Removing attributes is a mistake.

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 8:03 am

Removing Attributes is not a mistake. In fact it's the best decision that Beth has made yet. Attributes got in the way of things in Oblivion and now that they are gone we can focus more on skills then some spreadsheet system that doesn't work or leads to endless hours of grinding just to get +5 in a attribute using a skill that my character will never use. Do you really expect a Battle Mage to use Hand To Hand yet under Oblivions system I had to do it in order to get a +5. I'm glad that we no longer have to worry about that.

I wouldn't worry about Attributes being gone the perks should replace them with no problems and Attributes can easily be merged with the skills and Health, Magicka, Stamina with no problems.
User avatar
Louise
 
Posts: 3407
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:06 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 8:24 am

I expect most warrior will actualy want BOTH one handed and two handed skiills because much like in fallout most of the perks will effect BOTH.

Also a warrior going 1 handed then switching to 2 handers will have block skill and more hps and stamina then the mage will...

Also said warrior will likely be better able to repair thier weapon as the mage likely wont have smithing but the warrior prolly will..

AND we still dont know all the combat skills so we dont know what skills the warrior will have that makes using a 2 handed weapon alot safer/more effective.. and all the perks in those skills that do so....



As for the question on how many perks will be needed to replace atributes... that depends on how much you feel you realy needed... I doubt it will be all that many for most characters unless your very obssessed about it.
User avatar
Ria dell
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:03 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 8:35 am

Todd Howard in the http://www.g4tv.com/videos/52434/elder-scrolls-5-skyrim-gameplay-preview/:

"... Everything those attributes did are still in the game, they're just in other places ..."


I hope so. I trust Bethesda, and I know they won't just remove something as important as atributtes without implementing them in other way, It's just... that I agree with Faulgor on what he has said: a warrior that has used a claymore should be more efficient with a one handed axe than a mage that have never wielded a weapon, because he is more muscular. Whatever system they have should reflect something like this. And, although I like perks, let's face it: they are not the panacea.
User avatar
lauraa
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:20 pm

Post » Mon May 02, 2011 9:40 pm

I hope so. I trust Bethesda, and I know they won't just remove something as important as atributtes without implementing them in other way, It's just... that I agree with Faulgor on what he has said: a warrior that has used a claymore should be more efficient with a one handed axe than a mage that have never wielded a weapon, because he is more muscular. Whatever system they have shouldd reflect something like this. And, although I like perks, let's face it: they are not the panacea.


I disagree even if the Warrior is more muscular if he has no skill in the sword he won't hit his target. It doesn't matter how strong the warrior is if his weapon skill is low then he won't hit it's as simple as that.
User avatar
Sophie Louise Edge
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 7:09 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 6:23 am

Dice in programming terms, maybe. I mean, perks, skills, powers, and -- indirectly -- spell and magic item effects are all representations of character abilities.
I can see that.

Odd thing though.. It would appear [to me] that the series is patiently stepping along it's path to full blown simulator, and diligently cutting out all aspects of "game" from the product.

I look at it and can't help but assume that eventually it will just become a 'me' simulator of my life in another world; with a 'Sword', and a 'Spell', and a 'Heal' button. No skills... just minigames like lock pick... if you can pick it, it opens.
(Is this what people want!?)

I disagree even if the Warrior is more muscular if he has no skill in the sword he won't hit his target. It doesn't matter how strong the warrior is if his weapon skill is low then he won't hit it's as simple as that.

That's how it should be...
User avatar
LuCY sCoTT
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 8:29 am

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 7:07 am

I disagree even if the Warrior is more muscular if he has no skill in the sword he won't hit his target. It doesn't matter how strong the warrior is if his weapon skill is low then he won't hit it's as simple as that.


Of course, it will be more difficult for fim to hit his target than if the warrior mastered one-handed axe. But, however, if he hits, he should make more damage than a mage that has not used an axe in his entire life. It's a matter of strength.
User avatar
Kara Payne
 
Posts: 3415
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:47 am

Post » Mon May 02, 2011 9:17 pm

It probably boils down to the same thing, but for clarity, it might be better to phrase that argument as "a warrior character with high strength...", given that attributes are still more relevant than classes ever were to TES.

Their removal does destroy the comparison, though, as far as the ruleset's concerned - a skinny Altmer spellcaster can't be considered more or less physically powerful than a huge Nord axeman, save in whatever fixed (race-based) way encumbrance might be calculated.
User avatar
Rudy Paint fingers
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:52 am

Post » Mon May 02, 2011 11:15 pm

Anyone else worried about the modding implications of this? Having written and looked at many scripts written for Oblivion and FO3, I can safely say that they played a huge part in many popular/useful mods' essential scripts. How else are we supposed to know how "intelligent", "strong", or "agile" the player is?
User avatar
Carlitos Avila
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:05 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 10:26 am

Personally i feel that the attribute removal fits this game. They are trying to push the genre forward with a system that allows for easy and true customization. the improved perk system looks tasty :D
User avatar
Star Dunkels Macmillan
 
Posts: 3421
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:00 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 3:14 am

It's simple. If your weapon skill is 100 that means you've been swinging a weapon around for a long time and thus you are stronger. If your magic skill is 100 that means you've studied the arcane longer and thus you are smarter.
User avatar
Nomee
 
Posts: 3382
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:18 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 8:22 am

Of course, it will be more difficult for fim to hit his target than if the warrior mastered one-handed axe. But, however, if he hits, he should make more damage than a mage that has not used an axe in his entire life. It's a matter of strength.


Yeah but he has to hit the enemy who is probably more skilled then he is. The enemy will win before the sword hits him plus Perks can easily replace strength.
User avatar
Jessica White
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 5:03 am

Post » Mon May 02, 2011 10:14 pm

It probably boils down to the same thing, but for clarity, it might be better to phrase that argument as "a warrior character with high strength...", given that attributes are still more relevant than classes ever were to TES.

Their removal does destroy the comparison, though, as far as the ruleset's concerned - a skinny Altmer spellcaster can't be considered more or less physically powerful than a huge Nord axeman, save in whatever fixed (race-based) way encumbrance might be calculated.


In real world, if a person practises karate, will hit stronger with a sword than a person that have never practised karate or used a sword. Why should it be different in a video-game?

Yeah but he has to hit the enemy who is probably more skilled then he is. The enemy will win before the sword hits him plus Perks can easily replace strength.


Mmmm... I don't find that very convincing. If the character who masters X weapon atacks with Y weapon, he will make more damage because his training with X have made him stronger. A character that masters nor X neither Y, but is very good at Magic, won't make the same physical damage with Y than the character that masters X...

What a mess I have written...
User avatar
Liv Brown
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:44 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 3:34 am

Of course, it will be more difficult for fim to hit his target than if the warrior mastered one-handed axe. But, however, if he hits, he should make more damage than a mage that has not used an axe in his entire life. It's a matter of strength.

Not necessarily... If he manages to hit at all... strength is no guarantee of a good hit ~just a more damaging good hit; He might hit only just barely and do a nasty 1" nick.
He might find that he can only ever just barely hit a fast opponent.

(Is there an appreciable difference between a powerlifter's nick from a sword, and a swashbuckler's nick from a foil?)
User avatar
Glu Glu
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 5:39 am

Post » Mon May 02, 2011 8:45 pm

hes right having changes that we can actually notice is simplifying, now instead of raising 40 levels of endurance we can just chose to level up health
also simplification is always bad, that is why I am typing this in bianary
am I the only person that hardly noticed the effect of attributes?
User avatar
Your Mum
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:23 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 8:31 am

like i said earlier...rather than removal, i believe it's more like attributes are hidden from the player's direct manipulation.

to take the 1hander, 2hander weapons as an example, maybe upgrading the skill in one of them upgrades the "hidden" strength stat which would govern over general weapon damage, so a fully upgraded one handed warrior would do more damage with a 2handed weapon than a mage with a 2handed weapon.
User avatar
Charlotte Lloyd-Jones
 
Posts: 3345
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:53 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 11:17 am

like i said earlier...rather than removal, i believe it's more like attributes are hidden from the player's direct manipulation.

to take the 1hander, 2hander weapons as an example, maybe upgrading the skill in one of them upgrades the "hidden" strength stat which would govern over general weapon damage, so a fully upgraded one handed warrior would do more damage with a 2handed weapon than a mage with a 2handed weapon.

I understand what you are saying, but why make them hidden? That serves no purpose at all.
User avatar
Jessica White
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 5:03 am

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 2:25 am

like i said earlier...rather than removal, i believe it's more like attributes are hidden from the player's direct manipulation.

to take the 1hander, 2hander weapons as an example, maybe upgrading the skill in one of them upgrades the "hidden" strength stat which would govern over general weapon damage, so a fully upgraded one handed warrior would do more damage with a 2handed weapon than a mage with a 2handed weapon.


That's probably how it should be in theory. The perks will give the extra bonuses, so somebody who focuses more on One Handed weapon will be stronger with the sword then say a Mage who doesn't focus on One Weapon and uses a sword.
User avatar
Zoe Ratcliffe
 
Posts: 3370
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:45 am

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 4:20 am

I can see that.

Odd thing though.. It would appear [to me] that the series is patiently stepping along it's path to full blown simulator, and diligently cutting out all aspects of "game" from the product.

I look at it and can't help but assume that eventually it will just become a 'me' simulator of my life in another world; with a 'Sword', and a 'Spell', and a 'Heal' button. No skills... just minigames like lock pick... if you can pick it, it opens.
(Is this what people want!?)

I'm inclined to agree, though in all other ways I have a hugely positive impression of Skyrim. I hope no one forgets that there are a few very different, but equally valid ways to roleplay a single player game: the roleplayer placing himself into the world, and the roleplayer placing a character distinct from himself into the world. I always play in the latter style (the simulator thing doesn't appeal to me at all).


In real world, if a person practises karate, will hit stronger with a sword than a person that have never practised karate or used a sword. Why should it be different in a video-game?

No, I agree. Maybe I didn't phrase that last post well...
User avatar
Tracey Duncan
 
Posts: 3299
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:32 am

Post » Mon May 02, 2011 9:44 pm

I'm inclined to agree, though in all other ways I have a hugely positive impression of Skyrim. I hope no one forgets that there are a few very different, but equally valid ways to roleplay a single player game: the roleplayer placing himself into the world, and the roleplayer placing a character distinct from himself into the world. I always play in the latter style (the simulator thing doesn't appeal to me at all).



No, I agree. Maybe I didn't phrase that last post well...


Ouch, mea culpa.
User avatar
Glu Glu
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 5:39 am

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 5:03 am

We don't really need attributes, they always felt a bit pointless and even annoying in OB and MW, partly due to the horrible level system. Now, instead of having to worry about not getting full +5, +5 and +5, we can finally just play the game! No artifical attributes there to measure how much you make progress, the skills and perks will define that. The only thing that worries me is that we'll level up too fast.. That however has nothing to do with attributes.
User avatar
Amiee Kent
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 7:00 am

We don't really need attributes, they always felt a bit pointless ...
:) To me they always felt like points.
User avatar
..xX Vin Xx..
 
Posts: 3531
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 6:33 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 9:18 am

I understand what you are saying, but why make them hidden? That serves no purpose at all.


the purpose, at least in the way i see it, would be to maintain the illusion of progression without outright stating to the player what's happening. like after a few hours of fighting enemies or chopping wood or lifting heavy objects you notice that your character is getting physically stronger, or that by reading books, doing alchemy or enchanting items your character starts to have his/her spells becoming stronger or something to that effect.
User avatar
Nikki Morse
 
Posts: 3494
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:08 pm

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 9:21 am

I understand what you are saying, but why make them hidden? That serves no purpose at all.



probably to prevent the weirdest, most un-matural thing ever (character-buils wise): how in the hell does a swordmaster, who spent all his life training in the ways of the sword and the armor, happen to suddenly have the possibility to become more intelligent? he never did anything to earn it!

If anything, I say we shouldn't have control over them anyways. it never made sense
User avatar
Peter P Canning
 
Posts: 3531
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 2:44 am

Post » Mon May 02, 2011 8:13 pm

Anyone else worried about the modding implications of this? Having written and looked at many scripts written for Oblivion and FO3, I can safely say that they played a huge part in many popular/useful mods' essential scripts. How else are we supposed to know how "intelligent", "strong", or "agile" the player is?

You can probably check a combination of the character's health/magicka/stamina and the selected perks, instead.

In actuality, I think this could allow for more diversity. As an example... In Oblivion, you'd check "intelligence". In Skyrim, you can check Magicka for a "base intelligence", then look to see what perks the player has... perhaps there's one about "lore", which helps the character know more about places and creatures. Or perhaps there's one for "arcane" which lets the player handle more forms of magic. So now instead of having just "Intelligent" characters, you can differentiate between "History & Lore Intelligence", and "Arcane Intelligence". There's many other possibilities here, too.
User avatar
Scott
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 2:59 am

Post » Tue May 03, 2011 12:39 am

probably to prevent the weiidest, most un-matural thing ever (character-buils wise): how in the hell does a swordmaster, who spent all his life training in the ways of the sword and the armor, happen to suddenly have the possibility to become more intelligent? he never did anything to earn it!

If anything, I say we shouldn't have control over them anyways. it never made sense

I agree direct control over our attributes was quite stupid, but with hidden I meant not being able to see them, not being unable to control them
User avatar
Andrea Pratt
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 4:49 am

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim