I don't really see much of a difference (even given a very basic example).

How is: I use my sword to earn points, I put those points in my STR attribute, I do more damage
any more complex or rightfully earned than: I use my sword to earn points, I put those points in my Sword perk, I do more damage
?

In fact instead of just flat increase perks can offer a much wider range of options. Do I take a perk to increase crit chance or do I take a perk to add a bleed effect? In the end perks can off a much wider range of customization than attributes ever could.

I think I'm gonna like this change.

Im talking about anything that resembles a stat etc. Without them, every character is the same. That is no longer an RPG.

not to mention, whats wrong with depth? Whats wrong with a learning curve and actually having to think about what your doing? Was Oblivion's level system flawed? Yes, but it really wasn't that bad and could of been tweaked, not tossed out the window. Every change Ive heard or seen seems to just be a move to appeal to a wider audience.

You cannot categorically state at this point that anything regarding this issue is "factually incorrect," for the simple reason that we don't have the facts. We have Beth's tailored PR statements on the matter, and that's all we have. We won't really know, for good or for ill, until the game is released.


Yes - part of the benefit of computer RPGs is the ability to make all that number crunching invisible. But we aren't talking here about making it invisible - we're talking about doing away with the numbers entirely. That's a completely different thing.

Pen and paper rpg's often don't use stats, at least the ones I always play didn't. Often the character's are constantly at the same ability level, and you have to fight more creativly to win.

Stats don't make a character good or evil. That's where the rpg part of the game comes in. Gray area's too, stats don't make you anything. They're there to facilitate video-game-play. They're needed to give you a sense of getting stronger or better. But be that over or under the hood, it wouldn't matter as long as they are there. As for atributes, it doesn't sound like they're getting cut, rather the things they handled are being shuffled around to try and make it work better. :shrug: Depth isn't going away, just the numbers. If the numbers can be represented in game rather than in a menu. I'd rather have it represented in the game.

they do for a whole demographic of TES fans, your opinion isn't the only one. bgs is spoiling one child and starving another. sure they're doing it for the money, we all understand its a business, but its not like the game will completely bomb if the throw us "spreadsheet" guys a bone rather than belittling and discounting us completely.

What P&P RPG didnt have stats in some way or form? You cant even make a character in a tabletop without stats. Stats are not just numbers, they are every variable in the game. That was not an RPG if it didnt, that was a choose your own adventure book.



On a side note, I like spreadsheets. Most RPG gamers I know do as well. One of the reasons we play them, because other games, even lesser RPGs are just too boring and linear.

They do what's right by the game and what's fun. Considering they're playing it and we're not, I'm more inclined to trust them until I play it myself.

Ignore.

The problem with consoles is the interface: the controller. You see, there's a reason why spreadsheets are used so often to process and present information: that's what they are designed for and are very effective at doing just that. But to effectively navigate a spreadsheet, one needs a certain interface: a keyboard and mouse. Since consoles don't have that option (well, the Dreamcast did, but a legion of Sony Mind-Zombies unfairly killed it), the need to disseminate information in a different way, because the interface is so cumbersome. That's why Todd keeps running around and telling everyone "no more spreadsheets!" But I bet that Zenimax uses spreadsheets everyday to work out Todd's paycheck, among other things. Heck he probably uses them everyday, too! Truth is, important information is almost always presented in spreadsheet format. And at this point, there aren't many of us that aren't familiar with the format. So it works. But if you're primarily playing on a console, presenting the information in spreadsheet format makes it difficult for you to navigate, bogging down the game, and ultimately causing people to complain about said interface. I spent a great deal of time in the Morrowind forums, and I don't recall anyone complaining about the interface there. It worked. And although Morrowind made it to Xbox, most of the players in that forum primarily play on PCs. That game was designed for PCs. The Xbox conversion was an afterthought--Bethesda didn't really know if it would catch on and make money. Oblivion was designed from the ground up with the console player as a primary group. They didn't do too well with the menus, because it was some sort of amalgam of a PC and a console interface. Just like Mr. Miyagi said: "Walk on road, hm? Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later, get squish just like graqe." I argue for the PC side, because my experience is that it is a superior way of playing games. Some would rather play on a console. Fine. I've played many games on many consoles over the years (from the 2600 on), and I just prefer PC gaming. I think many people who play on consoles would agree, if they had a PC that could play games, and would give it a shot. I'm hoping with this new 10-year cycle for consoles will drive developers, and gamers in turn, to the PC as the primary development platform (like DICE is doing with Battlefield 3).

But it has nothing to do with "IQ." It's all about the interface.

It's really interesting the way you try to distance RPGs from the part that most makes them "RP" for many - the roleplaying. The decisions you make, the words you speak to your GM, the choices & morality..... all the stuff that the numbers are just there to support.


(Disclaimer - yeah, I know that most pnp RPG players don't actually rise to that level of roleplaying, and tend to just play a tactical wargame that happens to have a story. But that doesn't change the fact that, without the roleplaying, it's not an RPG - it's a wargame.)

Once more, I agree with you. And that's why I find strange of you to be upset with the new system, while, as I see it, they are doing what you want. They are giving far more options, via perks, and with the specialization they give, characters will be now more unique than ever before. Maybe atributtes could have been included? Well, yes, I suppose, but this streamlining works great and solve some old problems.

I'm all for this change.

Athletics/Speed stats are one of the things that has always made TES combat feel clunky. Rather than blows feeling satisfying as they do when performed at the "right speed", they either feel like slow motion blundering or fast-forward weirdness. Same goes for warp-speed-walking. It runs contrary to Beth's emphasis on more believable animations.

And having a set jump height actually allows for deeper gameplay, as level designers can structure navigation puzzles with that jump height in mind. And like warp-speed-walking, moon-jumping is just goofy and takes away from the world (unless magic is involved, that is).

thats possibly the most gross overgeneralization of RPG that I have ever seen. you make it sound as if it were some kind of goosebumps style book where you read to a point and pick the option to either turn to page 34 or to page 103.

btw, almost all pen and paper have stats, they are what the dice roll modifies when you do a skill check... thats why its called a skill check. (I was trying to be more informative than combative but the text is conveying the wrong emotion so...)

Well I'm glad they are listening to their own fresh ideas, as that was one of the things I hated most in Oblivion. I'd never want it back.

Says you. That can't be debated :whistling:


Just keep this in mind, folks. Remember the case with the beast races in Morrowind? Express your concerns, be clear and elaborate, but try to not get too emotional with it. That tends to provoking knee-jerk reactions (potentially from the devs too) and ultimately undermining your cause.

Yet every 'role' you'd play is the same without stats. Basically just a bunch of clones with different morality and choice alignments. Even those are stats though in a way. Being chaotic neutral for example is a stat. A game with no stats, where you just choose what to do in X world is a choose your own adventure book/game, not an RPG.

Sorry how is it different leveling your sword in order to get better at using a sword with either system?? In one system you use your sword, raising the Blade skill, knowing full well that when you level up you will raise your strength so you do more damage with a sword. In the other system you use your sword knowing full well that you will pick a perk that will make you do do more damage with a sword. That perk may even have requirements, like being a certain level with one handed weapons, or having the previous perk relating to swords. This way you using your brain even more than in the other method, because in the other method using either a Blade or Blunt weapon (or indeed punching someone) would make you better with both Blade or Blunt weapons, and at punching people.

Mirglof your argument for the attribute system is starting to grow some twisted roots of logic. The way you're looking at it, is that in previous games we have used 'B' (skills) to increase them so that we could earn 'A' (attribute points) for an overall character growth between levels that is equal to 'X'. Now in Skyrim its basically the same thing so I don't see what your problem is. We use skills ('B') to increase them so that we can earn health/magicka/stamina increases ('C') and earn perk bonuses ('D') for an overall character growth between levels that is equal to 'Y'. Now of course you will argue, as you have before, that the outcome of ('Y' * 50 levels) is nothing but a choice between a certain number of pre-made character designs, but I say to you; then what would you call ( 'X' * 50 levels)? Just because ( 'X' * 50 levels) exists in a more underlying and obscurred state than the more obvious perk design of ( 'Y' * 50 levels) doesn't mean that it isn't simply a collection of possible pre-made character models as well. And furthermore, I would say that with a total 280 perks (or whatever the count is) that we can choose fifty from and without pointless and unwanted level advancement in something as idiotic as Athletics, then the possible character growth in this new system is not only much more varied but its also much more customizable and consequential as well.

Im talking about losing content, not it getting rearranged. Even still, I liked intelligence (example) , I liked raising it even if nothing in game acknowledged it other than co-relating stats. I like the perk idea, I like that leveling is getting looked at, but I dont see how attributes and perks are mutually exclusive. If you want to make them invisible in the background type thing, go for it. Dont cut them outright though.

That's not role-playing; that's metagaming.

True enough. It does come down to stats in the end. We're only given the choice of role-play, to a certain extent, through our own imaginations. The game relies partly on us to build the RPG, as well as the devs themselves.

I'm sorry, I just don't appear to process thought in the manner that you do. I'm not sure we can have a discussion here. :sadvaultboy:

I am sorry but todd's "spreadsheet" speech has got you all turned around. perks replacing attributes as a system for leveling will place a finite combination of character designs, sure there are going to be over 200 perks to choose from but thats less than attributes in which a difference of as little as 5 points towards endurance in the beging could make hundreds of thousands of combinations and its more organic than suddenly picking what you are better at.

(by which I mean the previous system of handling perks in OB was that you didn't just pick the perk you had to get your level associated with that perk to a minimum level. the new way I could potentially exclusivly use weapon skills but theoreticly pick a perk associated with a skill I havent used at all. it makes no sense and streamlines the process of leveling to a point of mindless game play.)



EDIT: the issue isn't change, the issue is that the change is in a bad direction. what we're saying here is that we should keep attributes but improve the system so that you aren't forced into using a set of skills which is what todd is saying the point of all this was. if they improved upon the existing system they could change it towards they goal they intended without out putting the huge wasted effort of building a new system from scratch.

no where on this thread have any one said change was bad, only that pointless change rather than improvement is a pitiful waste of what the series could evolve into.

TC sounds like he's about to off himself because of a few game mechanic twerks.

Chill out man, we have half a year to learn about the game. If you approach it with this closed mindset of them ruining it then you won't enjoy it. Congrats for being emo and ruining the GotY for yourself.

How so? Come up with your own unique character look, fighting style, personality, and then have a dungionmaster create a world for the character's to be let loose into. Lots of fun, completely open, and the only thing holding you back was your immagination and the dungionmaster's world rules along with no godmod cheating. You could find trainers in the world and gain stronger spells or better weapons from better smiths. Definitly was an rpg, cause you played your own role in the world.


Don't take me the wrong way. I got nothing against that. I just dislike spreadsheets and menu's.