cool stuff I have never gotten to do in a video game before. I am stoked. If Bethesda had all the time in the world sure, every last feature would be there. They don't. They have real world time and cost constraint.

I expect Skyrim to be of high quality. After Oblivion and Fallout 3, I really expect no less. I can accept different or new, as long as the game delivers.

Because that's the way it worked out bro. Hate to be harsh, but it svcks for you.

I lost some major elements of my build from Morrowind to Oblivion, when Enchant as a skill was taken out. It svcked for me, and I was disappointed, but instead of crying about it, I adapted, and I came up with another build that 1.) I enjoyed and 2.) fit Oblivion.

As it is, I probably enjoy my Oblivion character more than I enjoy even my Morrowind character. I found new gameplay dynamics in Oblivion that I probably never would have realized if I just sat around crying about the elements of my build that were removed, and I was able to create a build that gave me a truly engaging and rewarding experience.

I guess I'm on the good side of the coin this time around, because Enchanting as a skill is coming back, as well as the inclusion of dual wielding, and Armorer being expanded into Smithing, thus allowing forging of weapons and armor, neither of which are possible in Morrowind. Now the build that I've been wanting to create from the beginning is viable.

I've been on both sides of the coin... Losing my builds, and getting my builds. You either adapt to it if you want to enjoy the game, or you move on to something else.

I bet you voiced your opinion about it first though.

Look, I'm upset but I've already started planning on ways to get around this. Restoration has to have some fortify spells somewhere. But still, I'm upset with the choice and I'm going to let out my frustration on this forum. I don't want to come off like I'm crying, but it's a very low blow for me here.

You know what it's like, like you said. It's human nature to want your way. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm just complaining as things didn't go my way this time around. It's how I can cope till I get the game itself. It's just the way it is. I want hth to be a full fledged skill. It svcks that my fav combat style got the short end of the stick while all the other ones got improved, and it's pretty self explanatory that I'm here to let people know about it. It's what forums are for.

I got countless builds that will now be unavailable, out of spell creation. They are gone. Countless builds>a dozen or so builds that revolve around dual wielding. Spell making was more than just combining effects. Its whatever you wanted it to represent, and with a little ingenuity, its visual and aesthetic effects could accompany your 'representation'. Not to mention the actual play styles that you could revolve around created spells. SC allowed for some of the most non linear RPing ever in a cRPG. It was an invaluable tool for making niche and abstract RPs and having hundreds of builds opposed to a few dozen, before repeating yourself.

Ah the pokemon argument... that's incredibly flawed.

First Pokemon Black and White, where you could only catch the new pokemons until you reach the endgame or trade, BECAUSE there were already too many pokemon in the game.

Second, you know what is the main complaint about all these games? THEY'RE ALL THE BLOODY SAME!

Oh joy. Is every single major series going to try to capture the momentary attention spans of the casuals?

It's because of the bad kids that every game must be "baby's first video game" easy, avoid complex plots, focus on graphics before mechanics, feature "ossim" gimmicks (hello finishers), and if it's multiplayer make the skill gap very small so Little Timmy doesn't realize he svcks.

I'll admit it, I'm BITTER. Halo: Reach shot itself trying to pander to casuals, and now TES is doing it too. Just to have all those players run back to Call of Duty when the yearly installment comes out.

In fact, it's not necessarily catering to casuals that's the bad thing; the bad thing is that because companies now pander to gamers who don't know what makes a truly lasting experience (because they just move onto the next fad), that gives them an excuse to make worse games. As a person who admittedly svcked at games when I was younger, I can attest that games made with the veteran in mind can be fun for casuals too.

I'll admit I'm not well informed about the new ones. I know they svck, but not much more than that.

But still, even if it's through trading or end game or an event or cheating, there is still a way to get the older ones. Yes?

Here's the thing that really gets me : everyone has a right to complain, if they don't like a feature, or they wish things from games earlier in the series. That's fair enough. Don't like the idea of marriage? Say so, that's your right. Miss greaves? Say so, as loudly as you like.

BUT, don't complain about things being cut from the game, because if it was never going to be in the game in the first place, then it ain't cut content. ''It's cut from the series." What? There is no reason for just about any feature to be carried over. It's part of a series, by virtue of taking place on Nirn, but it is also a stand alone game. It has to stand on it's own merits, and Beth will doubtless get grief for it's failings. Content and mechanics from other games have not been cut or removed or dumbed down, they are simply not there and never were, or are present in a form that fits with this different world and set of mechanics.

Hey, guess what? There is some new stuff in here too. Of course the stuff that hasn't been seen in the series before should not automatically be praised as a good thing just for being new. It hasn't been 'added' to earlier games. It's all part of this game anyway, and also needs to be judged in it's context.

:goodjob:

Budget and time. They don't have an unlimited reserve of both.

This ten thousand times.

I actually thoroughly enjoyed Black and White. Sure it wasn't great or incredibly different, but it tried just hard enough to make me care. If Barry in 4th gen died, I'm not sure I'd have cared; if Cheren or Bianca died, I would have. I also liked how the final boss of the story mode was actually a villain this time. A few of the new pokemon are incredibly powerful in competitive too, Ferrothorn comes first to mind.

As for the question, if you've beaten one B/W game, you can trade any pokemon from that game into another, even if the other has not beaten the game yet.

So you CAN use old pokemon in B/W story mode, you're just not supposed to.

Yea, I did. I was typically like "I wish Enchant was available as a skill, it was a huge part of my roleplay", and I did debate with people who supported the decision to remove it as a skill.

I never used it as a reason as to why I thought Oblivion svcked tho (I didn't follow Oblivion's development on forums, I found all this stuff out after I got the game).

Also, you may not be saying Skyrim will svck, but a lot of people are, simply because "their build" got removed. But the way I see it, a lot of builds were also made POSSIBLE by Skyrim's system. So I see it as a trade off. Your build was maybe removed, but a lot of other builds were made viable.

It's why I can't call the game "dumbed down", and it's why I can't call Oblivion "dumbed down". Many elements might be "simpler", but many other elements are expanded upon, improved, and made more complex.

In the end, I put heavy emphasis on character options and customization, and Morrowind excels at that, and so it is my favorite game of the series (never played Arena or Daggerfall, but will when I get my computer situation figured out). I believe that Morrowind will probably still trump Skyrim in that department as well, although Skyrim will excel in many other areas, and certainly excel over Oblivion in that department. I hate the Athletics and Acrobatics skills, but hey, I love Morrowind for at least making them viable. But it was one playstyle that was removed in Skyrim. IDK what the guy who says he has over 300 builds revolving around Acrobatics and Athletics is talking about... I'm not sure how you could possibly get that many builds. It's a removed playstyle, and it svcks, but I guess Bethesda feels the appeal is more towards guys who can wield big bad ass swords and axes than the guy who punches. If you look at all of the successful fantasy fiction... the guy who punches wasn't in Lord of the Rings. It was the Elf who kicked ass with a bow, the human who was bad ass with a sword, and the Dwarf who killed orcs with his axe. Harry Potter is all about magic, magic, and more magic.

Unless you're watching Karate Kid, I can't think of many times where the guy who punches is the badass that everyone wants to be. It's always the guy with the big guns, or the guy with the big swords. That's why swords, axes, and magic got improved while hand to hand got relegated to a non-perkable option.

Trust me, the removal of skills was a concern of mine at first too. When I heard that Skyrim would only have 18 skills (down from Oblivion's 21, which was already down from Morrowind's 27) I was worried. All the talk of "redundant" and "streamlining", I was like "holy crap, seriously??? You're totally taking out everything I loved about Elder Scrolls in the beginning".

But then more and more information trickled out. I learned about the perk system. I learned that many of these skills weren't actually removed, but rather combined with related skills (Seriously... Mercantile and Speechcraft DON'T need to be separate skills). The diversity was still there... it was just implemented in a different way. Then with inclusions of things like dual wielding, expansion of other skills like Armorer into a full blown Smithing skill, the return of Enchanting as a skill... I looked at it and saw "You know what? We may have lost some things - and that svcks - but we gained so much more", and in the end, I actually see more chances for character diversity than Oblivion, and -possibly- Morrowind.

Honestly, looking at Skyrim's skills compared to Morrowind's skills, the *ONLY* thing I see about Morrowind at this point being better than Skyrim at is the fact that in Morrowind, Conjuration allows you to summon multiple creatures at once, while Skyrim you can only do one.

People may cite things like Spear, Unarmored, Hand to Hand, Athletics, and Acrobatics, and I would respond saying "That svcks that we lost the choice to roll that type of character", but what we really lost was a very niche playstyle, and a weapon that they couldn't get to work out the way they wanted it to.

Halo is going back to what made it Halo. Not by Bungie,but still.
They admitted they went wrong with Halo.
Always gives me hope for ES:VI.

If I wanted a linear build experience, I'll play a linear RPG. One of ES games biggest appeals is to offer a tabletop-esque character creation experience who's builds and RPs were only limited by your imagination. Now its just limited. If ES types were a dime a dozen, maybe I'd be more willing to sacrifice it to the mainstream, but they are not. Losing builds=lame. losing a lot of builds=inexcusable.

What exactly was casual about Halo: Reach? The only real differences I saw were bloom, which takes more skill really, and armour abilities which svck.

Well... at least we're not arguing about religion...

Has no one thought on the magic thing, that only being able to cast two spells might make the game more fun to play? I mean c'mon, yes i can understand you wanting to be an all powerfull mage who can cast anything and whatnot but dosn't that take the fun out of it a bit? a spell which does 100% Fire, Frost and shock damage as well as -100% RESISTANCE to Fire, Frost and Shock a spell which will do MASSIVE amounts of damage because as im sure you know -100% resistance to something with 100% damage to it.

Im not sure if im making sense, Im just saying to me having to cast the diffrent spells instead of one massive spell will make battles more intense and fun, I really don't think the loss of spell making is that big a deal but at the same time I DO understand why people are un happy about its removal.

And again if this made no sense i apolagise its 2 in the morning

Melee no-bleedthrough svcked, many of the original maps were awful, the first 5-6 arena seasons were not based on W/L, and the kill times were longer. Made even more so by AA's. Many of these decisions are easily seen for what they are: either crutches for the low skilled players, or handicaps for the highly skilled (slow kill times cap displays of individual skill). Armor lock is by far the most obvious crutch, made in response to player whining about grenades and power weapons (displaying their lack of understanding in how to place grenades and keep control of power weapons). It says "you don't need to get better! Just press X not to die!"

Don't get me started on bloom. It's dice rolling in a shooter. I like dice in D&D, I dislike them in FPS's. DMR is especially bad, because at middle range there is no optimal style (spam=close, pace=far, mid=???). Bloom works for automatic weapons, and games with very fast kill times. Bloom is bad in a game largely based around a precision mid range utility weapon with slow kill times. If you want to debate it more, do it privately with me.

To tell the truth, I don't think I'd mind AA's so much if they were featured as pickups, something to be earned and controlled. It's the fact that you get them off spawn that leads to ridiculous -BLAM!- like all AL or all jetpacks (good-bye map flow).

A lot more infantry focused,Weapons all toned down and became really weak and armor abilities.