There's nothing archaic about it though, some people just dont understand it. I dont understand quilting, I dont want them to dumb down quilting for me though. There's nothing archaic about representations, they are one of the constants of the RPG, along with stats. this seems to be part of the "pat me on the back" generation. That needs constant reassurance and help if they dont get somthing, or they fail at somthing. There nothing pompous about my stand on RPGs either. I understood the variables, some people apparently didnt and so of course we must be pompous becasue we understood a very simple mechanic. I seriously doubt half the people around here have even played an ES.

Dealbreaker as in I already know Ill rent the game, I shall not buy it on release.
The horreur that was Oblivion will make me think twice.

Meanwhile I have also repeatedly said that once I play the game Ill make a thread just to wax lyrical on everything I love about the game.
As well as being critical.

Funny, I'm pretty sure if you went up to a quilter and said "Here's an easier way to do quilting without cutting corners and maintaining end quality" everyone would jump down your throat for it now. But really, if you want the game market to stagnate why don't you just play JRPGs, or flat out hope companies go under and never provide a future game at all?

EDIT: Again, I started with Daggerfall and I understand the mechanics behind various PnPs and cRPGs of old. It doesn't mean that those are what "defines" RPGs because in a sense that isn't the case at all. It's simply the old systems and implementations behind character progressions OF RPGs. I think you're losing sight completely as to what makes an RPG an RPG, and instead have constrained some limitation as to what you feel is an RPG and that every game must conform to those self-imposed standards. To me, that's the very definition of pompous.

That seems to be the very definition of a disingenous comparison.

Another fallacy. Implying that all change is good. Less variables=inferior game. Fact. If people dont understand somthing, either learn, or move along. And yes, representation and stats are a constant of the cRPG. They will always be there. I know what an RPG is supposed to be, apparently you dont.

>Implying you haven't chucked a metric ton of fallacies yourself

I'm simply sinking to your level since you refuse to actually go for the arguments and simply reiterate your stance on "this is what I think an RPG is, everyone obviously is stupid and doesn't understand it!"

I haven't, Ive stated fact. More variables>less variables. Especially when half the people didnt even know what they did in the first place. An RPG is a game that allows you to create a character and RP them. somthing you could do in every ES game. The stats, representations and variables adds depth and complexity. Removing the depth and complexity dumbs down the game. Fable didnt really have stats, you must want that then. there will never be an RPG without stats, it wouldnt be an RPG if it didnt have them.

Anybody against the ability to run fast or jump really high, knows nothing of the lore. and wants to dumb down the game.

:yes: I agree.

But who gets to define RPG? RPG is an acronym for Role-Playing Game.

Therefore, by literal definition, it could encompass ANY game in which the player plays a role. The term was given a definition based on a set of standards at the time. And those standards involved, invariably, the characteristics of the game you are now describing. But that by no means makes it a 'constant'. A constant is not a variable at all. A constant is something accepted as being unchanging.

To declare stats and representations a constant of the RPG is to declare that no game without them can be defined under the RPG moniker... because obviously they would not meet that unchanging criteria.

This would be fine and good, if that were the case. But stats and numerical representations for player skills were not INHERENT in RPG's... even in your 'Golden Age'. They were commonplace... but hardly an exclusive characteristic which defined the genre. I for one enjoyed many custom/home-made PnP RPGs which involved -minimal- stat management and attribute training. Sure, most of these used customized rules... because none of us were really interested in doing MATH to play a game... we just wanted a system that worked well and balanced fairly.

I'm not saying there is NO place for stats... and NO place for formulas... I am saying that there is ROOM to branch out from these arguably "classic" formats in order to find a better way to play the game.

If Bethesda wants to move -THEIR- franchise in that direction... if they want to try to expand beyond the tried-and-true concepts into the territory of a more 'pure' roleplaying experience... then I say let them. So long as they improve upon their story-telling methods and expand upon their game's wealth of lore... I have no doubt in my mind that they are capable of creating an excellent game.

You can in fact define an RPG, but you have to ask why is an RPG, not what is an RPG. If I dont create the character, Im not, by definition Role Playing. there will never be an RPG without stats. All stats are, are defining variables, whether they are numbers, colors, letters, whatever. If you dont have variation, everybody's the same and its not an RPG. the only people that could advocate removing variation and choice are people that didnt care about it in the first place AKA newbs, or people that didnt get everything out of their game in the first place. Obviously its Beths game and they can do whatever they want, but if its dumbed down, Beth sold out and are no longer the last great RPG company. there would be no more great RPG company. people seem to be under the misconception that we can create 1:1 scale RPGs, we cant and wont be able to for a long, long time. Until then, representation and stats are a must. If newbs cant understand them, then go back to the headshotz.

Some call it elitism, I call it defending the last great RPG series. If Sky disappoint there wont be a reason to game.

We an discuss this more in a few hours, Im out for a while, peace.

Sure you are.

There is no law or rule which defines 'Role-playing' as playing out the actions of a custom-tailored character. Or that that game MUST have a wall of numerical stats to tell you who you are. There is no literary or literal or even implied definition to suggest this. Role-playing is, by it's simple English definition, stepping into a role or character other than your own.

There are plenty of Role-Playing games in which the character is made for you. Custom characters are not inherent in RPGs either.

The question of "Why" is a matter of philosophy... and we could debate it all day without gaining any ground. If you are unwilling to accept anything other than your rigid definitions and reasoning... and I am unwilling to yield to them... what could we hope to gain? I think instead that I will make a the same valid point I made in my last post:


There's room for the genre to expand, and embrace new ideas. This concept of sticking to 'tried-and-true' methods is the REASON idiot-sponge games like Call of Duty 9 have come to be. They STOPPED expanding beyond a single formula... and true-to-form... they have reached a level of stagnation. Even the die-hards have begun to taste the repetitive spoon-feeding of non-changing mechanics and barely-improved improvements.

One game after the next, with all the same mechanics and a different skin, does not a good game make.

You can do that to any genre... Real Time Strategy... Role-Playing Games... Turned-Bases Strategy... after a while, if you don't seek new ways to make the game differentiate from the last... you find yourself in a game-development quagmire... where you keep shoving in tried-and-true mechanics in order to keep the player from seeing through the thin veil:

This is just The Legend of Questdom: Insert Variable.


-addendum-

You're right. Some will call it elitism. Because it is. That is the pure definition of it. You seem to have this belief that RPG's are your domain... that you and your like-minded kind alone get to dictate to the world what a Role-Playing Game must be... and then proceed to insult anyone who disagrees with you.

If your RPG genre is dying... it is a death I wholeheartedly welcome... because there's no place in it for anyone who doesn't think just like you. Games are supposed to be fun, and interesting, and enjoyable.

When folks come along and demand that they know what is good, and everyone else is wrong... it is a disgrace to the term 'gamer'.

I'm assuming you also believe that shooting fireballs (or any sort of magic in particular) from your hands is completely "realistic" too eh? Potions must also be the most "realistic" among all the TES games too because your character just got his/her skull bashed with a mace, then suffered a slash attack from a sword, but yet drinking a potion automatically heals all of what's suppose to be "realistic" damages to the character's body.

It shuld be implyed by wich race and body type u choose.
Bigger, the lower u jump and slower u run. but can carry more waight
and vice versa^^

Without question one of the single greatest responses of all time! You sir are a complement to all gamers.

Im a fan of old rpgs been playing them for years i can understand them i enjoyed the old stats as much as the next guy but i belive they are still under the hood and just influenced by youre choices.A guy that chooses to add alot of heath will likely see damage increases and encumberance bonuses along with possibly options for such perks.If they called it strength instead of health i doubt people would be complaining but that is basicly what it was in oblivion .Its completely possible these thing swill function exacttly the same all based on playstyle and youre selections .Can i understand wanting to make them more complex yes makeing each variable more neccessary but as they were they were basicly just to raise health encumberance and damage something that this system can do.So i dont see us loseing depth with perks i see a gain.But i do understand the want to make it deeper .

Youre boots of lightening run will be there and will have an effect im sure there will been things like boots of bounding .How long you sprint and the sprint button itself makes sense and it being based on stamina makes sense to me .A warrior type that spends his points on alot of health and stamina will carry more just like before .Im sure speed isnt just capped but it will be effected buy variables differently armor will have a bigger impact and it should imo.Bad no different yes i understand being resistant to change in things you have enjoyed but i really as an old time gamer that has played tons of stat sheet type rpgs feel this could be just fine.

Technically without acrobatics as a skill, there is no place to park the run faster and jump higher perks...

'The only people that could advocate removing choice are those that did not care about it in the fist place'

I could not agree more.
The only people happy with TES becoming an action/ adventure are people that never liked it in the first place.

Please let TES remain TES.
There are so many sub par games out there, go play one of those.
I shall never understand why people clamour to make TES more halo while all the while they have halo.
Leave us TES.

It won't feel like the Elder Scrolls if I can't jump my way across the map, and leap on top of buildings, and from building to building, and change direction in mid-air, and all the other wonderful acrobatic things we've been able to do before. I don't care about realism. If I want to experience a realistic jump I'll buy a jump-rope on 11-11-11 instead of Skyrim. Bring back the fantasy.

Can't imagine running, jumping, and even swimming, not to have perks in there somewhere. Possibly within some stealth related skills. And they don't have to be parked somewhere (in a visible numerical sense), "You can now run twice as fast" is good enough.

Yes, the definitions of role-playing is to pretend to be somebody else, usually a persona that you create. A RPG like ES is the same thing. the closest you can come to a single player table top experience. Removing this variety removes depth and RP potential. Why is not a philosophy, why is the goal they were trying to achieve in creating an cRPG. To have a medium that represent a larger 'playground' than a linear game. Originally turning war games into board game RPGs. Then into DnD. ES basically is a cRPG DnD, and its better for it.

And no, its not elitism. Its not wanting a dumbed down game when theres so many out there. We dont need to turn ES into the umpteenth action game.

I just see more potential out of ES and the freedom of creation it allows. Some dont care about this, they play and dont experiance everything, thats fine, but no excuse against those that did get everything over numerous playthroughs.