Well... There's alot of animosity towards the idea of being overpowered. I don't understand why. If Beth follows what they usually do, there will be no multiplayer aspect whatsoever. (no scoreboard, etc.)

Why is it such a big deal then, if you're able to become overpowered? Personally, I kinda think that if I want to make my character ridiculously strong, that's my choice, and it affects no one else. So why all this "we can't be overpowered!! Hurr durr!" are the npc's going to get mad? I don't think so.

I understand the idea of balance within player choices: a Mage player shouldn't be able to kill 100000x times easier than a warrior player. However, I think it might be fun if whatever kind of character you choose, you have the option of becoming a god-like monster.

Discuss. I'm interested to hear why people are so anti-overpower.

I agree. I think some people are afraid that if their character becomes too strong, the game won't be fun anymore. Well at that point, I think it's time to retire that character and start a new one.

GOD mode: off

Why? Because it's much more fun

Well,When I want to take folk out real easy,I.E one hit kill,I just put the slider all the way down.

But mostly,I want to fight hard and get stuck in,so,for me,I'm out.... (Dragons' den qoute)

I think it is more about becoming overpowered too easily. If I am level 84 and all my skills are maxed and I'm loaded down with really strong gear I expect to one shot things. But if I am able to destroy entire cities singlehandedly at level 12 then it gets boring.

Most people don't want to become over powered because then the game becomes extremely easy and it becomes extremely easy to get bored, there is no more challenge so you are just moving around the gamespace with no chance that you won't succeed, and since you know no matter what you will win it looses something. At least for me...of course then I just go into collecting mode and start building vast hoards or trying to get one of everything, usually both of those only in different buildings....

Basically once I know I can beat anything in the game I'm playing it becomes very easy to just move on..

I'd take fun over balance in a game like this.

My personal philosophy is that there should be many opportunities for making OP stuff, but doing so should be difficult. So there should be OP weapons, but they should be hard to find, you should be able to make OP spells and enchantments, but doing so should be difficult and require good materials/skills.

There should always be stuff that on the surface seems to be OP, but you should feel as if you earned it when you use it. Don't limit the characters opportunities by making the game "balanced" it's a singelplayer game, who cares what the NPCs think.

I am not anti-overpower. I just want a decent difficulty curve. I want to evolve from very weak at first (to feel the struggle of the rookie) to very powerful in the end game (around the soft cap level). I think both Tes games that I played (Morrowind and Oblivion) did it somehow wrong, in Morrowind I became God too soon while in Oblivion I was never powerful enough to feel like God. I want a balance between these, but definitely more like Morrowind.

Bethesda certainly seems to not like overpowered characters. In fact they even seem to hate overpowered characters. I don't get it, it's a single player game, who cares if your over powered.

For me, I think it's always more fun and pleasurable to be invincible/infinite in 'games.' I'd just like to see 'infinite options' given for those that would desire them. It sometimes feels like people are still 'caught up' in the idea that games have to always adhere to having a 'challenge.' I think that's ridiculous. The reason I find complete invincibility and infinitude the most fun is because it's the furthest from 'reality.' And I think a lot of people agree that they play games to leave a 'reality.' So following that logic it seems the game that supports complete invincibility of character by being furthest external to reality should be the most fun. But perhaps not, for me it's like that though.

The part where something is overpowered becomes an issue only if it is something the player doesn't have to force. Say all swords were overpowered. A player who chose to use swords would not realize it until they were well into the game, and then finally notice that they beat anything and everything in just a few strikes. THAT is an issue, because it makes the player have less fun. If its some convoluted combination of spell effects, that doesn't matter, because a player would have to force themselves to use it.

This.
If I've eradicated Skyrim of dragons, ended the civil war, and risen to the top of various guilds, I want to feel like the most powerful warrior/mage in Tamriel and I should be nearly unstoppable. If I've done all this, it'd be pretty ridiculous if I had trouble taking out a few bandits. And if I'm just starting out, I shouldn't be anywhere near strong enough to take on dragons and the like.

I think that works perfectly.

In an RPG it's in our nature to aspire to level up and grow stronger and stronger. It should be associated with your level.

This

The lack of challenge is not fun.

People should do what ever they want to, its their game. With that said, I dont like making OPed characters, unless Im actually RPing a OPed character. Like a 400 year old Vampire for example.

Balance is what makes the game fun. If you play on PC, start up Oblivion and mod your attributes and skills to 255. Go to the Testing hall and get the best gear for however you play. Then go and play the game. Being too strong right away isn't fun.

I think having the potential to become [what some consider to be] overpowered is important, but equally so is the ability to remain challenged without being required to continually, and consciously limit one's own character progression.

Some balance is certainly necessary [to appease the average player] in single player games, but a lot of would-be game designers seem to overestimate in what context, and to what extent it's necessary or desirable. And of course it's subjective; aiming to please some kind of reasonable majority is a good idea, certainly if you're in Bethesda's position.

Years ago I wrote, "there's no such thing as overpowered; only under-roleplayed." It was in the context of a tightly-knit multiplayer roleplaying environment, but I think it's relevant even here. Given the luxury of knowing your players well -- or to a lesser extent, but more relevantly, of designing open-world heroic fantasy -- there can and should be a path to epic power, as long as it's sufficiently out of view, or out of reach, that those who never want to progress beyond the challenges of the main story don't know the path is there.

Fun over balance, I can balance myself.

No its not, but choosing fun over balance does not mean a lack of challenge.

OK. What do you mean by "choosing fun over balance"?

I thin you should start out as average/bad, and become stronger, ending up as some godlike individual. like you did in morrowind.

If you don't have a balance then you don't have a challenge. Unless it's ridiculously challenging to the point where it's no longer fun.

The game should be challenging for the majority of the time you spend playing. At the beginning, everything should be challenging. As you get stronger and take on more difficult quests (such as dragon hunting), the challenge level stays the same. After you beat the main quest and perhaps finish some of the guild quest lines, there should only be a select few enemies that are challenging. You should actually feel like a powerful warrior.