Optional is the big word here. Since Fallout had a "hardcoe mode" that seems to have satisfied a lot of people, I don't see why it shouldn't be included in Skyrim, and I might be a little upset if it didn't.

However, because they know it's optional, they won't optimize it. So while I have to eat, I also have to go to the trouble of opening my inventory and equipping the food, which comes in ridiculous increments like entire loaves and bread, and single pieces of meat from a 100lb deer. And this might have to be done 3 times a day because, well people just assume we can copy and paste our cultural idea of mealtimes into the framework of a game set in a fantasy world.

And it's not purely "aesthetic." The option you present (pretending a need for it) is aesthetic, and pointless. We want eating because it introduces a need, like the need to have a weapon to hurt enemies or the need to wear armor to deflect blows. And the type of character you are determines how you acquire food, what kind of food you eat, and defines you as a person in a living world. If you get lost in the woods, one character will shoot a deer, another will know what plants are good to eat, and another will have to creep slowly back to civilization, knowing that if he get's into a fight he may not survive in his weakened state.

Added realism is good, insofar as it doesn't impede on gameplay.

I think Bethesda's big hurdle is that people expect far too much from their games than they, or anyone, can reasonably deliver. People should remember that this is a fantasy RPG. There are a thousand ideas that are great, and there are even more ideas that will appear to certain subsets of players. I know I'm guilty of speaking in favor of features that I would enjoy to no end, but for many players would be irrelevant to their gameplay, or even take away from their experience.

I would absolutely love for a game company to make a game specifically for me with all the features I want in a huge world with a lot of detail and such. But I'm just one person and that's an unrealistic expectation.

What he/she said ^ *golf clap*

Eh so the entire need to eat/drink/sleep was optional outside of hardcoe Mode in FNV? I wouldn't know of that myself, I never played it. But from the way that some of the people are talking about in this thread it made it sound like it wasn't optional even in Normal Mode.

Bethesda isn't exactly new to the gaming business and (generally) they do a good job of making videogames. So you can rest assure they made note of what worked and what didn't and will be making adjustments for hardcoe Mode (if it makes a return in Skyrim).

As pointless as adding the need to eat/drink/sleep for a minority of gamers who want 'added realism' when most players don't even notice it's not there.

I would point out that not all people play melee orientated characters, but I suppose Magic could be both sword and shield (same with stealth).

Never gotten lost in real life (even in forested areas, guess those merit badges do come in handy) but than again I never understood the 'need' to hunt in a society where food is easily available. 'Are you really that bored?' I think to myself, whenever I see a hunting magazine.

Hmmm...
So you've conducted a poll, have you?

That's just an assumption you imagine serves your point. Where did you get that? And please do not try to draw definitive conclusions from the traffic in the board or any poll regarding the subject. They both bear no real statistical value for you or me or anyone to draw as firm conclusions as yours proclaim to be.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions.
Not to their facts.

I want it to be as realistic as possible in terms of gameplay (physics, combat, interaction, hardcoe mode) , but with a really unique world.

I tend to like realism, immersion and whatnot. I mostly like it if it makes the game more dynamic, Half Life 2 tend to be the best about this.

Now there's one big rule about this, which overrules everything. Gameplay before realism. Simply put, if the realism is just too annoying, it makes the game less fun to play, then it's just not worth it. One example I can think of was a mod for Morrowind that changed the assassins attacking you from the Tribunal expansion. It had a optional part where the assassins could simply kill you in your sleep. But why? You have no manner to defend against that, you just die, and you have to reaload. That could be realistic but it's also not fun at all. Generally, most of the 100% instakill ideas tend to be just as bad too...
As for food/thirst/sleep. I tend to use mods and the hardcoe mode in NV myself, but it mostly depends how it was implemented. Actually I would never want a thirst along with hunger, unless the game is more about survival, and it plays in a desert or something, like Fallout. Even in unmodded Oblivion I tend to just eat food to emulate eating...

For aesthetic value, I tend to care even less. Like, if there's a ridiculously flashy, unpractical, but otherwise cool looking armor, I tend to go along with it. Same with moves and animation. People jumping up high in the sky and attacking people from above tend to be cool so I tend to roll with it.

I'm sorry but that's just a really bad example. Or a good example of a non-realistic sleep emulation. It lacks the basic startle reaction that would enable your character to fight back and saveoff his skin.

Considering that the population of the board actually represents a small portion of the gaming community that would be a hard thing to get accurate numbers on, don't you think?




Wrong, everyone is entitled to an informed opinion. Just the opinion itself is flawed and breeds more stupidity in a world already chalk-full of stupid opinions.

Facts are necessary to make an informed decision, don't you think?

I really enjoyed the realism of New Vegas, but I'm not sure how I feel about it in an Elder Scrolls game. When I think of the Post-Apocalyptic genre, the first thing that comes to mind is survival. When I think of games like TES, and D&D, and the likes, survival isn't exactly the first thing I think about. But, on the other hand, it's not the last thing I think about either. So, basically I'm speaking like a politician not choosing a side in this matter. But if the decision was on me, gun to my head, I would have to choose implementing the hardcoe mode, just because it would be good to at least try. If I don't like it I should have an option to not play it like in New Vegas, so it wouldn't be a major loss. The end.

Most polls only represent a small fraction of the population, with the results being extrapolated to gain a general idea of average response. The biggest problem with conducting a poll here is that the people who are responding to it are selecting themselves, either indirectly by coming to this forum, or directly by clicking on the thread with the poll. So you do have a chance for bias, but I generally don't think it's huge. For one example, generally the people who are on the forums are here because they really like the game, or really dislike some of the features, or both. So you still get a fairly average response. Also, there are plenty of people who do feel strongly, but don't know of or have never been to the forum. Then, there are those who feel strongly, and know of the forums, but no longer choose to come to them.

I think there was a poll relating to the whole sleep/eat/drink necessity and weather it should be in Skyrim (back before there even was a Skrim section of the forums) but if I recall a majority of respondents were against it. I'm against it, too. But if it's an optional mechanic that you actually have to intentionally activate than I'm all for it. I don't need to use it, and I won't likely to ever do so, but if someone else wants it they can have it.

Without a doubt, this is the single best thing I've read in the last month. :thumbsup:

Me personally ide say im prolly like you i don't care much for realism but it is needed to an extent... that said this game will prolly have a good amount. realism is needed for some parts but way to much in the game will become to tedious. i play games to get my mind off things and to escape reality. too much realism would ruin a game to little realism would ruin the immersion factor. so yes realism is defiantly needed to make the game just believable enough. i honestly have no respect for some one wanting a game to be more like real life then it already is... stuff like that just ruins the game

That's why, unlike you, you won't see me presenting unsupported claims on the matter.



I would then suggest you check out the meaning of the verb Entitle (passive form).



You mean the very thing you failed to present? Absolutely.

If a game aims to be realistic and it's not, fail. If it aims to be surrealistic and is realistic, fail. Skyrim has all fantasy things included but still trying to be realistic. Realism as in NPCs actually living in the world instead of standing still 24/7. Realism when it comes to day and night cycle, these things are all realistic so anyone who says they do not want realism, doesn't want a whole lot of things. Like gravity. There needs to be a line of course when it comes to really real things like food etc, a realism mode could trigger this on / off for those who want it and for those who do not want it. Magic is not a realistic thing but it fits Skyrim and all fantasy games and should be there, even if they aim to be realistic.

One could go on all day about realism, but one thing I particularly want to say is that Skyrim has more realistic things than surrealistic things. OB had that too, the only things "unrealistic" in OB were magic, creatures, some weapons, encumbrance, lack of food/drink/sleep need, jumping and the actual infinite fighting without getting tired. TES is more realistic than not and I think it should continue to be it.

I think a little bit of FOOD realist will be good...
like... if you don't eat you'll have less fatigue and health, and if you spend 1 week or a little more without eating, your health will decrese...
For eg: you have 200 health points, if you don't eat for a day, the health will decrease to 180 but temporarly, if you don't eat for a week the health willl decrese permanently to 180...
got it?
(Obs. Im sorry about my vocabulary. English is not my main language)

Added a poll to the topic. If some are unhappy with the poll options please let me know and I will change.

I find that realism is good at first, entertaining and all that, but it gets old really quick. In Far Cry 2 I thought it was cool how you had to take the time to duck down and actually inject yourself with whatever that healing stuff was supposed to be, until too many fire fights were it just got tedious. Same with Fallout New Vegas-hardcoe mode was totally cool, until eating and sleeping just became a tedious chore that actually took me out of the game. I dunno, to each their own, but personally I find that realism is just a hassle that doesn't really add anything to the game (including difficulty-notice how before I said "tedious", not "tough").

Said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again.

In any story telling media, believability is far more important than realism.

For example, no one would say that Star Trek is realistic, but it's been successful because it's believable. Same goes for games.

Nice point

And how does that apply to the whole Food/Sleep deprivation Debate?

You see, no one seems to be requesting more realism/plausability in Magic. What most appear to ask is enhanced realism in rather mundane actions such as the need to rest and eat and drink. Thus,those who keep waging a battle agaisnt increased realism based on the false assumption that it would be an oxymoron to have a more realistic Fantasy rpg are simply missing the point.

Some people find it tedious having to deal with alledgedly cumbersome tasks such as eating and sleeping during gameplay. Others, myself included, would prefer such artificality to be replaced by a system that would, one way or the other, accomodate such needs.

Tell me,
Where do you stand?

I prefer believability. Too much realism can make the game into more of a chore or the SIMs than anything. It's one thing to have eat/drink options being optional, it's another to make it mandatory when it's not that type of game and throw in other stuff, like sleeping, pooping, cleaning, bathing, etc. It's very easy for survival "realism" to become "chore", especially in a game that is not about survival.

The main issue of ANYKIND of rpg/fps/rts and whatnot is SURVIVAL.
Damn even lemmings, tetris, space invader, river raid, pong and whatever is survival.
All is about survival.

The main point to a RPG and TES is SURVIVAL, Survive to save the world, to normal being and abnormal beings.
Its survive agaisnt odd you wouldn t like to be put agaisnt IRL, or in sttings that don t exist IRL.
So survival ain t in the question.

The question is:

A lot of people want I WIN BUTTONS,
And a lot of people DON T WANT I WIN BUTTONS.
Thats the main polarization in the realism is good vs realism is bad.
It s about people not wanting challenge when the guts of the game is a challenge, i find it extremely paradoxal althought understandable up to one point.

So options is the way to avoid conflict.
Bethesda is lacking behind on that department.
If they ofered options, a lot of threads wouldn t exist and more interesting matter could be brought forth (or not).
I want as realistic as it can be without entering in sordid details like going to the bathroon, nor micro management, open the bag, unpack food, eat, pack food, close bag.

The mere warning that i am hungre as we find in STALKER and the fack that i open the bag and gooble some food and water or bind keys to shortcut those is enought. It will mean i would have to plan a little bit before going wild weasel somewhere, but it seems even this planning is too much for some people. So there s only one simple option, let the player choose.
Damn it its just doing an interface to the .INI of the game that will put 0 or 1 on the .TXT file. It aint that hard.
And usually if its implemented, it can be controled by turning on or of, since features like eating sleeping are a relatively simple comand tied to the ingame clock, and an excel table relating what is considered edible and drinkable, and would brink awesome return in terms of player satisfaction/per WH spent.

going to the toilet would be like playing theme park again!!