Skyrim=Action Game, not RPG : V - Skyrim

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 9:16 am

The way I see it, Skyrim has made combat a much more central part of the game than it has in the past, but it's not an action game.

Thats just crazy. Skyrim is the only TES game were you can actually do something apart from combat. If you play Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind or Oblivion, and don't want to fight, what can you do ?

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:08 pm

Thats just crazy. Skyrim is the only TES game were you can actually do something apart from combat. If you play Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind or Oblivion, and don't want to fight, what can you do ?

What can you do in Skyrim? Work in a lumberyard?

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 8:44 am

Firstly, it isn't at the expense of anything, the things they took out they took out because they felt that it limited your character. The fact that they add things to make it more interesting and realistic (besides the flying dragons, but in that world, it is realistic) means that it less of an RPG? You know, I could've sworn that more lines of dialogue was better for role playing. But who am I?

It's about money when you get to be beth's size. romanticize it all you want, it's still about money. I know it's a hard thing to get the head wrapped around, but we all need to come to grips, our beloved series is changing. For some folks that's a good thing, for others, that's not such a good thing.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 9:36 pm

SR is an rpg, all the game sites refer to it as an rpg, other game devs refer to it as an rpg and the vast majority of user refer to it as an rpg.

@Frodo, you can work a lumber yard,smith,cook,chop wood,and a number of other odd jobs.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 12:26 pm

Skyrim-At first blush, it seems that Beth is marketing to a larger market, which is good for business. Again, I'm not being critical, just trying to be objective. But when a co. works for 5 years and they add things like finishing moves, more lines of dialogue and flying dragons, at the expense of attributes, stats and depth of characters.....it's just going the same way of most games now a days.

Again, I'm not saying Beth shouldn't make all the money they can....I'm just saying, this isn't Bard's Tale, Wizardy or even Ultima which Todd loves to say is inspiration.

There is a certain point where money means more than gameplay. IMHO, we've finally reached it.

It's no wonder Ken left.

The whole point of removing all those stats is so you can make an even more in-depth character. They're not taking away depth of characters, they're adding to it. You don't need to be defined by the box saying Strength:20 or other things like that. You can make him/her anything you want.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 6:21 pm

Thats just crazy. Skyrim is the only TES game were you can actually do something apart from combat. If you play Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind or Oblivion, and don't want to fight, what can you do ?

I'm not sure what you're basing that on... Smithing and chopping wood for 300 hours might seem fun for some I suppose.

Edit- Oh and cooking Salmon Steaks

.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:55 pm

It's about money when you get to be beth's size. romanticize it all you want, it's still about money. I know it's a hard thing to get the head wrapped around, but we all need to come to grips, our beloved series is changing. For some folks that's a good thing, for others, that's not such a good thing.

That's all you seem to be saying. Over and over.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 8:55 am

It's about money when you get to be beth's size. romanticize it all you want, it's still about money. I know it's a hard thing to get the head wrapped around, but we all need to come to grips, our beloved series is changing. For some folks that's a good thing, for others, that's not such a good thing.

I've played all the core games and I've addressed your points about them in a post above. Try to refute them. I know what I played, but do you?

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 6:44 am

It's about money when you get to be beth's size. romanticize it all you want, it's still about money. I know it's a hard thing to get the head wrapped around, but we all need to come to grips, our beloved series is changing. For some folks that's a good thing, for others, that's not such a good thing.

Still waiting for some depth in your answers.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 6:13 am

I'm sorry to say, but there were puzzles in DF and Arena. The character customization was far different from what you depict. Tell you what, go famaliarize yourself with those games, then come back and give your perspective, i'd love to hear it, but as of now, it's invalid since you've obviously had no experience with it.

There were no puzzles in Arena and Daggerfall and Daggerfall barely had any character customization, at all. Arena had no factions, no customizable classes, no houses, no horses, and not even a single book. The game was a hack-and-slash dungeon crawl. The action elements couldn't have been more visible. Daggerfall had more customization, but was still a largely action-based experienced. It also had less lore than both Morrowind and Oblivion, as did Arena. Exploration is practically non-existant in Daggerfall and Arena's was ENTIRELY randomly-generated.

Morrowind lost Daggerfall's class creation system in favor of those pathetic birthsigns and changed the series completely. Exploration was practically non-existant in the first two Elder Scrolls games, and the game still had death by combat as a huge part of its world.

Oblivion had just as much killing as previous games. All it did to the combat was improve it, not make it more action-based. The quest markers and the "difficulty" you propose they eliminated (wandering across a barren ashland is not a challenge) have nothing to do with being an RPG and the problem with level-scaling was not that it kept the player caught up with the gameworld, but that it made the gameworld outrun the player. On the topic of difficulty in combat, my Morrowind character is a demi-god by level 15 and I still struggle with certain enemies in Oblivion at level 40 because of the level-scaling. If anything, level-scaling made Oblivion more difficult as far as combat went and that was its problem... that it made the game more difficult as the player character progressed. In any case, this "difficulty" has nothing to do with being an RPG or not. I've played brutal RPGs and I've played easy ones. I've played brutal action games and I've played easy ones. There is no correlation between "difficulty" and RPG elements, period. Also note that Oblivion was the first core Elder Scrolls game with any puzzles.

They lost a whooping three redundant skills and some stats in favor of perks that are limited to a certain number and make Skyrim THE MOST SPECIALIZATION-INDUCING GAME OF THE SERIES, apart from possibly Arena (due to its rigid class restrictions). We'll still have lore, can now do things such as blacksmithing and messing with economies, and merely have better action elements. Action IS and always has been a primary action of the series. The series has always been a dungeon-crawling, hack-and-slash series. These improved action elements are just that... improved action elements. The action is just as frequent as it always was, but now it's actually going to be fun. If you think an RPG is about intentionally holding back the combat elements that are already there and plentiful, but boring, than you just must not know good game design. :shrug: Also note that Skyrim will have plenty more puzzles than Oblivion and, therefore, will have plenty more puzzles than previous Bethesda games, as well.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 12:03 pm

There were no puzzles in Arena and Daggerfall and Daggerfall barely had any character customization, at all. Arena had no factions, no customizable classes, no houses, no horses, and not even a single book. The game was a hack-and-slash dungeon crawl. The action elements couldn't have been more visible. Daggerfall had more customization, but was still a largely action-based experienced. It also had less lore than both Morrowind and Oblivion, as did Arena. Exploration is practically non-existant in Daggerfall and Arena's was ENTIRELY randomly-generated.

Morrowind lost Daggerfall's class creation system in favor of those pathetic birthsigns and changed the series completely. Exploration was practically non-existant in the first two Elder Scrolls games, and the game still had death by combat as a huge part of its world.

Oblivion had just as much killing as previous games. All it did to the combat was improve it, not make it more action-based. The quest markers and the "difficulty" you propose they eliminated (wandering across a barren ashland is not a challenge) have nothing to do with being an RPG and the problem with level-scaling was not that it kept the player caught up with the gameworld, but that it made the gameworld outrun the player. On the topic of difficulty in combat, my Morrowind character is a demi-god by level 15 and I still struggle with certain enemies in Oblivion at level 40 because of the level-scaling. If anything, level-scaling made Oblivion more difficult as far as combat went and that was its problem... that it made the game more difficult as the player character progressed. In any case, this "difficulty" has nothing to do with being an RPG or not. I've played brutal RPGs and I've played easy ones. I've played brutal action games and I've played easy ones. There is no correlation between "difficulty" and RPG elements, period. Also note that Oblivion was the first core Elder Scrolls game with any puzzles.

They lost a whooping three redundant skills and some stats in favor of perks that are limited to a certain number and make Skyrim THE MOST SPECIALIZATION-INDUCING GAME OF THE SERIES, apart from possibly Arena (due to its rigid class restrictions). We'll still have lore, can now do things such as blacksmithing and messing with economies, and merely have better action elements. Action IS and always has been a primary action of the series. The series has always been a dungeon-crawling, hack-and-slash series. These improved action elements are just that... improved action elements. The action is just as frequent as it always was, but now it's actually going to be fun. If you think an RPG is about intentionally holding back the combat elements that are already there and plentiful, but boring, than you just must not know good game design. :shrug: Also note that Skyrim will have plenty more puzzles than Oblivion and, therefore, will have plenty more puzzles than previous Bethesda games, as well.

This.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 1:08 pm

I'm not sure what you're basing that on... Smithing and chopping wood for 300 hours might seem fun for some I suppose.

Edit- Oh and cooking Salmon Steaks

.

It might not be fun for you, but it could be for others. And it just means that you aren't confined to combat. It is possible to do something else. You could RP some roaming lumberjack that went from village to village selling wooden trinkets and other things they had made. In oblivion, if you were RPing, it had to be some sort of combat character. Thats personally why I think Skyrim will be more of an RPG than the other ES games.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:45 pm

you don't need "Die rolls" in combat to hit to be an RPG.

An RPG, at it' smost basic forum, is a game where you take a character and then can shape and mold them into a way you want. This is the underlying foundation of what makes an RPG And RPG.

This is still very much part of TES in SKyrim, only now instead of a computer controlling your combat and actions, (which is a relic of the pen and paper rpg roots of many crpgs) we don't need that anymore, since we ourselves can simulate that our own.

We don't need die rolls to "hit" crap when we can aim and hit it with our mouse and keyboard. That anoyed the hell out of me in Morrowind, sitting ithere smacking at something litlerally RIGHT IN FRONT of you, and having it "miss" even those visually, you are hitting it.

IT's something I'm glad is gone.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 3:51 pm

I'm sorry to say, but there were puzzles in DF and Arena. The character customization was far different from what you depict. Tell you what, go famaliarize yourself with those games, then come back and give your perspective, i'd love to hear it, but as of now, it's invalid since you've obviously had no experience with it.

Now you're just flat-out lying. There aren't puzzles in Arena (a main quest dungeon occasionally had a simple riddle, that's it) or Daggerfall... none. There are randomly-generated, labyrinthian dungeons with some lever-activated platforms in Daggerfall. There are no puzzles. Whether the people here who have not played either or both believe my word or yours is their choice, but I would appreciate it if you didn't pretend I don't know what I'm talking about. Arena had no character customization apart from choosing a face, a binding class, and just distributing points to attributes in the game's skill-less level-up system. Daggerfall's character customization system was the best in the series, in my opinion, but the gameworld was so devoid of anything and both games were no less action-oriented than Morrowind, Oblivion, or Skyrim.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 8:45 pm

its not an action game

1. its got leveling
2. it has perks
3. it has a massive world to explore instead of the action series strait forward paths
4. it has side quests
5. you can do quests at anytime

i can go on forever

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:04 pm

both games were no less action-oriented than Morrowind, Oblivion, or Skyrim.

Indeed. Just because the combat is in 3D, properly animated, and the enemies have actual AI does not mean the game is combat-centric. They put the most work into the combat in every new game, but that's because combat has always been what needed the most work.

Also keep in mind that combat is what we've seen most of because that's what will sell games. The lore and dialogue are important to the core audience, but the combat is what will bring in new fans. They're saving discussion of factions, quests, dialogue, and locations for a time closer to launch, after they've hooked more buyers.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 11:17 am

you don't need "Die rolls" in combat to hit to be an RPG.

An RPG, at it' smost basic forum, is a game where you take a character and then can shape and mold them into a way you want. This is the underlying foundation of what makes an RPG And RPG.

This is still very much part of TES in SKyrim, only now instead of a computer controlling your combat and actions, (which is a relic of the pen and paper rpg roots of many crpgs) we don't need that anymore, since we ourselves can simulate that our own.

We don't need die rolls to "hit" crap when we can aim and hit it with our mouse and keyboard. That anoyed the hell out of me in Morrowind, sitting ithere smacking at something litlerally RIGHT IN FRONT of you, and having it "miss" even those visually, you are hitting it.

IT's something I'm glad is gone.

I agree. Completely. Arguement over.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 6:59 pm

It's about money when you get to be beth's size. romanticize it all you want, it's still about money. I know it's a hard thing to get the head wrapped around, but we all need to come to grips, our beloved series is changing. For some folks that's a good thing, for others, that's not such a good thing.

Yes it is about money. But who here will buy the game after Skyrim if Skyrim svcks a**? They care so much about money that they will make us happy so we will give them more money. If they get lazy on us, we won't buy there stuff. What is changing? We can dual wield, there are dragons, they are making the game more in depth. Even if they fail, they at least tried to do good. The entire game is built on change. Arena was meant to be linear. Then they decided to make it open ended. They add things to the games. They only take out things that don't work good, in their opinion at least. Besides, if nothing ever changed, we'd be talking on cell phones bigger than my foot, watching black and white TV, and using flintlock guns and machetes. Change isn't necessarily bad. You need to have a heart to heart with Sheogorath.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 9:13 pm

I'm happy that so many folks enjoy this series regardless.....let me ask you this:

Can you climb walls
Can you look into windows
can you roll a lucky character
can you carry 300 lbs if you are a big warrior or a tiny mange
are there puzzles that make you think
do you employ strategy to defeat your enemies or just hack and slash
do you travel to a place or instant travel for instant action?
would you have finishing moves or....nevermind, this one is too obvious

listen...again....not arguing this....just call it for what it is. If you think it's an RPG, you are either too young to remember or......

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:20 am

i actually like how the character creation is now, you don't define what you are in the start you do it while playing
the first TES game i played was oblivion and how many freking times i restarted all over because i lacked knowledge about the game mechanics and didn't liked how i made that character and the first dungeon in Oblivion was a pain in the *** after a while

about streamlining the game i think its not that bad:
-8 attributes were simplified to 3, but we got perks that add much more customization/specialization than attributes ever will
-No birthsigns while creating the character but you can get one with the guardian stones later
-Some people are freaking out about 1 less armor slot but I'm not convinced yet.....

And better gameplay does not make the game less RPG....

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 8:48 pm

Can you climb walls

Absolutely essential for all RPGs, no doubt in my mind.

Can you look into windows

I can't believe I managed to play Morrowind without this.

can you roll a lucky character

How exactly are you born luckier than anyone else anyway?

can you carry 300 lbs if you are a big warrior or a tiny mange

A warrior will carry more through perks.

are there puzzles that make you think

From what we've heard, yes. More than Morrowind and Oblivion. And if Seti18 is correct, more than Arena and Daggerfall because they had none. You have yet to refute that claim.

do you employ strategy to defeat your enemies or just hack and slash

Yes. Even more so now with dragon shouts, dual-wield spells, and spells with multiple "modes" like Fireball vs Flamethrower.

do you travel to a place or instant travel for instant action?

I never fast travel, but I do not bemoan the inclusion of it because it is 100% optional.

would you have finishing moves or....nevermind, this one is too obvious

Or what? Hack and slash? Didn't you try to claim that was a negative aspect of Skyrim? But lo and behold, they're actually making it more interesting than that? Way to kill your own argument.

listen...again....not arguing this....

Yes. Yes you are. And the more you post the weaker this "I'm not trying to argue so I don't have to make a point" thing is getting.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 9:25 pm

I'm happy that so many folks enjoy this series regardless.....let me ask you this:

Can you climb walls
Can you look into windows
can you roll a lucky character
can you carry 300 lbs if you are a big warrior or a tiny mange
are there puzzles that make you think
do you employ strategy to defeat your enemies or just hack and slash
do you travel to a place or instant travel for instant action?
would you have finishing moves or....nevermind, this one is too obvious

listen...again....not arguing this....just call it for what it is. If you think it's an RPG, you are either too young to remember or......

man just let it go your losing this fight it's an rpg with action in it.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:03 pm

If skyrim isnt a rpg, then explain to me what an rpg is

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 9:35 am

Again, that's what I don't understand, HOW is an RPG, or any game with action, also classified as an action game? Doesn't it all have action?

By "action" it means running around with a joystick and pressing buttons to swing sword / jump / duck / block. You know, like an action game.

Versus non-action RPGs, where you do things like select commands from a menu for the turn-based combat, all of which is decided by numbers.

» Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:45 am

To understand how I feel about this, read Seti18's posts. I agree 100% with him