[...] with the possible exception of restictionists who hate the notion of anyone being able to create anything approaching an uberbuild and therefore want it voided as an option, which by definition is a reduction of player options NOT an expansion of them) by removing certain attributes. What they ARE doing is going further to limit the options available to a player/playercharacter.

They are, it seems, taking certain abilities and achievement related enhancements that, in previous games, came as a natural and automatic part of progression in certain skills/abilities, and repackaging them into perks of limited availability.

But the notion that such reductions in options "allow" for greater diversity is a lie. They actually allow for less potential diversity, by forcing diversity in a smaller number of certain builds. Players were nevere NOT allowed to be extremely diverse, they were never not allowed to make pure characters, very limited in certain areas and very gifted in others (and many if not most players had main characters who were exactly as I have just described). However, players did have the option of creating characters who were some what uber. It was an option that some players certainly chose. The Devs seem to be trying to take away such options, and dressing it up as somehow being an increase in options, when in fact it is just the opposite. I could easily be wrong, but I have a strong hypothesis, and there are good indicators to support it that the benefits of Acrobatics, Atheletics and the like will still be in the game. . but quarantined under "Perks". You can be really fast, but you won't be able to gain that extra damage in one handed weapons. You can jump high, but you have to give up that perk point that you wanted to use for enhancing your destruction spells, etc. etc. [/b]

Streamlining is another word for dumping down , we all know it and it made several other sequels to fall under expectations. Removing key elements of RPG makes the product more attractive to shooter's crowd so if you like shooters you may like the new approach but if you are an RPGer then the game is probably not for you .
I don't consider shooter's crowd inferior or stupid but their influence is pushing us RPG gamers into indys , sure it svcks to be a minority but i think it is fair for developers looking after profit. What isn't fair is the hypocrisy of insisting that your game is something that it isn't.
To sum this up all those removals will make the game better to casual or different genre loving gamers but for us RPGers the only option left is look elsewhere.

um strenght only had a small effect on mele damage it was your weapon skill that contributed the most to that and weapon skills are still in so no your mage still wont be very good at it if its his first time useing that mele weapon in the middle of the game.

The beauty of no attributes is that power is represented by three areas:

1. HP/MP/STA
2. Gear
3. Spells known/Perks/Abilities/Dragon Shouts/Skill Level

This means that the stronger we are the more HP/MP/STA which will be associated primarily with our level.

The gear we wear will provide us with benefits depending on its quality and/or enchantments.

The knowledge and abilities our characters possess enable them to function more effectively in and out of combat.

Essentially, power is not just a number. And by taking a more literal approach to a measure of ability and power Bethesda is immersing us in a higher level of realistic representation than with a numerical rating system.

This also means that the dominant characteristic of a character's efficiency in battle will not be any of the aforementioned three aspects but us (the player). Our own cunning, wit, intelligence and determination to survive and so forth will be the deciding factor in how powerful/potent our character turns out to be.

I can appreciate the fact that your argument is fleshed out. However, I still think that Bethesda has found a way to keep these features, but streamline them somehow. Whether I'm wrong will have to remain to be seen until the game actually comes out. Because of this, I choose not to debate about how or why until everyone actually has the final build of the game in their hands to play and experience first hand.

My question to you is what is wrong with relegating things like that to perks? For example, why not have to sacrifice some of your strength for your jumping and speed abilities? IRL, there's always a sacrifice in strength for greater agility, and vice versa. And even if they're not relegated to a perk tree, and you're still allowed to level them with the new leveling system, that's still fairly realistic. Say you're an exceptionally strong person, but you want to build up your speed, so you work on that. Your skill with speed is much lower than strenght, but becoming faster still benefits you, just at a slower incremental increase at first.

I really think the perk system is a good one and will force the player to really think about what kinds of abilities they want to focus on and have, and make it truly difficult to be a jack of all trades (like it would be in true life).

They're trying limit the freedom players have because they know players are smart. Smart players aren't going to waste points in builds that aren't the very best just for the sake of diversity. Noobs aren't going to end up with weak characters. The new system seems to guide the players in order to showcase all perks in ways that make them viable. It's seems easier to make perks more viable when developers can anticipate what a player has chosen before that particular perk the player is looking at.

More options that are viable => More practical choices => More choices.

Hard choices instead of clear cut builds.

Players were never NOT allowed to be extremely diverse, they were never not allowed to make pure characters, very limited in certain areas and very gifted in others (and many if not most players had main characters who were exactly as I have just described).

Reasoning like this, you could turn counter strike into a modern rpg , your own cunning, wit, intelligence and determination to survive and so forth will be the deciding factor in how powerful/potent our character turns out to be, it is your own skill that decides if you are good or not. You can also buy weapons in cs, so it must be an rpg!
Of course there are no HP/MP/STA or abilites ( but anyway I fully expect them to remove those unneeded part of the game in future tes games now to remove some complexity) /end of sarcasm.

I like the change, I've never seen an attribute system that worked perfectly. Fallout is probably the closest I've seen to good, and still, charisma is worthless.

Which Fallout are you talking about (or are you talking about the first one aptly named as Fallout - without a number)? Because charisma wasn't worthless in the first two games -- and even if it was less usefull than Intelligence and Agility, for example, it still had its uses.

They aren't removing abilities and features because they think they're "pointless," "redundant," or "extraneous." Now, I can't say what their motives really are, but I can tell you that what they've taken and the excuses they've given us as to why they've been removed are just that, excuses. They're removing features for reasons that they obviously don't want us to know, think that we'll disagree with, or otherwise find to not be good reasons to allow for their removal.

'Intelligence' defines how smart my character is. Whether he can easily be lied to or not. Whether he can have a proper discussion with a mage or rather likes to smash in skulls. How exactly is that squeezed under magica, health or stamina?

Intelligence never did that though, you did - not a single dialogue option specific to intelligent characters. It was entirely up to the player what dialogue options you chose and how intelligently your character handled various situations.
You can imagine your character is intelligent and play as if he/she is in Skyrim, and there'll be literally no difference. I'm perfectly fine with that myself, I prefer they leave it up to me to decide the personality and mind of my PC rather than having a stat that's also tied to combat effectiveness limit my dialogue options.

Not commenting about the squeezing part of the paragraph, but this thing about "restrictionists" wanting to trim down options.... If there are no consequences for the options, and related restrictions, the actual given options are void. The game can only react so much, if everything is possible for everyone, and that nullifies the players many options from gameplayperspective no matter how many there are.

Generally, if all is available at all times for all, nothing really matters.

how most peeps have not made the connections and seen the utter stupidity in PR and Question avoidance beth has been doing since Jan is Beyond me, things like Attributes were figured out long before they were officially announced out in the GI mag, and for simple instances like whether or not armor is merged took MONTHS, an E3 confrontation and a freaking fan interview to get a clear answer and even then it was laced wth PR.

You can imagine all you want, it wont matter and thats not the reason people are asking for Attributes, why you see Game mechanics as a limitation is beyond me...its a freaking game, if you don't like it ignore it infact not having it is a limitation how about them apples, the game has no methods of differing your characters persona with that of a Rabbit. HOW BOUT THAT?
;p

You were never "not" allowed to, correct. That still holds true. Of course this ignores the fact that by the mid to late 20's every character was the same any ways, regardless of intentions to make a pure or diverse character or not because eventually all skills and attributes got to 100 for all characters. Wow, wonderful diversity there..... :whistling:

Now the addition of perk trees and limited availability of perks will indeed enforce a degree of uniqueness in character builds and make playing a "pure" character actually different from another "pure" character rather than everything merging into a bland sameness singularity after so many levels. So your implication that the devs are trying to pull the wool over your eyes is indeed false since they are actually enforcing a degree of uniqueness you said you wanted but didn't actually have before.

Not so. For a pure powergamer that may hold true, but it does not hold true from a roleplaying perspective. The ability to have everything does not for a moment mean that every player will choose to have and do everything.

'Intelligence' defines how smart my character is. Whether he can easily be lied to or not. Whether he can have a proper discussion with a mage or rather likes to smash in skulls. How exactly is that squeezed under magica, health or stamina?

So because it did not do that in past games it can't now? not directed towards you, but these individuals who are opposed " I.E OPPOSED," to having attributes never get it across their skulls that Pro Attribute individuals want them back but fixed and improved, they aren't in the back ground, they arent hidden and the only thing of them that remains is what they did for skills, yes Skills now do for themselves what Attributes did. doesnt mean thats all Attributes did or could do.

how most peeps have not made the connections and seen the utter stupidity in PR and Question avoidance beth has been doing since Jan is Beyond me, things like Attributes were figured out long before they were officially announced out in the GI mag, and for simple instances like whether or not armor is merged took MONTHS, an E3 confrontation and a freaking fan interview to get a clear answer and even then it was laced wth PR.

You can imagine all you want, it wont matter and thats not the reason people are asking for Attributes, why you see Game mechanics as a limitation is beyond me...its a freaking game, if you don't like it ignore it infact not having it is a limitation how about them apples, the game has no methods of differing your characters persona with that of a Rabbit. HOW BOUT THAT?
;p