the absence of wereboars.

rofl deleted mine after i saw yours....but yeah i agree with this...when the devs themselves specifically state theyre taking out these features for the purpose of streamlining/reaching wider audience. I dont see that as an opinion at all...and i dont really see it as a positive at all.

It is an opinion to say everything they took out was replaced with a "gimmick", and that all of those things are "negative" and that people dont know whats "good" for the series.

He listed facts then gave his opinion on them, thinking his opinion on those facts was also a fact.





So calling something a gimmick and that only you know whats good for a game but others don't isn't an opinion? I see the lack of levitation as a good thing. I see more NPCs and armor types/variations as a good thing. These are called opinions, just like what he wrote. You can't just blindly paint everything as negative (and blindly call it a fact) and not be called out for it being your opinion.

double post - lagg

Last point I'm going to make, I'll be more direct this time and make it clear you are a perfect example of the points I've been trying to emphasis.

Fact - merging of armor been explained with sound reasons behind it, the change to run speed can be seen as either positive or negative and was probably done for balance reasons since they have added a sprint mechanic, the exclusion of levitation has been explained several times

Fact - no one who posts here on the forum knows what is good for the series (myself included), I rather think Beth knows better than any of us since it is after all their series (and a rather exceptionally successful one at that).

Fact - player freedoms and the rpg side of the game is getting bolstered more than ever, removal of classes, addition of perks, and addition of the dual wield combat mechanics are going to make this the most customizable TES game yet. The free roam exploration is being made better with the number of hand crafted dungeons being made and the variety they are reported to contain. The sandbox rpg game play is still intact and being made even better with the addition or radiant quests, a hand crafted world, better npc interactions and relationships, crafting, jobs, I could go on and on here

If anyone looks at all of that and still says "dumbed down", they obviously don't want to call it anything but that and will ignore any addition or improvement that directly rebukes their complaints. Anyway, I'm done with this conversation. I think I've made my point by now.

I can't speak for all of the game's critics, but I have never called Bethesda liars. Some of their explanations for changes are perfectly valid (like the reason for merging armour or the reason for excluding levitation) - I just don't agree that it's the right direction for the series to go in. Just because an explanation makes sense, doesn't make it right.

Nor have I ever said that Skyrim will be "just a dumb action game". In fact, I can't recall anyone else (aside from you) using those words.

Most of the criticism on these forums is presented in a constructive manner. People aren't simply throwing around insults as you suggest - they're presenting valid arguments to support why they disagree with a lot of the changes being made. You may not agree with these peoples opinions, but simply shrugging them off as a mindless rabble who ignore facts and are determined to run the game down at every opportunity is ludicrous.

The giant spiders,other than that its all good

So there are no established fanbases which Beth would love to keep as their customers by doing compromises in design in their favor along with reaching out for the new? And there's no need to listen to these fans and think about their concerns as in the end everyone will vote with their wallet anyway regardless of the quality of the product? Well, I guess that's that then.

And so that you know, I'm not defending mindless bashing with no point to it. And a bright fellow like you surely understands that even harshly worded criticism can still be constructive if you know how to read it.

Ah, so people disagreeing with you are naysayers and stuff you don't mind being taken out is redundant and antiquated. By whose definition? Yours? And you seriously think your's the one to lecture about maturity?

Tell you what, I work in marketing. And not in entertainment, but in instruments required to make life-or-death decisions. Do I tear my hair out at naysayers? Yes. But at the same time, they put me to task as to where the bar is that in an ideal case, I'd have to jump over. If they clamor "I need this and that" while I know for a fact that it doesn't provide any medically useful information, I still nod at them and see what the cost/benefit ratio would be to introduce this capability. You know why? Because they're potential customers. If it makes enough more people buy the instrument to pay for it, who am I to lecture the customer as to what he doesn't really need? I'm not going to advertise the feature since people who do know better would think I don't. But if he wants the feature and R&D can provide it profitably, so be it. If the naysayer clamors "The instrument can't do this and that" and I know it can do it as precise as is currently possible with any technique whatsoever, I let them rant and see for it that people on my side rant at least as loudly, all the while telling R&D that we need to get better. But in many cases, I know full well that it doesn't fulfill requirements in this specific application. And you know what? These "naysayers" are a boon for me then - because I can take their words and forward them to R&D and tell them "I told you a year ago these are our requirements - now you get it from our customer. Do you want to hear it from the competition when they can do it while we can't? Get moving on this issue finally!"

Getting info from customers is always valuable. Getting negative info shows you where you could achieve more. Getting postive info bolsters your ego, but not necessarily the coffers. Of course it is always best to be aware of customer needs before the customer himself has fully realized those are his needs - but that's a risky business, and only works when you have met the needs the customer is actually fully aware of. Otherwise you're providing icing without a cake.

My biggest fear is it will be too easy and harder difficulty only means longer.

This might be the reason for all the "stream-lining"...ya know, reaching a more diverse, larger group of consumers? The difference between this game and this product your describing is that NO ONE HAS PLAYED SKYRIM YET. Everything is speculation, even the 'facts' we think we know, because we haven't experienced the game.

Ah yes. So those who make it always know better than those who use it. May I give you some advice? NEVER start a business. Believing your customer to be too dumb to know what he needs is a surefire way to run it into the ground in year 1.




You have a funny idea of "fact". Catering to your wishes is a fact. Precisely what has addition of perks or dual-wielding to do with RPG? Oh, I see, they cater to YOUR idea of RPG, and because YOU define what constitutes a good RPG side, that's that.




You've made the point that you're a demi-god, Bethesda is God, and both of you are infallible. Whether you wanted to make that point, I'm not sure, because it doesn't speak for you or the points you perhaps wanted to make at all.

Fact 1- A depressing number of people do not know the difference between a fact and an opinion.
Fact 2- Message boards are predominantly filled with the types of people mentioned in Fact 1.

My True and only concern atm:: (since i love perk trees over attributes and betterbalance - imo -the biggest changes)

PC gfx and ui I have a feeling the textures won't be that good and the PC ui will be a big and clunky one like Oblivion.






Too true lol.

Ah, so I talk about ADDING features, whether they are needed or not, and you say taking them away is the same thing. Yup. War is peace and all that. Tell you what, your "streamlining" is the "Bud Light" effect. Yes, you reach a "more diverse" group of customers by stripping everything from a beer that anyone might take offence at. Only problem is that those who actually know beer will call BS on it. Take away all the edges, strip it of any kind of character whatsoever and yes, you will find a large group of consumers - the large group of those who don't know any better. But you will have to live with the disdain of those who do.




We have a previous example, Oblivion, and we have some statements. Oh, and for the record, we have just launched a new instrument generation, which aside from a handful of customer study sites, no one has actually used so far. Orders are just now being taken. So your talk about the difference between the game and "my" product is pure fantasy on your part - there is always a "next generation". And if it wants to be perceived as the cream of the crop, it better not just take into account the wishes of the [censored], but those of the naysayers as well.

No, I'm saying you do not know the sum total of what they have added/taken away because YOU HAVE NOT PLAYED THE GAME. If they have added substantially more than they have taken away, or made up for what they have taken away with something else that does the job better, or has rendered the previous thing redundant or obsolete than the act of removing it cannot be seen as a negative. If they haven't done this than it cannot be seen as a positive. What I am saying is that WE DO NOT KNOW because we do not have the completed product in our possession. Very simple.

This topic reminds me of a joke.

How many fan-boys does it take to screw in a light-bulb?
10. 1 to change the light-bulb and the other 9 to whine about how the old one was better.

I still think it would be better for everyone if judgement was reserved until the game is played. If this game is seen as it's own separate game on release and not in any relation to TES, it would probably get amazing reviews and be loved by lots of people. Right now I don't think the complaining will ever stop.

Now to the actual question of fears. My biggest fear is that the quest-lines will be short.

I fear that exploration won't be as rewarding as I'd like it to be. While I loved Oblivion (it was my introduction to ES), and was generally bowled over by the size and complexity of the world, I did feel that once I had seen one Ayelid Ruin/Fort/Cave/Oblivion Gate, I had pretty much seen them all. I'm hoping for more variety, and more of a hand-crafted feel (which Todd Howard has promised).

I wouldn't mind if you could turn quest/map markers off, but I'm doubting that's going to be an option.

I also share the fear that dragon-killing might become tedious, as it appears to be a pre-requisite to complete the main quest. But I'm hoping I'm way off base with this one, and that dragons will be powerful enough (and infrequent enough) to really be special when you have to face them down.

But generally speaking I am an optimist. Pretty much everything I've seen about Skyrim looks terrific to me. And while I sympathize with those who feel passionately enough about this series to hold it to the highest standards, some seem to behave as if Bethesda is on a personal quest (complete with map markers) to destroy their lives. They're just artists and engineers trying to make a living making games. That's all.

Rofl...wow possibly couldnt disagree more. So in your logic...bethesda could scrap the entire game and just remake a platform style donkey kong clone game with nord graphics and call it skyrim....and because bethesda created it, your blind faith in their knowledge of whats best would make you play it relentlessly because its so ridiculously amazing. I see tyelkormo stated it pretty well...when you dont listen your customers and all that.



Dont think i used the word gimmicks in my post. And i didnt use lack of levitation as an example :shrug. But i guess i could type my whole post out again since you didnt read it. Im referring to where he said core aspects were removed all for the purpose of streamlining and being made to reach a wider audience(right out of the devs mouth) But youre right, the rest is just opinion...even if the game gets exponentially more ridiculous in the handholding department and you dont even have to think to do anything anymore and youre basically just watching a long cinematic...many people would still love it, so thats just my opinion. Direction dialogue gets cut completely and gets replaced with quest markers because people dont like to read/know how to follow directions...this could be amazing for lots of people, no reading AND no thinking. All just opinion.

not getting to play it as much as i would like to

You know..... it's a funny thing about these threads.....

Somebody will start a thread asking what people like in the game, and it'll just dawdle along, with people talking about the the things they like - no conflct, no problems.

Somebody will start a thread asking what people don't like in the game, a few opinions will get posted, then one or more of the same handful of posters will come crashing into the thread, flinging fallacies, rhetoric, hyperbole and insults, desperately and scornfully trying to "prove" that the opinions expressed are "wrong" and the whole thing will devolve into an ugly flame war.

Why is it that the "naysayers" - the supposedly horrible people who just want to complain and make problems - never go crashing into the positive threads to fight with those people? If the "naysayers" are the bad ones, why aren't they the ones who are starting the fights?

This is one of my concerns as well. I was under the impression that todd said there will be a different ui for pc players, so lets hope they follow through with that. I actually thought MW's ui was great. All info available to me on screen at once. Id absolutely hate having to scroll through my entire inventory "iPod" style" on the pc, when i have the advantage of mouse/keyboard.

Everybody should all just stop arguing let's all be a big happy family eh?

I was "proving" his opinions wrong because he literally called them facts. He even labeled them as facts.


Nice try though.


*:nono: don't call folks trolls and don't discuss warnings or banned members here*

Yes, very simple. You don't understand marketing. But yes, probably best to state what you WOULD have wanted when the product is done. Makes perfect sense, right? Yes, you can only act on information available at any given time point. That's perfectly normal. And if I am given the chance to say what I'd like to see and what I'd NOT like to see in the next product generation, I use that chance. Because waiting until I have it in my hands is actually a pretty stupid thing to do. When you don't state the specifications you'd like the product to meet beforehand, don't be surprised if they aren't met - regardless of what product we're talking about. While some here have actually ecplitly stated that they consider Bethesda to be deities, my trust in their ability to read minds is kinda limited.



You know, that's the POINT of brands that the products of a brand are seen in relation to each other. What you consider a bug is actually a feature - when done right. It means people who believed the last product brought unto the market under that brand to be the best thing since the invention of sliced bread will give me the benefit of the doubt with the next instance, whereas someone coming onto the market with something new will have that much more convincing to do.