Continuation of http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1307103-its-not-my-fault-i-abused-smithing/

Hopefully the title and the poll will focus the discussion and reduce the number of people who seemed to be responding to the (old) title instead of what was actually being discussed

I like the option to do either; more choice is better.

Probably the first time in a long time I've seen a poll that isn't completely objectionable and biased. You deserve a credit for that (although obviously I would argue that the mechanics aren't broken, its worded so it seems clear enough thats how once side perceives it, rather than an unarguable fact).

I would have picked both options in the above poll if able.
I don't believe game mechanics not functioning well should be ok, however I have the imagination, self control and intelligence to forsee what could be a major problem and avoid it while still having fun.

Also the term broken mechanics doesn't really apply to many of the gripes people constantly bring up. The mechanics aren't generally broken, they are just not well implemented and realised in their current form (not that people will distinguish the difference - exaggeration and ranting on forums is more the norm than honest accurate debate nowadays from what I have seen).

Civility! Thanks.

Also, in response to: "do games need to be challenging?", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game does list challenge as one of the key components of a game.

It also seems that the argument does boil down relatively well to "Can we consider Skyrim a simulator?" (or something like that). I would still argue no, but I'm tired and must leave for now, so I'll attempt to come back with a more fleshed out response.

Everytime I see a long, well thought out reply, I see TL;DR about 2 posts further down. It was at this point I realised we were all doomed.

I honestly don't see how the mechanics are "broken."

My Enchanting/Smithing/Heavy Armor warrior is a beast because that is what one is when they have the blood of dragons and deck themselves out in their bones. I did my time getting there by doing the main questline on Master. I have earned my badassery and I enjoy mutilating everything that looks at me cockeyed. Even so there are still some fights that are tough and that require a few potions.

Not broken, actually good game design.

Now fix the myriad of glitches!

More choice equals better. It's not entirely unrealistic for someone to know how to smith a sword but not know how to swing it!

I'm of course biased, but I think that your opinion would fall into the second camp, at least the way I see it. I too plan to roleplay around mechanics I feel are broken (or is "damaged" better?), but my point is that we should acknowledge that these mechanics are indeed broken/damaged/not implemented correctly, and not say that there is not a problem just because we can avoid the faulty mechanics if we wanted to.

Where is the "I don't care either way. I started with a character concept and built to the concept I came up with before the game was even released. The fact that it is broken or not is totally irrelevant."

RPers are pretty much saying " well they sold us a cardboard box for a thousand dollars but I have the imagination, intelligence, and self control to pretend it's a spaceship", guess what it's still a cardboard box at the end of the day.

Nuh uh, it's a spaceship. (j/k)

Also, at $60 and over a hundred hours played, I've already gotten my money's worth, and the end is nowhere in sight.

I don't care. Don't like it, don't use it.

BS. The mechanics we were sold are nothing like that. We were told we would be buying a hunting rifle, and instead got an automatic grenade launcher, but that is OK because we can pretend that it is a hunting rifle.

Also I object to the use of the term "broken" which implies that it does not work. The proper term is overpowered, or in the case high end magic underpowered. Broken is when a quest fails to update or your wife disappears from the world after leaving the chapel.

To be frank, I think this game has always been pointed a little bit more at the role players than at the people who just play a MQ and move on to the next game. A lot of this game is what you make of it, and I think the source of a majority of these arguments boils down to RPers vs. RPGers. In other words, the people who fill in the blanks/avoid the errors versus the people who are just playing the game. If you're playing the game, you want to take advantage of all available tools. If those tools are borked (alchemy/enchanting/smithing), then it pisses you off because it shouldn't be that way. The people who trend towards role playing just ignore it, because it's not as hard for them to do so.

For what it's worth, even us RPers can see the synergy there being... well, let's call it excessive. It just doesn't bother us as much. Besides, those of us who have been around for a while got our min/max fever out of the way with Morrowind or Oblivion.

Immersion is a major factor in games for me, regardless of graphics. The option to create legendary items and have them be extremely powerful is fine, they're supposed to reflect legendary skill, but creating something that can't be countered by anything else smells of lazy design.

And, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roleplaying_game does not list challenge as a key component. A reference to wikipedia is not a conclusive point.

A roleplaying game is an exercise in storytelling through a free medium. I don't know of a single roleplayer who plays the game to test their abilities.

Although there are some key aspects to storytelling that if avoided, will make the experience seem hollow, such as the heros journey (wiki Hero of a thousand faces for more detail). When you deliberately skip the heros journey in a roleplaying game, you sabotage the concept.

Most players recognise the need for a heros journey, and develop their character accordingly, usually without realising it. It didn't even occur to me to max out smithing for this very reason, thou I'm sure if the game was like Diablo, I would have pounced on it in a shot. Its about adapting to the game being played, and its vital you recognise that freeform RPGs like this have much more in common with a live action roleplaying game with very little dependance on stats, and instead on personal stories than with stat-based combat games.

Simply put, people expect this game to offer an experience in 'beating the game' instead of telling a story, are always going to be disappointed. I will argue against your balance (and no RPG is truly balanced.. whoever told you this is lying, otherwise the term Munchkin or Powergamer wouldn't exist.. only social restrictions stopped that from being too rampant) and statistical shortcoming of various skills, purely on the basis that the more you convince Bethseda to walk down this route, for what I believe is a vocal minority(my belief, poll may prove me very wrong), takes more away from the open storytelling world they provide me. Thats why I argue my point voraciously.



No, its not a simulator, and despite the name, neither is the Sims, its clearly a game. This is not in dispute, no one is claiming simulator.

Best post I've read on here.

No.
I do believe things could have been implemented better. I don't think anyone really disputes that with some aspects of the game.
However I don't see the point in allowing it to ruin my fun (you know that thing people play videogames for). I knew what I was buying, Skyrim (and I got Skyrim, shocking as that may be - some people bought it expecting an alternate reality boxed in videogame form).
The game isn't broken (well unless you play on the PS3, then you have a point, but thats another topic), as much as people may claim otherwise. People simply do not like the implementation and execution of the systems in place. That in itself is fine, striving to change it for the better is not a bad goal. However exaggerating that the sky is falling, falsehoods and insults do not make positions in an arguement stronger. You must also be aware that the game was not designed for individual people, but for a large audience and as such will never be to everyones tastes. Modding tools are coming out if you play on the PC to allow people to alter the game to suit their individual tastes.

There are certain things I don't mind being "broken". Morrowind's crazy alchemy shooting your stats up into the thousands, or enchanting a ring with constant Restore Health. Oblivion's 100% Chameleon trick. Basically, things you have to go out of your way in order to break.

I don't think it's that hard of a fix for Smithing, though. Lower tier items should grant less XP, and merchants should never have hordes of higher tier materials laying around. After Steel, you should have to start hunting around for material to make Dwarven, Orcish, Ebony, and so on. I'd even remove Daedric entirely, or at least make it part of some quest line.

While I like smithing, it makes it a bit too easy to just whip up the higher tier arms and armor, making any possible quest rewards or exploration less appealing. It's a little less about balance than it is risk and reward - why bother searching for a Daedric Sword when I can just cook one up so easily?

I voted for the latter though "broken" is too strong a word. I'd call them sloppy and not well conceived. This actually applies to the whole skill system. Why Beth never applied a graduated system is beyond me. By that I mean, you gain minimal to no experience for activities far below your current skill level. If you're going to have a "learn it by doing it" system there should be an incentive to challenge yourself. At skill level 80 smacking your 900th mudcrab with your sword is rote by that point. Likewise, if your smithing is 80, making iron daggers should be meaningless to your progression. Every blacksmith in Tamriel can do that and the entire world isn't scaling up with them.

Interestingly, the mechanics of Smithing, Enchanting and Alchemy are not broken when taken separately, or when taken all at the same time. I have a character that has only perked up the crafting skills, and Speech (for monies!). I am currently in my high 20s and the game feels just about right. The lack of combat perks are made up for by using upgraded, enchanted armor and weapons while chugging potions. The difficulty feels pretty spot on, and I still die from time to time when I take on too many enemies or run into 'that guy with the warhammer'. Unfortunately, things fall apart when you combine these with the combat perks.

Even without abusing the system (making potions to make better gear to make better potions, etc), you can make yourself quite powerful by combining fully upgrade weapons with powerful enchantments that can stack up to make your attacks extremely powerful. I have a character that has a bow that does over 500 damage, and I haven't "gamed the system", so to speak. I can 1-shot dragons and even ancient dragons usually only take 3-6 arrows.

How would I fix this? No idea as of yet.

Another +1 from me, it obviously comes down to how you approach a game like this. There are even some of the more sensible and moderate suggestions that I wouldn't care if they got implemented, what worries me is slippery slope syndrome, and the more the game gives to Gamers, inevitably tends to take away from Roleplay Gamers.

I see it this way. There is a game. In the game you do what you want, when you want to. How can this ever be a negative? If you bought Skyrim, you knew ahead of time it is an open world non linear game. Given that, you can literally make the game as easy or difficult as you wish, regardless of the game mechanics. It's still an RPG and still supports leveling. If you think being able to explore, find raw materials, and make new weapons to be too easy, well don't do that, play a more challenging game. If you think leveling up light armour is too easy just cause you walk around with leather boots on, then take the boots off, go monk style. I'm really not seeing where the game is broken based on gameplay anywhere yet.

It shouldn't be about avoiding "broken" mechanics, it should be about exploring what works for you. Something that seems flawed to you, could be what makes the game enjoyable for someone else and vice versa. It's your world, do what you want with it.

BS.

You were told you were buying a hunting rifle, and received a hunting rifle. You then learned you could get an automatic grenade launcher, got said launcher, and now complain that it blows things up faster than the hunting rifle.

Put down the grenade launcher and pick your hunting rifle back up. :gun: