But H2H is more "Action-Adventure"?

Good for you? I never said I was "glad" that it was eliminated actually I never said it was eliminated at all (quite the opposite if you had read it without rushing to post a snarky comment) I just said that the decision made sense to me because other forms of combat were more likely to be used anyway because they were simply more interesting. I never said my lack of personal use was a reason to remove it that was a totally separate statement more on the line of I don't really care that it's gone not "i'm glad it's gone" as you so thoughtfully forced into my mouth.

Now if I had a dollar for every post where someone tried to be a smart ass and failed I'd be able to fund my own game. Fail post is a fail.

Removing hand to hand is absurd. What am I supposed to do if I am disarmed or my weapon breaks, slap people like a gimp while I get curb stomped?

Hell no.

I wan't to knock them back, disarm them, stagger them - things any fighter worth their salt can do. When I loose my weapon THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER.... rawr

They've only confirmed the skill is gone not the ability to fist fight if I'm getting this correct. I just can't see them removing the most basic form of combat completely..

Where is all this new info coming from suddenly anyway?

well dang...that kinda...killed my interest in this game. i've been unarmed for morrowind and oblivion...oh well, i'll save some money for other stuff. cheers.

You'd really ditch everything this game has to offer because of that? Kind of extreme to me but to each his own I suppose.

I hope there is a perk that lets you do something with your hands other than simply punch them.

With the gutting of the attributes they are being forced to lump like skills together to fit under the same perk trees. If they don't then they would be forced to write dozens or more "redundant" perks under separate skills. The consequences of cutting out the heart of the character.

No attributes and sole reliance on perks means.... Less skills. Less options. Flat characters defined by health bars and magicka meters instead of strength, endurance....willpower.

Only perks are tied to skills and with no h2h skill...you can make the connection there. In the state it would be left in I don't even see a point to leaving it in except to say it's still there :shrug:

Actually the opposite. Characters will be more unique/specialized...more chiseled out.


More options. Choose 1 of 280 perks(that do more) and 1 of 3 stats for 50 levels vs 3 of 7 attributes for 25 levels.


Even a playthrough with the same focused skills(class) can be completely different thanks to perk trees.

Read my other post in this thread, page 5:

Ive been thinking about it. Im pretty sure you can still punch things, theyve only removed the skill. I wouldnt really have an issue with that.

No they won't.


Does the pointless repetition ever get old?

While it is true perks, in unlocking unique skills and abilities, will be a nice bonus it looks like the gutting of the attributes system will mean many, or most, of the 280 perks the noddingheads keep going on about will be nothing more than cover for what the attributes did better (while allowing more, separate, and varied skills at the same time).

Try doing better than cutting and pasting the talking points next time.

I doubt you can't punch.

Could be better this way, now that it doesn't have to compete with other melee weapons. Fighting with fist can now simple do damage to fatigue. Maybe you can knock people out, like in morrowind, and the guards wouldn't charge you with attempted murder (just assault).

Wether you win a fight will come down to your stamina and your personal skill. Makes the idea of bar brawls a lot more feasible.

This isn't a thread for perks vs attributes and all you've done is try to start a flamewar. Not everyone who isn't vehemently apposed to attributes being replaced is just a "nodding head". FYI we can formulate our own opinions *gasp*

That's fine with me. Just don't cut and paste a one line repetition of various points...over and over and over again....not saying you are....but there are a few here that do.

Also, not trying to start anything. It was predicted weeks ago that the attributes gutting would force Beth to cut and consolidate skills so they do not become overwhelmed with hundreds of repetitious perks (that attributes would have governed better and more simply). This news seems to be proving that prediction correct.

Really all the changes(removing classes, attributes) boils down to one distinction. In the previous games(MW and OB) every single character was the same come end game. This BLOWS. Honestly I'd rather have every character close to the same at start game and in Skyrim come end game our characters will be magnitudes more varied and unique than the previous games' start was.

I can't even fathom why anyone would want a game with med start variation and no end game variation over a game with mild start variation and massive end game variation. It boggles my mind.

Yes there are those that do and it is tiresome but we're working with limited info to start with, just because it's cut and pasted doesn't mean we can't agree with it or think it's completely right especially when said info gets straight to the point.
All them head shakers out there should learn this (that is a (bad) joke btw ;P)

I'm going to have to disagree about them cutting this skill due to repetitive perks though because this is one skill where the perks could have been almost completely or even fully unique.

Strange, I've never played a single character that ended the same. Also, your assertion that attributes (or classes for that matter) somehow led vanilla characters makes no sense. If anything it seems you are making an argument about leveling or scaling issues...

That's what I'm wondering too (Both questions.) even if hand to hand is removed as a skill, that doesn't tell us whether we actually can't attack without weapons at all or can still punch enemies but don't have a skill for it. Though I'd say that if punching IS in, you can probably assume that if there's no skill for it, it most likely won't be a viable alternative to other combat styles, rather, it would be pretty much worthless, only a measure to be used when desperate if you're weapon is broken or lost.

And the absence of hand to hand is unfortunate, but not such a big loss, if I had to choose, I think I'd honestly rather have spears than hand to hand, as it seems to me that when your enemies are armed with swords and bows, you probably wouldn't want to fight them with your hands and feet if you have a choice, on the other hand, spears could be quite useful against enemies armed with such weapons. Not that I'd ever say hand to hand should not be in the game, just that the absence of spears is more glaring, and yet the lack of spears is unfortunate, but acceptable, the same goes for hand to hand. I've played my fair share of RPGs that do just fine without either feature, and I have no doubt that Skyrim will join those ranks. It would certainly be nice to have hand to hand in the game, but I don't really feel that it's a vital part of what defines the Elder Scrolls or RPGs as a whole.



Guess that means one more copy for the rest of us then... yes, I really don't care, at all, and I doubt it affects Bethesda much either, considering that Skyrim should do well enough that the few who would actually abandon the game over something like this aren't going to hurt its success much.



You might have a point if you did not seem to completely forget that perks exist now, and basically assume that the system is identical to Morrowind and Oblivion in every way except for the absence of attributes, and also forget the fact that flat characters is EXACTLY what characters tend to become at the end of Morrowind and Oblivion, because if you kept playing for long enough, you could ultimately maximize all attributes and skills, and at that point, the only thing defining characters was a health bar, and only because characters who got their endurance to 100 sooner would have more health due to the way health progression worked, which further served to remove the distinction between characters because no other attribute worked in a way that made it so that the sooner you could get it to a higher level, the better, therefore, regardless of what kind of character you wanted to play, getting endurance as high as possible as quickly as possible was the only way to make your character as powerful as possible. If anything, characters in Skyrim may be better defined because there's a limit to how many perks you can choose, so even if two characters have raised all skills to 100, they may not necessarily be identicle.

In short, your "less skills = less options" notion is complete nonsense, it doesn't matter how many skills are in the game if at the end you raise them all to 100, characters still end up becoming carbon copies of each other.

Really, it's time we put the attribute thing to rest, it's starting to sound like a child crying over his favorite toy being broken here, this has gone beyond beating a dead horse, at this point it's becoming more like beating the pretified bones of a horse that's been dead for millions of years. I think we get the point by now, you're not happy that attributes aren't in the game, unless you have anything we haven't heard before to say about it (Which I'm not seeing in this thread.) I see no reason to clutter a thread about a seperate subject with it.



Perhaps you should ask yourself this question.



And I suppose you know this because you've played Skyrim, right? I mean, you definitely sound like you know this pretty well, so I can only presume you've played the game, because I know I can't say these things with such certainty about a game I've never played before and have only a few examples to judge the mechanic in question from. Oh, right, no, you haven't played the game at all, therefore, you don't know this, you seem to just automatically assume this, but it's easy to make assumptions about something you haven't experienced yet, however, these assumptions don't always turn out to be true.

Regardless of that, I don't see how you can say attributes did this much better when attributes, as they were handled in past games, were poorly balanced, and all attributes could be maximized in the same character with the only thing that needed to be challenged being your patience, it seems to me that what attributes did in past games they actually did pretty poorly. Now, I can't say for certain that perks will do better, but I'm not going to go all "You're ruining everything!" on Bethesda just because they decided to change a system which was flawed to begin with when I haven't even tried the new system. And I don't recall attributes ever allowing me to specialize specfically in daggers rather than just short blades as a whole, or just blades if we go by Oblivion's approach, and they certainly never allowed me to gain bonuses such as being able to pierce enemies' armor with a mace, all they ever did was allow my weapons to do more damage or give me more magicka, you know, things that skills, perks, or the simple health/magicka/stamina approach is already doing. And I fail to see how the removal of attributes somehow "forces" Bethesda to combine skills (Not to mention they were already combining, or enirely removing, skills when there were still attributes in the series.) I see absolutely no connection there, and it really doesn't make your arguments more convincing when your logic seems flawed.



It's great to see some good sense here for once. Now, we should probably get back to the subject of hand to hand, if people REALLY want to keep going on about the matter of attributes, or better yet, wait until the game is released to discuss the matter again, since then we'll have a chance to play the game and see for ourselves if removing attributes was really such a bad move. It's not like discussing the matter how will make Bethesda put attributes back in the game, returning them to the game is not some small matter one can do with only minor changes, as the presence or absence of attributes requires fundamental changes to gameplay mechanics to the way characters are handled in the game. And this would also mean changes must be made to skills, perks, and quite possibly spells and enchantments to account for these changes, and to races too, and probably NPCs and creatures since presumably they'd have the same attributes as the player character, even if it would be feasible to make these changes at the current stage of development, it would probably not be possible to properly balance them and ensure everything works as intended, leading to a horribly balanced mess. In other words, going on about the subject now won't change anything. On the other hand, once the game is released, we can make a more informed argument on the matter, since having tried the game, we can know from personal experience, rather than assumptions, what having no attributes will actually be like, maybe some of us will even change our minds on the matter.

And I shall hereby make an example myself by posting nothing more about attributes here.

Hand to Hand was always pathetic anyways..

But what do they mean with hand to hand removed?? Blade was also removed, DUH. And blunt, DUH.

I think I would be fine with that. As long as I'm able to deal a finishing blow when my opponent runs out of stamina, either with bare hands or by switchting to a weapon.


Nah, this is not an issue of attributes, or even classes. But I'm not going to dig into that here.
What I want to say is, that although we are given more distinction in the end game, there are still only 3 basic classes: warrior, mage, thief.
By making Hand2Hand (and maybe unarmored) a viable option, we would have at least gotten the monk back. Personally, I prefer the uncommon classes, like a shaman that uses his staff as a melee weapon, or a monk/priest type that doesn't use weapons or armor. By removing those options and concentrating on the most played classes, you are breaking my game.
However little the feature, somebody will have used it. And removing it might ruin their fun.

I can't believe hand-to-hand is gone,i'm pissed about that....really pissed. I know some of you think we can still punch,but i wanted more than that.I wanted kicks,crabs,throws,counters,sweeps,disarming......you name it......what a pitty. Yes we all know hand-to-hand wasn't brilliant in morrowind or oblivion,but they could have done so much more with it in skyrim. I've been away from the forums for a while and to come back and hear this.....well,let's just say my bottom lip is collecting gravel. The game is going to be epic though in my opinion,everything i've heard sounds great and i welcome the changes,i'm just a little disappointed about hand-to-hand....guess i'll have to get over that one.

I wonder what's there instead of hand-to-hand?....it better NOT be mercantile.

I said they would probably remove it a long time ago.
But no one would believe me.

I think it is stupid, instead of fixing it they just throw away yet another thing.

I wish people would stop saying maybe it's in one-handed....why? Hand-to-hand was classed as martial arts,the trainer's were martial artists. Martial artist's don't run around jabbing with one hand,and licking a lolly in the other,they use there bodies,feet,hands,fingers. The reason i think it's not been worked on as it should is because it may be difficult to do it/animate it in first person,or it's lazyness. I mean the even added extra kicking animation in the shivering isles,why the [censored] couldn't we do it?......maybe because of first person. If hand-to-hand was done properly....and i mean properly,with kicks,grabs,throws,flips,sweeps,breaks,disarming....then combain them and more with dragon shouts,stealth and magic,hand-to-hand would be one of the best skills in the game. Even gauntlets with spikes so we could add poison...that = dead dragon.......Hand-to-hand is more than a simple punch to the face. I'll just have to accept it's gone...and please don't say : you can still punch if you have no weapon,that isn't good enough. With the big improvement in animation i was expecting better hand-to-hand with all the bells and whistles,guess i set myself up for disappointment there.

How can they take it out.

Anyway i've had my rant,let's see what E3 brings.