I wonder how my thumbs would be if I ever attempted Realms of Arkadia on a console http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2DXDNGpNqY That's 5.5 videos of character generation and preparing before any journey really starts. Despite controlling a party rather than a single character, this feels a lot more like role playing than the modern incarnation, mostly due to lack of traveling and survialism. 9 combat skills, 10 body skills, 7 social skills, 6 nature skills, 9 lore skills, 7 craftmanship skills, and 2 intuitive skills. That's 50 skills. In a CRPG. Many doesn't translate well into what we have, for obvious reasons. It also had 7 positive attributes and 7 negative attributes.

But... There are no perks at all. In Skyrim, there will be no attributes at all, and "only" 18 skills. Assuming we get 5 perks to choose from per skill (Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, Expert, and Master), we get 18 * 5 = 90 perks. Let's do a magic flip of words; we now have 18 attributes (Arkania had 7+7+derived stats, very similar), and 90 skills (Arkania had 50). Why this flip? Well, in many cases skill would only determine the success rate. But guess what, we don't have a success rate - when did you last fail to cast a spell or mix a potion? So now we can instead have a skill (was attribute) that affects the power of a perks (was skill) outcome.

It allows them to setup individual setups that makes sense, rather than being forced to make peculiar perks that by many here are considered stupid. So if done right, it makes perfect sense to me to drop many of the existing skills and introduce new ones, where perk effects are driven by the skills value. Take light and heavy armor. Why should these be skills? Let them be perks that are driven by skills that used to be called stats.

It is a setback from "increase skill by (ab)using", to a more generalized "increase effect of perk by using its skill". It's easy to come up with a tonne of skills, but a nightmare to come up with fitting perks for them. Where Arkania used 3 stats to govern a skill (remember it had a lot more), Oblivion used only 1, probably to make it easier for the player to comprehend.

One problem I have with perks is in the magic system, how it works today. I don't understand why becoming better at Illusion, I get access to better spells with the same effect I already knew just more powerful. I would prefer that when I'm a Novice in Illusion, I get access to the effect Light, and it's effect and duration is controlled by the skill. So at high level, I have the same spell but is now much more powerful. If we have 5 perks of Illusion, we can instead get access to new effects within that school, grouped into perks.

85 spells in 5 schools gives us 17 spells per school. That's too many to deal with using perks. Feels better to me to learn and study a new set of effects that fits your achievements within a particular school. I.e. illusion at novice you get Charm, Calm, Demoralize. At apprentice you get Frenzy & Rally. At Journeyman you get Silence & Paralyze. At Expert you get Chameleon & Invisibility. At Master you get Commanding Humanoid and Command Creature. Which one seems easier to learn, Charm or Command? You still get to improve your cheap Charm spell by increasing skill, but if you specialize more into Illusion (by adding next perk level), skill will increase faster and get you new effects. Some skills might be locked into this difficulty approach, where others may let you choose more freely, and some go for a perk tree approach. All or none may be applicable, we simply don't know yet

So unless the perks end up being completely nuts and unfitting, I'm willing to consider the whole system just as before, but simply relabeled.

I sincerely hope this is the way they'll be approaching it perk-wise, where perks are more 'abilities' than bonuses, or bonuses to abilities as opposed to just unrelated 'stuff.' My example would be you level your 'Stealth' skill and in that tree are perks that include sneaking, lockpicking, pickpocketing, surprise attack, etc. These could be possibly all available when you start the Stealth skill and they get better as you use them/put perks toward them, or the perks could be ability-based bonuses like in FO3/NV (Skill: Seatlth, Ability: Sneak, Associated Perks: Critical Strike, Distraction, Mr. Sandman).

The possibilities actually allow us for a LOT more variety and character abilities. Very exciting stuff.

If they can balance this right then yes, 18 skills would be enough.

I don't know what has been added in replace of those that have been removed. So I am undecided.

I've never heard that console games are considered simply and easy, at least not by people who know what they talk about. If I wanted a game to appeal to the masses I would make a pc game, everybody knows how to operate a pc, but not everybody knows how to operate a console. A console is a system only designed for gaming, and requires the need to learn how to use a controller with dual anolog sticks, all just for gaming. Most people already know how to use a pc for non-gaming related areas, so if I want the more people playing my game, I will create it on a system which people already use for other stuff, hence we have Farmville.



It has a history of a million flashgames as well, the majority of casual games, exists solely on the pc, Solitaire, Bejeweled, Tetris, Pacman, Peggle, Minesweeper, all were exclusive for PC, and some have since been ported to console. People will know how to use a PC, regardless of gaming, while people will need to learn how to use a console, specifically for gaming, there's no other reason for having a console.



Arma2 the spiritual successor to Operation Flashpoint, which was available for consoles? If something is hindering Arma2 from console port it's probably the graphics, and control system.



It would probably loose all it's fanbase, casual gamers aren't buying any TES games, the new thing it does is overlapping with other genres, but if it goes too much over into other genres it will be beaten by better games in that genre. Even if it went all stealth magic combat, if would still not be a casual game, dark messiah is stealth magic combat, but isn't a casual game either. Accessibility isn't opposite of depth. There's a difference between complex and complicated.

Well if you think about it, we know that mysticism is out, but honestly, the perks of that school of magic were better spread between the other schools. And we can probably assume that mercantile and speechcraft were combined into one skill, which makes complete sense.

So now were down to 19 skills and honestly its for the better. Now we just need to find out what the last skill is that was taken out/combined with another skill. Thus bringing us to 18 skills. Athletics and Acrobatics could of been combined.

So, if assuming that what I said above is what happened, then:

Mysticism was spread amongst the other schools. (was kinda pointless as its own school in the first place)
Mercantile and Speechcraft being combined makes perfect sense as there both mostly the same thing
Athletics and Acrobatics being combined makes sense for the same reason as above

I don't see the problem here with 18 skills. Just because there are less doesn't mean its a bad thing. Having more just for the sake of saying there is more doesn't make the game better.

If it's only something like mixing barter and speech ( You can talk somebody down from killing an entire city, but you can't convince him your sword is worth another 20 gold???) then I don't mind. Athletics and Acrobatics could go together I suppose. Mysticism is gone, absorbed into the schools of magic, not neccessarily a bad thing.... And we need one more to be removed... can't think of any other skills that could be mixed, so maybe 18 skills is bad.

I'll give it a chance though.


Edit: I Just read the post above me and I'm confused now, how many skills did OB have?

Well, there you go Then look at this control system: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2DXDNGpNqY
It works surprisingly well, using mouse (and keyboard). Now make that game for consoles, and you have a problem. A big one. PC games with advanced controls typically suffer when redesigned for console and we're stuck with a dumbed down GUI rather than a specialized on for PC. And yes, although I don't want to take part in a console war, I think the console approach is what makes the PC version feel very awkward to use - slow and sluggish and just plain inconvenient. If I was a developer, would I try to support console? Of course, you'd be a pretty bad businessman if you didn't.

Btw, I'm heavily into Arma2 as well. To the point where I'm role playing my character actually. Lean and roll, stances, 3 movement speeds (actually 6, but), freelook, weapon operation, inventory system, radio management, action menu system, online controls, flying and vehicle controls, special ACE keys, and endlessly more, I'm at the point where I actually have NO key (combinations even) left to spare. We have press, press and hold, double press, with any combination of ctrl, alt, and shift. How could you *possibly* get all that to consoles without sacrifice?

I must say I'm worried about this trend Bethesda has shown in its last few TES games with cutting and merging skills BUT it's still bit too early to say if its bad or not. I just hope we won't see all encompassing melee skill but it seems likely as they might use perks to differentiate your weapon of choice (example: perk that makes your mace ignore armor). Anyway must see more about the skill system before I pass my judgement!

I think 18 should be enough, but all depends on how the will let it be. If work pretty hard you can do only 3 skills and everyone will say that it's enough

A lot of console players complain about one thing: PCs are complicated. Installing, dealing with incompatibilities etc. put off people that just want quick fun. Personally I don't mind all that so I'm a PC gamer through and through.

I don't think picking up a game and playing it on the console is hard, since most console games are built for exactly that: quick accessibility. Just takes patience to learn to use a gamepad.


To be on-topic: 18 skills could be enough if they make them meaningful and different and allow our characters to specialize (short swords for my thief and massive two handers for my warrior etc.).

I'll wait and see but for now I'm not disappointed. My only "errr" so far is the possible exclusion of attributes although I don't think they'll do that.

I believe this will be done via the perk system. So fear not! I personally am reserving judgement until I play the game myself. However, from the information we have I am excited. :celebration:

I have no idea. I really need to see the skill list before I decide.

Edit: I'm currently thinking that Acrobatics and athletics will go to be replaced by the speed attribute, and speechcraft and mercantile will be lost so Personality can take over, leading to the return of Long Blade, Short Blade and Axe - I'd be happy with that

Although Medium armour would be nice...

Oblivion ofcouse had several useless skills such as Lockpicking (skeleton key made it useless) speechcraft (I always pribed) merchantile (useless, never got it above 33) etc.
So aslong the 18 skills are all useful, not just for a minigame im happy.

I actually think that could easily be converted to console controls. One of the big surprises with me about old PC Rpgs, is that they all were completely controllable, only using your mouse. Seriously, the whole Baldur's Gate series, entirely playable only using your mouse, which consist of maybe 2 buttons a wheel, and movement. Such a simple utility system can easily be incorporated onto a gampad.



I suppose it would require holding down different key's and than the other keys change function, it's used all the time when you have more spells than buttons. A lot of people make the assumption that because it takes up a lot of keys on a pc, than it can't be done on a gamepad. It just means that the developers are gonna have to be creative when figuring out the controls. Such a thing as flying and vehicle controls have been done a lot on consoles because they are pretty similar, and when you enter a car, or enter a plain, every button on the gamepad can change function appropriately.



Yes, but all of those are with just getting the game to work, not necessarily, the game itself, even with that in mind, the PC is the quickest way to a fix, have a problem on the console and you're gonna have to wait for an update. It's the PC's themselves that are complicated, not necessarily the games.



When you've learned how to use a controller you can do most things as you say, because the whole point of a console is that developer always know what hardware the costumer haves. But learning how to use a controller is harder than learning how to use a mouse and keyboard, as you say it requires patience, and the only reason to learn gamepad controls is solely for gaming, you can learn mouse & keyboard controls without ever touching a game. Because of that, you already have a entry barrier for people who aren't invested enough in gaming that they've bought a console and learned how to use a gamepad. My girlfriend could be labelled a casual gamer, she's horrible with a gamepad, Halo 3: because the game basically assumes you're fluid with the controls, even easy difficulty is entirely too difficult, because she's not just battling the enemies but the controls as well. She literally can't walk with one stick and look with the other, at the same time. Couple that with the fact that she has a lvl 80 character in Runescape on the PC, and you see that the label "casual gamer" is incredibly vague. You can be a hardcoe gamer at one genre and a casual at another, you can be tolerate of the learning curve in one game, and lose interest within seconds at another.

Atheltics was always a terrible skill because it wasnt a choice it always happoened.. same with mercantile acrobatics and restoration...

But say you have a survival skill to cook healing food you can chose to not use magic to heal..

Or say instead of athletics at 10th level you can chose a perk that increases runspeed 10% and can take that 3 times...

And instead of mercantile you can chose a perk at 8th level that gives you better prices and anouther at 22 that increases both the stock of items found in shops and your prices..

Or a perk at 30th level that lets you fall twice as far before you are hurt.. say an iron bones perk... or an iron [censored] perk.... or both.. let you fall REALY far without injury.

And then you have room for more skills that make your character different.

Heck maybe there is a skill centered around the dwarven thingies scattered about all over the map...

This may have been said already, but I figure I should say it because it is THAT IMPORTANT!

The people who think the skills from earlier games meant anything other than an arbitrary number with no actual change to strategy or gameplay do not realize the difference between ABILITIES and SKILLS. There were no abilities until Oblivion and even those were incredibly simplified. All of the skills are the same unless their abilities actually have a tactical difference. The perk system is being implemented to accent skills in a way that demonstrates the variety of abilities encompassed in the same general vocation. Characters with same skillsets and different perk selections will be able to do do different things well in a substantial way. Is that not what you wanted to happen with your different skills? Would not a person who is trained in martial combat be more effective with unfamiliar arms than a magician who never wielded a weapon, EVER? Does this not make the slightest bit of sense?

Good night.morning yall!!

EDIT: Am I the only person who thinks that block will be combined with the armor skills in a Defense Skill?

Well I don't see the point of having useless skills in the game. Just because you can choose them doesn't make them any less useless. You can remove them as skills and put them in the game in other places like they did in Oblivion. Less skills doesn't necessarily mean less content or less choices, that's just an assumption that is unfounded.

I did not have a computer until I was out of my teens. I grew up playing all kinds of games on consoles and I must say... learning how to play games with a keyboard took me a lot longer than with a controller because the keys are not lined up in a convenient fashion. I still hit the wrong keys sometimes because I am a tall person with big fingers (2-4 keys at once usually). I have 0 trouble playing games with controllers at my brother's place because the buttons are located so much more conveniently. That is all I have to say about that.

Oh, I know about perks that's why going down to 18 skills doesn't worry me for the time being. Having 50 unique perks to customize your character can give this game's character development more depth than past games. I've read somewhere that we have a perk that gives maces the ability to pierce through armor doing extra damage witch points to weapon specialization so I'm happy.

Like I said the only thing that slightly worries me is the possible absence of attributes. I don't like it if my darkelf assassin and my nord warrior start out the same way, same attributes: none. Or that at lvl 1 all characters have the same speed, carrying capacity etc. regardless of race. I want my woodelf to be quick on his feet and good at shooting a bow. Even if they don't make them editable throughout the game (kinda like fallout) I wouldn't mind. If I can customize them when I start out and have some kind of racial bonuses to attributes I'm happy. IMO the incentive to get the triple +5 at level up kinda took away from the enjoyment of the game: instead of just playing it normally some people would just juggle with the attributes and skill level-ups.

But Todd did say that they want to make races more different so this could mean different attributes.

Like I said, with what we know so far I'm happy.

The wood elf race could have a +% speed racial ability and an ability that reduces draw time on bows. That would sorta do the same thing?

Pretty much, yes.

It doesn't have to be attributes in the classic RPG sense... I want races to feel unique and maybe give me some editing options (traits like in fallout?) when I start out the game: more speed or maybe I want a lucky orc etc.

The normal "leveling" of attributes can be handled by perks: do you go for more carrying capacity (strength in the classic way) or for faster bow firing when leveling up (agility/dexterity/speed)?

Why do you invest points in your attributes? Because you want to be more efficient when doing certain things! That very same thing can be done with perks. Fallout proved this.

Note the part where I said I do not want to pretend. The game should respond to my decisions, both overt (like murdering some dude) and more subtle (like pursuing Mercantile over Speechcraft). I shouldn't have to set artificial limitations on myself. That's no different from a speed run or no-kill run in a shooter.

Um, sweet? Character and story development is important, never said it wasn't. I really dont think this has to be a one or the other affair.

I never claimed any of this... :/

I am absolutely in favor of less visible numbers. Go ahead and hide my stats. I know I am good at Mercantile because it was one of my starting skills, but I'm only aware of my skill insofar as what I can and cannot accomplish. It still improves with use, but I don't have a clear number to assign to it. In this sense, I know I am good because I am good. Things I could not do before, I can now. This would be a system I like.

Numbers are not the issue. The issue is what my character can do and what my character can't do. And when Beth insists on continuously consolidating skills, my character's abilities become broader and broader. It gets to the point where characters are simply generic jack-of-all-trades (a common criticism of the series, right?).

This is justification for no skills at all. If the only thing that matters is an unbridled story, free to move in any direction without limitation then yeah, drop the stats. But I would think most CRPG players are looking for a story with limits. "If I was a thief I could pick this lock, but I'm not so I have to crack some skulls to get inside." This is the kind of story I want to unfold, and I want those limitations that force me to consider my options and plan around my character's capabilities.

Again, you are making an assumption that cutting feature Y means adding feature X. If I remember right, this is the exact same thing we were told in wait for Oblivion. And yet when it come out, there were fewer skills, fewer factions, and those factions that were there seemed to operate in a vacuum, etc. I see no evidence to suggest that the quality of guild, factions, or skill uses will be improved in this installment.

Uh, no. I specifically said that I do not want to fantasize. I want to actually be confined to the abilities of my character, instead of just prentending there are things they can't do.

This is not something I am opposed to, and is actually something I'd like to see expanded on. With the number of people who pretend to roleplay Book Collectors or Librarians or whatever, you'd think there would be greater demand for some more scholarly skills and factions.

This is I believe what the whole point of this thread is about. Weeding out the arbitrary and/or pointless skills. Adding a "Lore" skill wouldn't really improve the game any more then adding a few books would, it would basically only be there for the RPers. On the other hand some kind of archeology guild where you go out and delve Dwemer ruins would be sweet.

Holy crap I think you are right, I just checked, and it matches what was said about perk paths! Each star has a line going through it(the path) some just have one line and it ends other have 3 or 4 stars connected, thus you would have to learn the first star before the next,etc. 3 Less skills, but over 100 perks, there adding more to this game compared to Oblivion. The voice acting and increase quest detail are why Ob had less stuff than MW but I thought the quality was much better and I still played more than MW(and MW I used more quests mods!). As for Daggerfall 9 of the skills are an out right joke and involved making an enemy type not attack you and a number of others are redundant, like Streetwise and the high class speech one, what a joke. MW had the most stuff(I don't count Daggerfall's bland randomly generated world over MW 's much smaller but much better world).