Abu FTW!

For TES yeah, but with Fallout 3 I actually prefer it that way. I own the GOTY, but I will not install it [Broken Steel] without a mod that breaks its breaking of the ending.

That in years to come, when people are writing of game makers who missed golden opportunities - who had the chance to make a truly amazing game that would've brought a franchise to the fore, but instead simply repeated a bunch of previous mistakes and added a bunch of new mistakes and simultaneously managed to alienate old fans and fail to impress new ones, they'll say, "You know - like Skyrim."

There were a lot of negative things to be taken away from the Q&A, and very few positives... so the whining was kind've justified in my opinion. And as I said to someone else - don't feel too sorry for the developers. Pressure and high expectations are all part of the parcel that comes with previous success.

And rolling over and blindly accepting all changes being made to the series doesn't equal maturity. Quite the opposite, in fact. It's often the more immature fans who are blindly optimistic and who don't know what's good for the series. "Skyrim is going to be amazing!!! Who cares if theyve removed a ton of core features! We can use two swords at once now, do finisher moves, and get married, so this is going to be the best game ever made!!" :confused:

Hear, hear! :foodndrink:

I'm worried companions will be a bit too bland, to the point of making me not want to use them. à la Oblivion and Fallout 3.

I'm worried companions will be a bit too detailed, and tied in to big chunks of game content (like sidequests & factions), making me feel forced to use them. à la Fallout:New Vegas. :whistling:




....the devs really can't win, can they?

I fear, like all the other games that touted streamlining and accessibility, Skyrim will lose its luster real quick

examples?

Arcania Gothic 4

Fable 2-3

DA 2

ME 2

Two worlds/ Two worlds 2


etc etc.

/shrug This is part of the problem though, you state your opinions "There were a lot of negative things to be taken away from the Q&A" "who don't know what's good for the series" 'theyve removed a ton of core features" as if they are fact or you are some how the one that knows what is good for the series.

I on the other hand am of the opinion that a lot of good came out of the Q&A and that they've removed some rather redundant and antiquated mechanics while giving us so mush more in return.

I think for most of the nay sayers the devs could come here and sign their souls away in their own blood if they told a lie and folks still wouldn't believe a word they say trumpeting catch phrases like "dumbed down" and "streamlined action game" as the backbone of their criticisms. The devs will never please these folks no matter what, I'm kinda glad they don't waste effort on rebutting them.

My fear is that it will take things from fallout.

[]I hope they dont have quest markers with zero direction dialogue, making markers a necessity
[]hope they dont have points of interest on compass
[]hope they dont show enemies on compass
[]hope the quests arent designed around the idea that everyone will be using fast travel
[]hope there is actually content(caves/dungeons/hideouts/whatever) in between major areas that is hard to find so there is actually something to make you want to walk/ride everywhere as opposed to just zipping around with fast travel.

Isn't the problem more that people do actually believe the devs, and thus are disgruntled? There are valid reasons for those "catch phrases" to be thrown. As well as, marketingwise, there's a reason for Beth to throw other kinds of "catch phrases" and copouts around -- like "removing confusion", and "attributes were just middle hands". :shrug:

I also can't see why "these folks" couldn't be pleased no matter what. All it would take is to at least have compromises leaning to both ends of the spectrum.

Biggest fears for this kind of game is that it is 1) limited by aged console hardware and limitations (which result in a not so good PC title) 2) Its becoming too simplified or as some put it "dumbed down" and 3) not developed in such a way where modders can easily and freely work to improve and add upon the game.

My one fear is the number and variety of the spells in the game, seeing as though there will be no spellmaking.(except in the Creation Kit)

No spellmaking? Damn, I was hoping I could cast self paralysis and go tobogganing down the side of one of those awesome mountains.

I fear caves and dungeons looking the same again(its happened too many times)

Well, Beth isn't in the business of making compromises they make video games. They make the game the way they envision them. That vision might include classes or spears or 100 slots for armor or it might not. The only compromises Beth needs to make are time/budget vs features. We as consumers can decide if the game they have made is something that interests us or not.

Its even all well and good to come to the forums and talk about what you like and don't like and why, "constructive" criticism is how the games keep getting better.

Coming on the forum though and claiming design decisions are "cop outs" or "dumbing down" or that Beth is just "lying" to the players or the game is "just a dumb action game" or claiming to speak for the "real fans" and that kind of crap is just ridiculous hyperbole and there is a reason the devs aren't going to waste time responding to that kind of junk. In fact I don't really know why I waste time responding to it either, probably better to just quit doing it myself.

So all you have as a counterpoint is insulting others... that certainly lends some credit to your point.

that would be my biggest fear, but i think they learnt their lesson with FO3

Gotta disagree....people use the terms dumbed down and streamlining for a reason....partly because the devs themselves have used the term streamlining. But people dont just throw around the term dumbed down for no reason. I think its pretty obvious to most people when they anounce a change that will take away a lot of the thought process/planning/strategy/effort needed from the actual player...that it is indeed dumbing down the game. I guess as they said with their streamlining they are also trying to reach a wider audience...and a lot of people dont want to actually try or put effort into rpg's or think much or read....so when theyre trying to attract these other people, it could actually definitely dumb down the game.

I would actually hope bethesda actually spends some of their time seeing what their community has to say....which they obviously do considering they cited a mod as their reasoning for the new bow mechanics. Id rather not just have blind faith that whatever they do will be amazing and even if it svcks terribly and still play it religiously because like you say, its bethesda, and they didnt take a word from their fanbase to see what they enjoyed but since its beth it will be awesome.

Fact - there were a lot of negatives to be taken away from the Q&A. The merging of armour, the changes to runspeed, the exclusion of levitation (not something I care much about personally, but still).
Fact - there are a lot of people who don't know what's good for the series. Obviously I can't name names...
Fact - they have removed core features. Two things the series has been built upon - player freedom and the RPG side of things - have been streamlined considerably. New gimmicks come in, established features come out.

...and yes, I do have a fairly good idea what's good for the series. One thing is for certain, I know that excessive streamlining and accessibility is terrible for RPGs.


You make it sound like people are pulling the concerns about streamlining out of thin air, completely contrary to everything we know about the game. :confused: I've lost count of how many times the devs have used the words 'streamlining' and 'accessibility' in interviews. And a lot of changes clearly point towards dumbing down. It's not like people are making up all of the concerns because they want the game to be dumbed down... the negativity has built up over time due to things the developers have said.

Nr.1 fear... Short storyline...

Ha! Fallout wasn't much better. It may have been slightly more subtle, but eventually those super mutant masters got old. As well as the hordes of deathclaws. Especially since you level so fast.

Oh and if you are going to scale the game, PLEASE SCALE THE NPCS TOO!!11!1!one!1!!
In Fallout they always got killed when you got too tough because the fauna was on steroids. This was less of a problem in Oblivion, though there have been a few quests marred because some moronic AI decided to leap to my aid with their fists against a bear or whatever.

They should do it more like Morrowind, where most things you fight are static despite your level, but they should also make sure that boss fights are scaled so that they're still challenging.

These are all opinions. You're starting to embarrass yourself.


You might want to accept the fact that they are your opinion if you want anyone here to debate you with a serious face.

Wow some of these people here need to stop complaining and being so negative about everything. First of all everybody who has interviewed skyrim or played... Said it was great and one of their most anticipated games of the year. Also I see a lot of people complaining about greave and cuirass merged together... So what. Because of that we get alot more armor than previous games, more players on screen too. People need to just wait for skyrim to come out and decide for themselves. You guys can criticize but shouldn't be all doom and gloom.

.

Jumping in here, hope you don't mind.

I don't see how all of fact number three is an opinion, when it has been confirmed that they have taken out Attributes, and that they have streamlined character creation.

Ha! Beat me to it.