While I'm glad that this system sounds easier to use, Oblivion wasn't really complex the only complex thing you need to do was trying to keep track of minor skills influencing attributes and that you could just type on a calculator. Simplifying isn't bad however it could be if they screw up the system, I'll need more time before I can truly answer that question.

Am I the ONLY one who gets pissed off everytime Oblivion forces me to take off all my armor just to put on a [censored] robe?? Or how I can't have left/right gauntlets? Or how there are entire suits of armor (Dark Brotherhood armor I think is one entire piece). This has got to be one of the stupidest simplifications BGS has made apart from the fusing of Short and Long Blades (which in real life would be COMPLETELY different). Not to mention they now have gotten rid of spell creation?? WTH is TES becoming?! For godsakes all you noobs who came into the series in Oblivion, this is not how the series was first envisioned! Just wait I predict Skyrim will be even more simplified and come closer to a simple medieval action game. Whooo FABLE and Dragon Age FTW!!
No spears,
no spell crafting (apparently),
no levitation,
no short/long blade,
no mysticism,
no lycanthropy,
no attributes,
no birthsigns,
no acrobatics,
no athletics,
no medium armor,
no horses(Maybe.... how is that a Maybe, why would there not be horses... WTF?!?!?!)
no individual armor pieces,
no clothes over/under armor........ the list goes ON

hell I'm getting tired of playing Morrowind!! I already know every nook and cranny, have every item, killed every person in the game!

Skills is not the real problem going to Oblivion from Morrowind.

4 factions in Oblivion against more than 10 in Morrowind.

Unique places and items.

The fact I've done everything in Oblivion in about 250 hours (and i enjoyed it a lot), but although i've played for more than 300 hours in morrowind i still have factions to join, places to discover etc..


And also quest markers where not a bad idea but they were implemented badly, draining out every sense of accomplishment

People keep jumping the gun.

Why am I even doing this...

-oh sure, let's add in spears just like that. Let's not make them actual useful, realistic weapons, just add them in without any balancing or design, they just want spears, not a working weapon...
Have you noticed how there are no spears in most modern RPGs...
-Instead we have more dynamic, more unique spells. You may debate about this.
-Yes, let's add in a skill that's incredibly hard to design around, and would give way too much leeway to one character archetype.
-Actually dagger perks are now under the sneak skill apparently. I never knew why shortswords are considered as the same as daggers anyway...
-No, but the spells remain.
-How do you know?
-Skills
-Perks
-Would be broken in current system, probably replaced by perks.
-Same as above.
-A good example of overcomplexity.
-Same as with spears, just add them in broken and useless, people just want horses, not good horses...
-There are individual armor pieces. Oh, no pauldrons? Too bad. Different gloves was a stupid idea anyway...
-Switch over to clothes when you want to walk around in civil.

:violin:

So, instead of having arbitrary attributes, we have our "significant" stats (HP, MP, Damage, Move Speed, Attack Speed, jump height/control) derived from our skills and race... How is that "Simpler" than having them solely dependant on arbitrary numbers that too easily "Cap out"?

And with the more intuitive spellcasting system, spell "making" isn't needed (When was it confirmed as "No" instead of "Not sure"?). It was worthless in the past games except for exploiting game-breaking combinations, cluttering up your spellbook with "It seemed a good idea at the time" spells, and a 38th version of "Fireball! But more damage or less cost!"

Bud, just cause there are apparently "more spells" or "more weapons" does not take away the fact that there is NO levitation, there are NO spears, there is NO spell creation... lycanthropy was something they DELETED in Morrowind, it was in Daggerfall! NO birthsigns (yea nothing to say here eh?) NO clothes under/over armor... The fact that Todd even said that there MIGHT not be horses is incredibly stupid... HOW CAN THERE NOT BE HORSES?!?!

The fact is you're trying to nullify my remark that the game is dumbed down by saying it has more perks/weapons/armor etc. than Oblivion. Sure perhaps you are right, but guess what Oblivion WAS DUMBED DOWN EXTENSIVELY. Man are you being paid by BGS??! lmfao

I still love when people whine about the loss of 5 attributes choices without bringing up the addition of 280 perks and Twice the # of Levels (together allowing more customization than Oblivion or Morrowind)

This is a great way to show you are biased from your rage/anger.

Just because it wasnt really good in Oblivion doesnt meant that the other games didnt have wonderful spellmaking.
Oblivion is a poor example for spellmaking.
The problems were mainly because of level scaling, and then there was the incomprehensible decision not to let spells be deletable from the spellbook.
Wich in the other games you could do.

Nothing in a TES game is gamebreaking or overpowered, unless you choose it so.

Spellmaking not needed because now I have 3 ways to cast the same spell? Please. Finger of the mountain, anyone?

But this is not that they have got rid of Light, medium and heavy, it just means the armor skill is used to gain levels whatever armor you wear, once you level there will be perks to specialise in the different types of armor, so its still there it just that the way you go about specialising in that skill is different. The same goes for weapons.

Your comment is just based on a blanket statement that the were 3 types of armor skills there is only now 1, well yes there is but within this skill there are now perks that allow you to specialise in the 2 or 3 different sets they go with, so the amount of types of armor has not changed.

This actually makes more sense as basically the core mechanics of using armor is the same whatever armor you are wearing, it is the little specialised ways of using it that determins the difference. EG light armor still offers protection as does Heavy, but to specialise in this type you need to use if differently, which is where the perks come in.

I was mostly comparing it to Oblivion, it's not dumbed down compared to that game when you look at combat, the world, and how unique your character will end up being. Basically better in every way.

Attributes, according to the definition of the word (A quality or feature regarded as a characteristic or inherent part of someone or something.), are the inherent strengths and weakness of your character.

Fallout 3 did a much better job of making its 7 Attributes according to this definition (than MW and OB), and you were given 40 points to distribute among the 7 Attributes . . . at the very beginning of the game, when you created your character.

Perks and fast leveling does NOT do the same thing as Attributes (very few of FO3 perks increased any of your 7 Attributes . . . most just did things like increased your damage when using certain weapons).

Please ppl get of BGS d**k!!
What I am trying to say is that there are already MANY features that have been taken out and CONFIRMED. Arguments like "well theres perks for that" are hard to stand by because we don't always know if there will be perks that can replace those features, it's all speculation!

They have the same effect when combined with the 3 Stat choices. So you pick a Perk and Stat roughtly twice as much as you would pick 3 Attributes in TES3/4.


@DCDeacon
Pete Hines
Clarifications on#Skyrim. There is no hard level cap. Effect of Attributes have been folded into skill perks and Magicka, Health, Stamina.


The end result: A more unique character, as you've made twice the amount of specialization and stat choices (~50lvls), many of which probably do more unique things than attributes did. (Zoom Slow, Bleed, Daggers finally Usefull, etc.)

The reason clothes don't go under armor is to prevent Enchantment Overstacking...

And there aren't really any attributes that matter to a character (gameplay wise) beyond the 3 "Meters" (HP, MP, Stamina), mobility (move speed and jump height), and damage-dealing ability. There isn't really a need for underlying arbitrary number that tweaks such features in needlessly complicated ways.

I can give two Pen+Paper examples of how "simple" can be good, and "Complex" can be Very, VERY bad: Savage Worlds (One dice type, unification across a number of effects, 1 simple check mechanic) and FATAL(Deep character creation! Choices have consequences! Skills for Everything!), respectively

Skills is not the real problem going to Oblivion from Morrowind.

4 factions in Oblivion against more than 10 in Morrowind.

Unique places and items.


Do we know something about these features in skyrim?

No they don't . . . not at all.

Why are so many having such a difficult time at grasping my points in this forum! I don't see how I could be any clearer. :banghead:

Attributes are your character's INHERENT strengths and weaknesses . . . and should rarely change during the game.

Skills change as you level up (as you gain experience).

Attributes are part of your character's INITIAL BUILD . . . not the way that your character improves over time.

The problem is that too many players do NOT want their character to have ANY inherent weaknesses . . . which is why so many here are for the removal of things like Class and Birthsigns . . . and so in favor of fast leveling and a bunch of perks. Fewer and fewer are willing to play a RPG if it includes real consequences to their actions. All they want are characters that are better than all the NPCs . . . at EVERYTHING.

Hmm.
I dont know those games.
But, about complexity..
Checkers vs. Monopoly.
One is very, very simple, just a few basic rules. The other is quite complex with a randomising factor of two dice, a vastly diverse board and tons of that stuff.

They are both good games though, but for very different reasons.
The point is that monopoly shouldnt try and become checkers because kids these days dont like going round and round on a board and having to learn a lot of rules.

And enchantment overstacking? Please, even Morrowind had that down quite well. You had seven enchantment points on any high level pauldron, wich is not enough for even the cheapest constant effect.

I think I understand what you are saying. I do think however there will be inherent strengths and weaknesses dependent upon your race choice at least. I'm quite sure for example that Altmer will still suffer from a weakness to fire, frost and shock but will start out more intelligent and less Strength and Endurance.

But they do not have the same POTENTIAL. If Bethesda had bothered, they could have had a multitude of options available to players depending on their attributes, just as Fallout had done. High intelligence grants different dialog options, while high strength might allow a player to pry open a jammed door with their bare hands. If perks are relegated only to skills, I don't know WHAT skill would allow a player to pry open doors with their bare hands.


No, they won't, because those don't exist anymore.

Monopoly was a very poor example to choose, because it's a terrible board game. The people who land on the good properties in the first run around the board have a clear advantage, and if somebody gets houses, that's it, game over. Oh, the game will go on for hours by virtue of the game's poor design, and by the time somebody actually wins you might have lost a few friends, but it's essentially over already.

And checkers is one of those "learn in five minutes, master over a lifetime" games. It's less complex than chess, and it looks simple on the surface, but centuries of thought have gone into developing tactics and strategies for responding to various positions. It doesn't have near the amount of depth as chess but it sure as [censored] is deeper than a shallow, crappy game like Monopoly, where most of the game is spent waiting for your opponents to move, and when it finally gets to be your turn... you move. And if you land on one of those aforementioned "[censored] you" spots it's only fun for one person.

The example was solely chosen on mathematical complexity, i.e. the number of possible interactions between player and game.
Wich is all possible board combinations. Since monopoly has a more varied board, more options and more players, the phase space of all possible moves is orders of magnitude higher.
They are both incredibly complex games in their own right though, but checkers is say aleph zero, and monopoly is one.

The argument stands.
Though I could have chosen checkers over chess, or over star trek 3d chess. lol.

Actually it undermines your argument because it shows how something that looks more complex on the surface can in fact be shallower and less fun than something that appears to be simple at first glance. It doesn't matter that there's more possible permutations if most of them are meaningless.

Also the guy you were responding too should have mentioned that FATAL is literally unplayable due to requiring a graphic calculator to create your character and is obsessed with six in a childish and perverted way. You determine such exciting character stats as "anol circumference." I'm not joking. It's a vile mess of a non-game created by bad people.

No.
Mathematically the phase space of possible moves in monopoly is orders of magnitude over that in checkers. The point was that they were vastly different games and should not try to emulate one another.
The point stands.
Dont deliberately try and make it into something it is not, do not derail the issue by talking about a game I never mentioned.
Its like Im talking to a politician or lawyer here.

I'm sorry but someone that went from "punny swordman that barely knows which end to point at opponents" to "grand master swordman that rivals all others in the known world" for SURE didn't do that without a sizeable body strength improvement.

You say attributes are fixed or mostly fixed but it's wrong. You can train them as well as you train skills, it's practically the same. You are of the opinion that your fate is decided at birth but ever since Daggerfall Bethesda has been making the TES games to mean more and more that hard work and dedication can overcome such initial problems. There aren't many games that allow you practically freely to take what looks like a puny race like a Bosmer, put him through some military like training for years and end up with a mean muscled two handed axe wielding pro. And why should it be totally forbidden?

TES is a game where your training is the main factor to decides what you are, not your birth and it's fine like that. Don't go against that because there's not many RPGs of the kind already.