Mirror's Edge: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N1TJP1cxmo
Battlefield 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zw8SmsovJc&feature=feedlik
Dark Messiah: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caB1jodPQPQ

Here are just a few games who have dabbled in this idea of the player's interaction with enemies and the environment in general. I don't know about everyone else, but I personally believe the more interaction we have in a game, the more control and immersion we receive as a result. I think the grab mechanic in Oblivion went a long way to add immersion, even if it never worked that great (at least on the Xbox 360). With that being said, BGS is taking some of these concepts by making combat more interactive and brutal (finishing moves, shield bashes, etc), and there will likely be other things that further improve interaction and immersion for the player gameplay wise. Are you personally a fan of this kind of player interaction, and would you like to see BGS focus more on this? Perhaps it's too late for Skyrim, but certainly it's definitely BGS could work on with Fallout IV and TES VI.

I don't care either way.

No one really has an interest in this topic? Wow, that's somewhat disappointing. I personally think this could be a revolutionary front for really taking TES/Fallout to the next level. BGS has been poking at this slowly with each and every new installment, so I personally hope to see them further push towards that direction.

I commented.

Thanks, although I was kind of hoping/expecting more reaction from the community on this topic. I think it's an idea people like to discuss in different ways, but I decided to just create a thread to specifically talk about.

Oblivion made a huge push with player interaction in terms of melee combat (power attack, spinning move, disarming opponents), traps, the grabbing mechanic, etc. Skyrim will continue to add to that with more interaction in combat, and hopefully various other features.

Just think about how hand-to-hand combat could be overhauled if people had the ability to grab enemies, kick them, use items in the environment, etc. Or just having the capacity to use different items in the games in different ways, for example using a torch as a weapon. BGS already has all the tools with how truly expansive and content-filled their games are, now they just need to make use of those tools through interaction!

BGS also has access to Havok Behavior, which is arguably one of the best animation tools in the industry. With that alone, we could truly see some amazing feats and actions done with this game, that would truly make the player feel like we are in full control in the world.

I do agree with this thread, and from what I have heard of and seen of the finishing moves, I do think Beth is heading into the right direction. Think about it. We have never really had too many open ended RPGs where your character grips his opponent's shoulder and drives his dagger between their ribs. Thats the sort of stuff my D&D characters do that I always wished I could do in the elder scrolls series. Then we also got the new out of combat activities such as farming, blacksmithing, cooking, wood chopping, ect. Things I also always wished I could do in oblivion when I decided "I want to play a farmer character." My only hopes with these said activities is that we will have animations to go with them rather than just a menu.

I don't expect to ever have a climbing and acrobatic system quite like Mirror's Edge (Even if that would be amazing in the hands of my more mobile swashbuckler or stealthy characters), but the stuff seen in Dark Messiah is awesome and would work very well in the elder scrolls world without taking away from the feel that I am still in Nirn. But even if we don't get the interaction with the environment, creatures, and characters as a lot of games that specifically focus on them, we still are getting a lot when you consider that skyrim is still an open ended RPG with an extensive lore, large scaled mountains and cities, and more than a few dungeons to delve into.

This is very true. I am just merely showing the possibilities that BGS could use to continue progressing the game forward. Ultimately, BGS's stance when it comes to their games is allowing players to do whatever they want, and go wherever they want. This level of player action would amplify that goal so much that I think many would want to see this. As you said, it wouldn't just have to be combat. Animations for farming and cooking. Actually moving items in your house around, without just using your cursor to click and drag an item. There is so much BGS could do (and I realize the extent of this request is quite an undertaking). This is just definitely one element I would like to see continuing to evolve and develop in each new BGS title personally.

Well, there was some of that in Oblivion. In the chargen dungeon, you could roll the logs down on the goblins. Granted, you couldn't pick up a glass from the table and throw it at someone, but that may have had more to do with Oblivion's Havok physics - anything that wasn't nailed now usually ended up on the floor.

But really, when I watched those trailers, I was like: egggh. Maybe. Or not.

~ Dani ~

the physical interaction is what i really want, climbable surfaces, pushable objects. liftable things, destructive environment....a zelda level of interaction with platforming and freerunning elements.

I think it would be cool if when you brush by a bush it moves with you rather than you walking through it.

That was an example of a trap, which I listed. Keep in mind those various videos were to just give everyone an idea of the possibilities. BGS could easily improve on all of those games and really push the interaction to a new level. Again, they have access to Havok Behavior, and honestly the only limit is BGS's creativity. Ultimately, they would have to see it as a necessary major mechanic to add fully into the game, but they seem to be slowly itching towards that direction with all the improvements they make (spells, shield bashing, finishing moves, etc).

Zelda is definitely a good example of having an interactive environment that the player can interact with. Although, BGS could easily go beyond that in terms of the possibilities of what they could do.

@johner210 - I also agree that simple little additions to that would really make people appreciate the game. Although, I'm sure implementing that would probably be a bit tedious. I would just be happy with BGS taking more major steps towards adding in more player interaction.

Any NPC with high sentience should be able to make exchange. I liked that in Oblivion, if I charmed a Dremora Lord, they would speak to me. . . I didn't like that I couldn't get any general conversation out of them beyond that one line, buuuuuut, twas better than nothing. Yet I would like to see more realistic conversations between hostile NPCs who do not notice me, and from hostile NPCs whom I, through arts or whatever other methods, shift to a docile, amiable, or servile disposition.

I agree. You make an interesting point, and that would add a lot to the relationship and dialogue system of the game.

Functionality and coherence over immersion ANY DAY. Skyrim is nothing like those games, even though, being a first person game, it comes from some of that tradition. However, if you start adding a lot of things, it will become impossible to create a game of the scale of say, Morrowind, that has just so many instances where all of the different "interactions" can take place so the game doesnt become repetitive and boring.

Those games are merely examples of games who have taken advantage of player interaction. Regardless of if they have anything in common with TES or not is irrelevant. How would this be impossible? BGS has been increasing player interaction with each and every new installment in TES. The whole point of these player interactions is they would prevent the game from becoming repetitive and boring. They would allow for endless possibilities of fighting opponents (whether it's with traditional weapons, setting up a trap, throwing something, burning the grass with magic, etc). I do appreciate your opinion, however I do not understand your logic in being opposed to the idea.