Sad news for those fans of "complexity" in an RPG. Complexity, as you define it, is on the way out. Putting points into categories is a thing of the past. Attributes and states are born of pen and paper RPG's played at table tops. These written stats were used to check dice rolls, since combat took place in the imagination. Early RPG's then adopted these same hidden attributes and skills, since their combat was also stiff and non-reactive. When combat takes place only in the imagination, as opposed to on the screen, die rolls are necessary. Increases stats and skills in order to increase the odds of die rolls was thereby a necessary part of pen and paper, and indeed of early electronic, role playing games.

Fortunately, we are leaving those days behind. More fortunately still, devs know this.

In TES - and any other modern, real-time action RPG, combat takes place on screen. I decide when to block, dodge, strike, shield bash, etc. My skill and timing decide whether I land a blow, break a block or even swing a crit, if the game is well designed and allows for it. Hence, I no longer need hidden die rolls to govern my choices. I govern my own movements and choices now, instead. So we can eliminate all of the hidden and half-hidden numbers shaking around in the Yatzhe cup whenever we pretend a stiff pixel swings a sword. Now the pixel isn't so stiff, and its actually swinging the sword. No hidden die rolls needed.

But now people whine about complexity. As a long time RPG fan, I don't miss the sort of "complexity" you whine about. I want to swing a sword and get better at swinging swords. To cast magic or pick locks and get better at those things as I do them. More important still, I want to actually do those things. Not roll a die and have a chance to do them, but actually perform those tasks. TES lets me do this, and I love it.

Complexity in an RPG Can be fantastic. New Vegas had this more right than Bethesda ever did. Complexity existed in choice and consequence. You could literally be good or bad - or something in between the two - and various factions reacted to that. Some choices cut you off from others. Some alliances meant more enemies and some fewer. Dialogue options could open new quests or resolve current ones in interesting ways. This is complexity in the modern RPG, not some hidden numbers game. And frankly, I for one love the change.

Levels and grinding are on their way out. I predict that levels and such will dissapear in the next couple of TES iterations. As opposed to idiotic leveled loot and shops, geography and difficulty of enemies in the zone will determine loot quality. I also predict different weapon types will have different perks built into them. Perhaps ebony is super durable and slow, but does high damage. Elven could be light, fast, sort of frail, and do lesser damage in exchange for more strikes per second. Things like that.

Levels and numbers games are old hat and a dying breed. Devs are beginning to understand that no valid reason exists for these things. Indeed, when I get hold of the creation kit, I always unlevel shops and loot lists. I also force players to look for good loot in dungeons, as shops will not have myriad enchanted and high level gear in my games. Levels are nearly done in these games and their end - and the end of annoying, hidden die rolls for the sake of "complexity" cannot come soon enough. Perhaps if devs don't have to make hidden numbers appear important for the sake of complexity, they can work on increasing the complexity of their game worlds.

A million times this. I wish everyone whining about Skyrim would heed this.

Good post...you took it to the next "level." I have a hard time imagining character level going away but leveled loot I can definitely see being the next to go. You did say iterationS however. Time will tell, ha.

1) Skyrim is a console game at it's base. Blame Bethesda if you want, but simple economics of the game industry make it so. Accept what you cannot change.
3) If you purchased Skyrim on console, you made a good purchase and have a great game to play, but it IS what it IS and won't change.
2) If you purchased Skryim on PC, tools will soon be released to allow modders to fix all the PC gamers complaints and the OPs desire for "complexity".

Let's all move on and continue this conersation in the modder forums some time after New Years.

I disagree with a lot of things you say, but you are right in one thing, these kind of games are on their way out. Actually they are long out of the door. At least in mainstream. The thing is, however, that there are different possibilities of how to do an rpg.
What you describe is one way - let's call it a player-driven rpg, for sake of a better word - what your character does is strongly dependent on player skills, too.
But to call it an rpg you need the game to offer you enough complexity by giving you choice and consequences, something indeed done quite nice in New Vegas.
In other words, the game has to offer you the ability to play your chosen role and act accordingly, not just make you follow one pre-defined path. Otherwise you are playing an action game. Not that there is something wrong with that, it's just no rpg anymore.

The other way is to make your game strongly character driven, i.e. you have a set of rules defining your character and the interaction of your character with his surroundings. The old dice-throwing stuff. Your character abilities are entirely defined by his stats, the player only guides him. I see nothing wrong with that kind of games, as they offer me a lot of fun by creating and leveling a character the way I see fit and testing his abilities (and my ability to use them) against the challenges the game has.

Games like Skyrim (or New Vegas) are somewhere in between. Skyrim still has stats that define your character and it's interaction with the environment, after all.
On the other hand combat strongly depends on the skills of the player, too.

I think Skyrim is really good on this matter. The crafting and the combining spells and the enchanting is complex enough for me. I love it.
HOWEVER, a few more weapons wouldn't hurt; I would welcome those warmly.

see thats where you are wrong. I did go back and play morrowind after playing skyrim. ofc im going to spend most of my time in skyrim when it's new but who knows down the road which of the two I will actually remember...

The only complaint I have, and it's minor so I haven't made a post about it, is that I think the companions in Morrowind were more fleshed out. They seemed to give much more of a backstory than those in Skyrim. But that is minor to me I just use Lydia as a pack mule.

I agree with much of what you have to say here. Except, "action" combat does not equal "better". It's just different. Not all of us want our RPG character's success determined by our own real life twitch reflexes (at least not all the time). That's what Action games are for.

Turn-based and stat-based games may be on the way or already gone for now, but it's a logical fallacy to say that statistical based choice resolution is obsolete simply because the technology exists to simulate it real time. They are two different approaches with two different purposes, one is not inherently superior to the other.

Skyrim is much better than the previous games in its crafting system.
As far as Enchanting or Spells go, it's just bad.
The atmosphere of being a mage just isn't there, Bethesda didn't even try.
Skyrim is just a huge rehash of every creative idea they've already had, reconfigured in a pretty package, I haven't seen anything new at all.
They have literally done nothing to magic except cut it out.
Fewer spells, less interesting spells, fewer enchantments, less interesting enchantments, fewer ways of configuring them, what was the point?
Okay, they did split 'spell effects' and 'enchanting effects' up, so that you learn enchanting by itself, which is simpler...

Not a single enchantment utilizing a negative effect? You made an enchanting system that is epically suited to this kind of balance, then proceed to never use it, once.

It's as if they designed every facet of magic/enchanting based on whether or not the change from the previous games would be easier or harder to mod with, and didn't bother fleshing any of it out after that.

Agree...

Morrowind was not that complex and most of the mechanics that were are dull for today's standards so it's pointless to compare. It does need less linear quests and more unique dialogue....but nohting like Morrowind, so I don't know what you were smoking....

Exactly. I'm tired of them reciting this 9 year old system as if it was actually revolutionary. Morrowind was not a great game when it came out and the only reason it's so popular now is the old rpg cult.

Then the RPG future is truly abysmal for players who were drawn to the genre by the prospect of roleplaying another individual ~their character. A big problem I have with TES is that I have to decide when to block and when to strike even though I'm playing a competent warrior who should know how to do that better than I. Weighted Die rolls reflect the character's ability in a fight, and ability to accomplish variable tasks that require specialized skill (Skill that the player might not have, and that should not matter if they did); There really are few other ways to this fairly, and manual control is not usually one of them. If what one wants is a digital costume in a virtual world, then I've not seen a better game than TES for that ~But that was not why I was drawn to RPGs. :shrug: I want to explore how my unique character fares in the situations they encounter ~Not how I would fare if in their place (or even fare with comparable skills).

There are plenty of valid reasons, but most are perceived as infringing on freedom (as they should, its by design). Some players do not appreciate it though.

A complete and total product (Morrowind) is 9 years old.
The vast number of mechanics, ideas, and content behind the creation of Morrowind and the things in it are timeless concepts.
Please stop assuming that 'we like some of the things they had in Morrowind' means:
Use a 9 year old crappy game system.

Agreed; Seconded :tops:

No game is perfect, not Daggerfall, not Morrowind, not Oblivion, and not Skyrim. The forums aren't here just to be a praise fest for the latest game--they are here to provide feedback to the developers, to allow gamers to discuss the game, what's good and bad about it, to discuss ways to improve it. We're not whining.

This.


The reason the last two editions have been less loved is because they are console ports to PC whereas Morrowind was a PC port to console. And frankly it was better.


Also to the guy who said so.. PC gaming isn't dying.. more people play facebook games than own all consoles combined. Last I checked thats PC gaming.

The Witcher 3. - Ze DRAGONSLAYERGUYZOMFG :flamethrower:

Nothing like justifying all that time spent learning how to enjoy redundant systems and features by bashing later iterations as "not as complex". I'm sure a business (with empashis on that word) like Bethesda, would do well making it more difficult for people to play their games.

More complex, and make the same mistakes that Oblivion and Morrowind made, no thanks. :rolleyes:

Okay, just gonna point this out here.

Playing dressup with your many armor peices =/= complexity. Hell, armor doesn't even really work that way.

After Intelligence should I stack Spell Power?, Haste?, Crit?, Mastery? My wand that I don't use needs better gems so I can kill something on Hardmode.

If this sort of thing sounds like fun, PM me and I'll hit you you up with the website.

(It actually is fun for a while).

I never understood the pauldron thing, and why people demanded them being separate again. especially people who said it was "more realistic"

You realize when people bought armor they bought a FULL SET OF ARMOR, and that armor they stripped off of some dead guy has about a 1% chance of fitting properly (if it was something like plate, obviously mail would be much easier to fit)?

While you are correct we need to look at "why" games come with less.

The public aka casual gamers. They are the money makers; us die hards alone cannot save or turn enough profit for a game in most cases. Really it comes down to money, xbox/consoles just sell more then PC copies (in most cases) and most people tend to play casually on consoles.

This is why Call of Duty does so well. Is it that great? No. Argue with me if you wish. The story mode is new and that is about it. They shape up the new copy with new maps, guns, perks, and re-textured skins for their models.

Would I buy a game for that? No and I never really have with the exception of Halo due to the fact I like the story.

For TES to please me to the level of complexity I want etc etc they would have to make it pretty much a world where I can do everything and anything (become a champion of a daedric god and conquer the land in their name or become a lord of a castle and raise an army). It's just not going to ever be my ultimate fantasy. The room for expansion and growth is immense, we will see how it progresses from here on out.

I am happy with Skyrim, I can complain but I will not. I got what I expected, maybe even more so. Do I want more? Sure of course I do.