Oblivion isn't the only game in the series you know.



Because it limits customization. It doesn't matter if we have more armor if the actual combinations that can be had is still less.



Problem is, armor slots don't prevent more armor types.



Just because they say its going to better doesn't mean it will be.



But you see, we have already looked to the good things about this game. And we've gotten over them. Some of us have stopped drooling long enough to notice that the light does not shine from the every orifice of this game.

The good does not outweigh the bad.



Speculation? Ok you keep on believing that, I'll be here to calm you when you're let down. You can ignore the bad things about Skyrim if you want but you're setting yourself up for disappointment if you don't acknowledge them.



Ever wondered why people complained about New Coke? Ever wondered why DA2 was received so poorly by fans despite its "streamlining"?

Modernization is only good when what we're defining as being modern is actually good, and not bloody terrible. What most dev's are doing in order to "modernize" games is catering to a great mass of people who have no business being catered to, nor even being called gamers. Good games are accessible by everyone, yes, but not if you remove all complexity from it.

You do not make a game accessible by removing complexity altogether, you do it by creating a system of gradual complexity. Again, I cite this picture, as it is relevant to my point:

http://media.riemurasia.net/albumit/m34359/815061735.jpg



No its not. Its deviously simple and you're just lying to yourself if you think it isn't.



Because it was a good system that facilitated roleplaying. They should have expanded it. But the casuals are already here. The Xbox told of their arrival. Oblivion was merely a delay. From the time the 360 met shelves, when gamers would stand divided. But no one wanted to believe it. Believe dumbing down even existed, and when the truth finally dawns, it'll dawn in the fire that renders the casuals a forgotten people.

Yeah, I just did that. Problem?

Pretty much. Call me cynical but I don't place a lot of faith in what developers say pre-release, they are very good at talking things up, whether as part of the marketing or due to an emotional investment in the product. Besides, the whole simplicity/complexity argument is so subjective, what's simple for one person could be complex for another.

On the OPs comment about hidden vs removed, in some cases, for me at least, the two terms are anologous by virtue of removing my ability to directly interact with them. I'm not a huge far of TES's learn by doing skills because it's part of the levelling up, something I enjoy. Again though, what's fun for me could be tedious and unnecessary for others.

Do you really think console gamers are casuals?

I think that the people who think its going to svck because its "dumbed down" will actually enjoy the game if they can just get those negative thoughts out of their heads. Everything seems to be there, hand-written quests, gorgeous graphics, fun gameplay, and rpg stats. I'm sure it will be an enjoyable game. However, if they continue to think that the game will svck, then they will make it svck for themselves in their own mind.

Either that, or they'll say that Elder Scroll VI is dumbed-down while saying that the previous was awesome (even if they said that it svcked before). Just like with Morrowind and Oblivion.

Xbox is casual? Yfw you see an epic MLG match of the most hardcoe CoD players and see that it actually is a really hardcoe game, among others.

Oh yeah and that picture doesn't look too fun. I don't want to play a game and rage the whole time when I'm fighting the boss.
And who was that made by? Your brother so he could help you prove your point?

Expand on that a bit. How can you roleplay in Oblivion in a way you can't in Skyrim? Or even better, what game do you hold as the epitome of roleplaying?

As I said, games like The Witcher 2 and Demon's Souls are much less reliant on numbers than other RPGs, yet both are deep, challenging "hardcoe" experiences because of it. If anything, Skyrim forces players to focus on how they're actually playing the game in order to improve, rather than mindlessly grinding stats until they can plough through the game.

Lol, so their removing some things? This makes the game simple? Casual? Well, casual games don't involve over 50 hours of gameplay. What? Some removed skills and removal of classes outweigh the good things?? Like dragons, awesome graphics, huge world, dragon shouts, finishing moves, awesome AI, and dynamic quests? Yeah, I just think you can't stand a game if its not filled with hundreds of useless content and stats. So if you really don't like it, then kindly get off the forums, and stop trying to ruin other people's excitement.

http://media.riemurasia.net/albumit/m34359/815061735.jpg

Funny picture ZzAr,,,,considering Morrowind only got easier as you progressed and became a demi-god.





This doesn't help your case.....as the specific reasons why DA2 was received so poorly are exactly what Skyrim is improving upon in general.

In either way, it's a progression that rewards achievement and dedication.

The sad thing is that these days no-one bothers writing a transcript anymore.
And I therefore have no idea what the point is.
As my computer has no sound on.
At all.

COD is a casual game.. Same goes for Halo and Killzone and Bad company. Being the best on a casual game or playing against the best on a casual game doesn't make the game or you hardcoe. Any 10 year old can pick up COD and frag easily..

Having to actually learn how to play let alone be decent is a hardcoe game.. good example is Battlefield 2142 down especially BF2 PR mod. Ya you could go "fraggin" in it but that didn't guarantee a win as it does in those games. If you worked with a team you got a much higher win chance then a single guy with a high K/D has.

Best example is Arma you actually have to adapt to it unlike the other said games you do not have instant accuracy nor little rewards nor a HUD it has biggest learning curve that I can think of and if your good at that you can call yourself hardcoe because not many can say that.

I find it quite telling that so many of the posts that purport to address the criticisms directed at the development of this game don't even present those criticisms honestly.

Don't try to call them out on it, they don't respond :confused:

I gotta say i think The game looks Really good. Went back to Oblivion Recently to start getting ready for Skyrim and right off the back just from a graphics and animations standpoint it looks great.

Only thing I don't really like is the HUD. I don't like how the 3 bars take up the whole bottom portion of the screen and I hate "imploding" bars. I can never really get a good sense of how much I have left for w/e reason

Just because I hate that they have taken out things from MW and OB and that I want them back in does not mean I just want a clone of MW or OB, almost no one who hates the mass removal of content wants a rehash of MW or OB. what we want is a new game that has all the features that we loved about the old games, but in a new world, with a new story and all the things that we played and fell in love with improved.

arbitrarily removing content just so they can say that its different than a previous title does not make it own game, it makes it a degeneration of the previous game. thats based on what we KNOW is gone, whether or not SK will redeem itself in my eyes and my wallet remains to be seen if what they intend to replace the massive amount of removed content with is vastly better. because I won't settle for things that are just as good as what used to be there.

and I am just saying now, no matter how good dragons are, that won't be enough.

I'm trying to figure out what this massive amount of removed content is?

This is exactly it.
So many people saying I shouldnt expect 'Morrowind 2.0'
Why for Dawkins sake not?
Jeebus, that was the game we liked, that is why we bought Oblivion and failure to deliver what the fans want, again, is only gonna lead to heartache.
I really dont understand what is so difficult about embracing and maintaining the core concepts and mechanics of what made Morrowind a game I play to this day.
Unlike Oblivion, which I really cant stand anymore.

What information and where? There is no such information because they have showed very little about the game. The evaluation of the overall complexity can only be made after the game has been published. Before it - and certainly at this point - it's more or less speculative. Negativity for negativitys sake, I say.

And let's not forget the main issue when speaking about complexity. There's complexity as such and then there's complexity that has been well factored into the actual gameplay - not just stats in inventory but something you can actually see and feel when you play. In other words, meaningless and meaningful complexity. There is no evidence whatsoever that complexity has been diminished in the latter sense. Some examples of removed features is known but there might be as much if not more added features of which we have no knowledge yet. There could be overcompensation for the removed features such as the much - loved pauldrons and crossbows.

In fact, the things we know about radiant AI concerning the behaviour of NPCs, added economy, polished and more detailed crime/punishment system, improved and more detailed combat system and 280 added perks among other things speak very strongly on the behalf of added complexity when everything is taken into account. So at this point the game certainly seems to be more complex than it's predecessors rather than less.

This. All current evidence shows it is more complex in actual gameplay sense.

And how does Skyrim not do this? Morrowind let you become a master of all skills, dedication to certain ones only served to limit your options.

People need to understand that stat-based development is irrelevant in a world where modern tech enables us to give visual feedback that shows the player they're improving, instead of telling them they are through symbolic numbers.

A master swordsman in Oblivion used different, more useful attacks that showcased how powerful they had become. A master swordsman in Morrowind... did more damage... and that's it. A master swordsman in Skyrim will likely be able to wield two swords proficiently, deal finishing blows more quickly and render enemies defenseless through various disarming and stunning strikes. The stats are still there behind the scenes, but now we're actually seeing the impact in our gameplay.

And I want everyone here to remember that, in 2015 when we're expecting TESVI, the same exact people will be making demands for Bethesda to confirm duel-wielding, hundreds of dungeons, and all of the other awesome stuff we'll be getting in Skyrim.

Yes, dragons aren't really a game mechanic anyway, they're an enemy. An interesting one, perhaps, but they're not a game mechanic, they're a specific type of encounter. Maybe they should just remove skills and say "It's okay, we have sea serpents now!".

Now, did I say that? No, I didn't. Consoles brought casuals into the gaming market. You can be just as hardcoe as the most hardcoe PC player you can find on these forums and still be on a console. Consoles are just low-end gaming PC's that can't do everything a normal PC can, with a different control scheme naturally. What platform you use doesn't define you at all. Its what you prefer in games that does, and most that you would consider "hardcoe" (and really the fact that this is even a name for these sorts of people should tell you a lot about the opposite end of the spectrum) tend to prefer the situation of 1994 (in the picture below), whereas those you call casuals tend to prefer the situation of 2010, in the same picture.

http://media.riemurasia.net/albumit/m34359/815061735.jpg



Thing is, it doesn't matter much that we're all going to enjoy Skyrim. It IS going to be a good game. But that doesn't stop it from not being as great as its predecessors were (not in every area, obviously, it is doing certain things better than its predecessors, but its also doing other things worse), nor does it remove the fact that Skyrim has a lot of potential, and its being held back. The fact that removing options was an options is evidence enough that we aren't getting the Skyrim we should be.



Only reason I don't accept them is because really they can't be fixed easily, if at all. Spears for instance were never seamlessly introduced to Oblivion, and the best mod for it was one that required you to cast a spell to switch the animations (because they couldn't add new sets) and I don't even know if they managed to get an actual skill working for it.

If Beth just made it so that we could easily duplicate any features from the past games (things like skills and attributes, and especially the lack of them, were, and most likely will be hardcoded, which means we'll never be able to properly restore them) then I wouldn't have a problem at all with any of the negative things about Skyrim, because I know they would be easily fixed. Problem is, they won't be, and Beth has not proven otherwise, and I doubt they will.



Never said that. Xbox brought casuals into the gaming market, and it is because of that Xbox and other consoles are consantly held as the "casual" platform when the reality of it is that its only that consoles hold the majority of casual players. And this much should be obvious seeing as we're talking gameplay, which is an issue only affected by casuals. Platform does not affect gameplay very much, other than through minor things (namely controls and things like auto-aim)that really aren't that big of an issue.



Because now every character I make is always going to have to hold the beginning of "know-nothing peasant". Every character I create is likely to be shuffled along into the Main Quest whether we like it or not, simply by virtue of the fact that we start the game as prisoner and we're saved by Esbern, who we already know to be a main character in the MQ. In Skyrim we have lost a lot of the things that can help a role player define their character and actually have these definitions be reflected in the game. We may have gained a couple ways, but we've lost more.

And this isn't even going into the fact that entire playstyles have been axed.



Yeah, and TES shouldn't be emulating those games. It should be its own thing, and Skyrim is deviating from what TES used to be quite a lot, and not just in bad ways, yes, but the good it is doing for the series does not outweigh the bad.

And besides that, the quoted part of your post could have been done without axing attributes and whatever else. And even then, you never had to mindlessly grind stats. It was never necessary, even in Oblivion where level scaling exacerbated everything that could even be perceived as bad about the leveling system (protip, health isn't the only way to deal with damage, just as you don't need a massive magicka reserve to become a destructive mage, just as you don't need much fatigue for pretty much anything, which is where I think Skyrim might be doing some good, as it seems that fatigue is actually having a bit more of a use)



No. And I'd tell you where you can go shove it but I'd rather not get modded again.

And by the way, these forums aren't just for drooling over Skyrim. May be you should learn that, and accept that our concerns are legitimate, regardless of whether you care or not.



And? May be you should stop putting stereotypes on me. I don't pretend that Morrowind was the shining god of gaming, because it wasn't and I would have actually preferred to have Morrowind be harder at higher levels.



No, its not. The fact that the dev's felt it necessary to include a spell that shows you where to go, is evidence enough that they aren't aiming for a complex game.

I liked this video...better than the ones with Todd speaking through them. I have great faith that Skyrim will be BADASS.

From what we've seen. Yes. Yes it is. You don't have to use that spell.