Exactly this, they need to be given credit that they actually know what they're doing...it's easy to sit in judgement when you don't know anything of what's going on.

Uh... this is definitely my first topic regarding streamlining. Actually, I'm pretty sure this is my first topic in the Skyrim section in several months. At least try to add something to the discussion.

You have X amount of time and Y amount or resources to spend on "weapons" without using more than Z amount of disk space. Do you spend more time developing and polishing swords/bows/staffs/axes/hammers creating more unique kinds of each with better balanced and interesting perks and more customization options with crafting skills or do you make less variation of each type and increase the time it takes to polish/QA but also add in Spears/XBows/Thrown?

I can well imagine adding an entirely new class of weapons is not an insignificant task considering everything that needs to be designed, tested, bug fixed, QA'ed, creating animations, meshes, textures, sounds, etc, etc. Its not as simple as just checking the 'spears' box in the CK and viola spears magically appear in the game.



I don't recall redundancy ever being used as a reason why cuirass/greaves were merged.



It's my understanding the Birth signs were changed into those stone things? Can't say I agree with this one in particular but they are still somewhat in the game. Birth signs never had a great impact on game play anyway aside from adding flavor (which can be a good thing unto itself).



Unless you are role playing "Runs really fast guy" or "Jumps really high guy" I can't see how this 'removes' how you play. If in fact that is the entire basis of your play style I can't see how any video game ever is going to appease you, that is an exceedingly narrow character definition.

Why should "runs really fast guy" be considered less viable than "shoots lighting bolts and fireballs guy" or "inhumanly strong guy" or "stealthy ambush guy". :confused: So many people don't seem to get this - to a lot of people, speed is just as important as strength is to someone who enjoys roleplaying a warrior; or magic is to someone who enjoys roleplaying a mage; or stealth is to someone who enjoys roleplaying a thief or an assassin.

Here's the type of character I typically play in TES games:

A ranger/scout type character who is faster, more agile and more acrobatic than other characters. They are proficient with a bow and short blades, and avoid heavy weaponry and magic entirely. They also don't rely too heavily on stealth, to separate them from the standard thief type.

Simply getting a slight boost to speed / stamina depending on what my character is wearing isn't going to be enough for me. That's no different than a warrior character having the same strength as anyone else... and having damage dealt determined entirely by the weapon they're using.

I whole heartedly agree. A good post with well made anologies. Doubt it will make a difference, but I'd salute you and thank you if it did. :foodndrink:

Exactly. At high levels of Acrobatics in Oblivion, it was possible to use the roll to dodge attacks, and you could pull of some cool [censored] like jumping over an enemy and attacking them midair. If acrobatics has been removed, this will no longer be possible.

unless there are perks for jumping high, dodging, etc., as there are perks that affect the sprinting speed and stamina drain

I love how people take this threads as something to be opposed and then make counter threads about having Positive thoughts....

so effectively its believe people gripe just to gripe without any reason so lets make positive threads just to make positive threads :teehee: not that there can be any discussion because everyone agrees its Good :bonk:

I swear

I imagine that since the game is essentially finished at this point, neither positive nor negative threads are going to have much impact on what devs do between now and when the game goes gold.

Viable at what? Viable to be role played? Being a viable character design within the scope of the game? Viable meaning being capable of completing quests? Viable meaning efficient in combat?

It sounds to me like your definition of viable is probably going to be a lot different than Beth's definition of viable. Skills, perks, attributes, whatever systems they put in place in the game are their to serve a purpose, to facilitate meeting a goal. For whatever reason Athletics/Acrobatics either didn't meet that goal or were possibly detrimental to other goals (like making the world feel larger/place importance on vertical design of the landscape, etc.).

Does that mean you loose out on role playing "runs really fast guy" yep, sure does. I'd still say that having a character concept that narrowly defined isn't something that can be integral enough to the experience of player base at large to justify possibly weakening other aspects of the game or risking the success of whatever goal it is Beth is trying to achieve.

I wouldn't be surprised at all the same folks complaining about the loss of athl/acro would also be the first ones to come here and complain about how quickly they can run across the map with 100 athletics or jump up any of the mountains with 100 acrobatics and how the world is too small compared to MW!!!! :banghead:

I just want the game, Im tired of people bishing about "complainers" and thinking there needs to be a massive influx of "positive" threads to out weigh the "negetive" I'm tired of the dumb assed divides created for no freaking reason when one constant exists on the forum and that isnt even recognized, We're all here for TES

:tes: and you can thank me for yelling for this Emote, Gizmo for making it and Gstaff for being at the right place at the right time.

I agree with Omega. there doesn't need to be positive threads to out-number the negative ones. But the opposite is true too.

I'll say what I already said in a good number of threads

1 - When something you don't like has just been ennounced in the last month or so, and you try to think of alternatives and ways to makes it better, That's constructive criticism. This kind of attitude is what makes the world go forwards, and it's perfect that way

2 - When you open the 15000th thread, about the same thing that was announced back in February, bringing nothing new to the table, and when you throw blames at anyone (casuals, console players, 99% of the population that suddenly is brain-dead), that is COMPLAINING. Complaining not only gets nothing solved, it gives an impression that everything is doomed and that the whole world is gonna end if things continue that way.

There are two ways to deal with something you don't like: you do something about it or you deal with it. Option number 1 IS doing something about it. Option number 2 shouldn't even exist.

There, hope it helped

I personally believe a majority of the cutoffs and simplifications have to do with getting everything to work on the console rather than redundancy. I mean come on, consoles are at least 7 years out dated by now so there's no surprise the game is going to suffer major simplifications. They said they combined armor pieces so they could have more NPC's on the screen at once... Obviously this would never be any such problem for PC. What else have they or will they *combine* or *simplify* in order for the game to run smoothly. I am almost certain were going to get the same stale armor/weapon library that Oblivion suffered. Think all of all the NPC's with the same full armor suits. I could almost swear I was fighting medieval Imperial Storm Troopers. This along with horrible itemization Oblivion had.

Yes sir. Indeed it's sad that people are so divided. I think they're less divided on their opinion of the new game so much as they are divided about the way people are complaining.

Most Skyrim supporters simply want people to wait until the game comes out to start ragging on it. At least then we will have solid examples for why we like or dislike certain aspects of the game.
Without proof that can be experienced and fortified or refuted, complaints will always garner derision from non-complainers because it's complaining about empty air. There's nothing out there yet to prove the complaint.

It will get better once the game comes out I'm sure. :tongue:

The point is the end of a pencil. :thumbsup:

I trust the Dev's more than some guy who doesn't know anything about programming a game.

Quite true, not to mention that when people complain about the options that have been "removed" from Skyrim, they always seem to forget ones that were added or returned from previous games. Things like smithing, the echanting skill, romance, the ability to participate in the economies of communities, things like that. Now, maybe you don't necessarily feel that these things make up for what has been removed, maybe you don't even care about them of them, but regardless, when you want to argue about "simplifying" the series, completely disregarding the things that have been added and only acknowledging what has beem removed doesn't really help to make an objective discussion.

Another thing that people often fail to consider in this sort of discussion is that no developer, Bethesda or otherwise, can ever hope to include every option or feature someone could possibly want to see in the game. Developers have limited amounts of resources available to them, and with these finite resources, they need to believe what they believe will be the most successful game possible. For this, they need to have priorties, they can't just add everything they think of that might be a good idea, they need to consider whether the payoff of adding it will really be worth the effort, or indeed whether it fits the game they're making at all. And sometimes, they need to drop some features they'd like to add so they can have enough time and money to work on things hat will ultimately have a more important impact on the game. It may be rather extreme to say that mysticism was pointless, but I'd certainly say its impact on the game was smaller than the other skills that have been confirmed to make the cut, seeing as the spells that were previously from mysticism made their way into other schools. After all, the magic skill we get to replace mysticism (I'm thinking of it in those terms anyway seeing as it's the only magic skill in Skyrim that wasn't in Oblivion.) is enchanting, and what that does isn't something you could easily justify putting under a different skill. While options are generally desirable in RPGs, there's no way a computer RPG can ever truly offer total freedom, and having too many options can actually be detrimental as the more options there are, the harder it is to ensure that each one has the proper concequences, and an RPG isn't supposed to just have options, it's also usually expected that the options will have a noticable impact on the game. Another vital part to ensureing that your options matter is choosing the ones that will make the most difference in the end, so sometimes you still have to be willing to sacrifice some features you want to do for ones that you'd consider more important.

Now make no mistake, I'm not saying I'm happy with every single decision Bethesda has made with Skyrim, but then again, I could find things to complain about in every game I've played before if I wanted to, I'm sure, the Elder Scrolls or otherwise. I'm just saying that sometimes, it helps to think about the possible reasons for the choices made by the developers before criticizing them, and that sometimes what initially looks like a detrimental move can actually have benefits, though you may not see them initially. Perhaps after thinking of these things, you might be happier with those things you initially complained about, or at least may find them more understandable. And if you still don't like the choices, then you can complain all you like, at least then, your complaints seem more objective if you don't ignore factors that are contrary to the point you're trying to make.

I disagree.

On topic, I believe beth is just tweaking it so its not the exact same game from years prior in a different setting

So if they decided to make every race furry bunnies with party hats we're still supposed to support them? and since when is say "HEY this doesnt look right" not supportive?

Hahahaha And i disagree thingss are being improved not stream lined CANT YOU PEOPLE THINK OF THE POSTIVE. Radient Story,Cool looking armour, 150 unique dungeoens, More realstic AI, The return of Giants and Giant SPiders, Dragons And a huge amount more, Oh exploration like Morrowinds.

ill agree this thread is a bit more on the whiny complaining side when trying to talk about all the recent simplified changes or removals... but all the negative threads about this topic you see nonstop lately kind of shows a lot of people are unhappy. ;/

So even though Todd and company says things are being streamlined......you still disagree. and yes all of those are nice, it doesnt mean they answer for things gone.


I have a sixy Ferrari, engine roars like a neather beast but their are no seats, the steering wheel is gone and the gas tank is missng, oh thats all fine and well though it has GPS, a DVD player and new car smell.

Well they are adding Rabbits to Skyrim..........

Well I agree you got me there....But Streamlining could not be a bad thing we need to welcome more novice players into the Elder scroll community

agreed... my worry is were entering Action Adventure territory more and more lately and less Action RPG.