I refuse to think that long and hard and seperate so many details and effectivvely convince myself that I did not have fun with each game in its own right.

You didnt even get to the sandbox part untill probably 3/4 of the way through that wall.



Back when graphix svcked we could do so much more with skills and such or world size because we disnt need the animations or super variable environments.
Now in the age of realistic graphix Its almoast as if gameplay has to play catchup. Daggerfall for example had climbing, totaly feasable in a game back the because all you had to do to show you were climbing was move the cammera up or down. Todays it would have to be animated with atleast the hand grabing handholds.

Its way to little of a problem to write a book about.

Every word I wrote was pefrectly formed. You are merely making arguments for the sake of making arguments. Nobody needs your stupid whining.

Ah, the "Ubi Sunt..." of the RPG gamer: "Where are all the freedoms I used to have? They have passed like rain on the mountain..."

Personally, I think that removing classes will arguably enhance the player's freedom. You no longer have to predict how you're going to enjoy playing by choosing a class, and then constrain yourself accordingly for the next 150 hours.

Daggerfall had a Social direction, so to speak but it was wide and far reaching and effected the Is and is nots of your characters interactions from nobles to thieves, Morrowind did not have a social system..so to speak it was generic in interactions but had fluff, Oblivion did not have a social system, it was equally as bland as Morrowinds. for all intent and purpose the Social system in Skyrim is "new" to TES. to me its a gimmick but to each their own.


yes the lack of systems that allowed my to predifine my 18 year old or GREATER individual who was doing something before they got imprisioned, as well as customization options that are now gone bother me, I find it even more insulting that a previously streamlined aspect of stealth "Pickpocketing" is now its own skill again, as a sort of sick joke to taunt those familiure with daggerfall on what could have been "UPS we cut to much find something quick!"

I see no problem in having a already defined char with strenght and weaknesses, and then having them adapt to the game as you play to the situations you get yourself in, none.

Just use the tutorial as 'background building', let's face it you are likely going to level once or twice before leaving the tutorial dungeon (since I assume level 5 skills are going to level very fast) just level some of the skills you want your character to have, choose an attribute to reflect your background and chuck a perk or two into your main skill. By the time you get out the dungeon you will have at least a slightly defined character.

Nobody needs your whining either, so if you have nothing to contribute, just QQ out of here. This game will be great regardless, it will probably go into the annal of legends just like Oblivion, but will it be a great Elder Scrolls game? We don't want a good series ruined and we only have the best of intentions. Then you come along all rude-like and tell people to stop whining.



Oh the sweet irony.


The only thing I don't get is the needless destruction all the time. Instead of merging ACrobatics and Athletics, it gets axed completely. Removing Hand to Hand was also not called for, as it appealed to a style of combat that the blade/blunt didn't fill.(health and fatigue) For a style that had zero weapons, it did pretty well. Now imagine if Hand 2 Hand had weapons such as brass knuckles, or steel fists? It would be on par with blade/blunt, but Bethesda took the easy way out. I'd rather have more playstyles that are slightly less built upon, than have very little but very fleshed out. The Elder Scrolls is high on replayability, but they keep shrinking that.

Okay, we apparently have less freedom... how?

So the lack of skills and them being merged into other ones stops you from doing them? You cannot play a swordsman because there's no blades skills, only one-handed?

You showed examples what kind of characters you can play in Daggerfall, but you can just as well play them in Oblivion you could even play some more efficiently.

Lack of attributes won't stop the customization of your characters, there are skills and perks for that. You can always focus on some skills and ignore others. You can still play a socially awkward wizard, or a thief who knows many crafts...
The lack of classes doesn't stop the customization, if not it gives it more freedom. Yes, you might have to concentrate more for achieving a set goal, but it's not like you couldn't just ignore your starting values before. It wasn't rare that I simply forget about raising major skills in Morrowind...

And... children? Really?
Look, you mentioned Daggerfall, and how big freedom it gave you right? Well not really... Remember most of the people, mostly innkeepers, shop-owners, nobles and well, the kids? They were all untouchable, the most you could do with them is talk to them and accept their quests.
So no, children will hardly limit your experience...

And Dragonborn is exactly the same as being the Neveraine or the prophetised hero, or the agent of the empire or the random prisoner from the imperial city...

I don't understand why nerds are so obsessed with Morrowind. It wasn't as beautiful as Oblvion, if you think it was you need to get your eyes checked. There was one tree every 200 ft. And it was brown.... Everything was brown..... The combat was silly most of the time, especially melee combat. 20 strikes, 1 successful hit!! Don't even get me started about Cliffracer spawns. I think Oblvion improved incredibly over Morrowind, and i bet Skyrim will do the same to Oblvion.

lol, you don't say!!!??

How about your wait for the game to come out and stop making all these threads crying about how bad it is going to be. Go outside or something (a hard concept for you I'm sure).

To be honest with you I didn't read it................ :wave:

Translation - Oblivion was prettier and had better combat, there for its better than Morrowind, hands down. the fact that Morrowind had a better story, depth, Lore, world, and a non disney land atmostphere doesn't matter because Oblivion is pretty.

and better AI and actual day-night schedules, some manner of city life, better scripted events, more interesting quests, more realistic landscape, horses, voice acting, ...

... or just better graphics and combat... :rolleyes:

Honestly, in my opinion, what some people don't realize is 'sandbox' and the 'RPG' are relative terms. It's how you play the game that makes it what it is. You could load up Oblivion, and make a vow to do nothing but the Main Quest, basically making the game linear. There goes your 'Sandbox'. And yet even then you're still playing an RPG. You're playing a role, the role of whatever you make your character do. In this case, the role of only doing the main quest. Just because things are removed from, say, the TES series as a whole doesnt detract from the overall scope, the scale of the world, the choices you're given, the actions you take.

IMO.

You make some good points, but the fact is is that while skyrim may not be as open as its predecessors, it will be just as good a game, if not better, on its own. Skyrim is its own game and people really need to stop comparing it to morrowind/oblivion/arena/daggerfall. If you want the experience you had playing those games, then play those games, don't ask for the same thing in a new one.

I think your misunderstanding my post. asking questions does not mean one is against something. I'm simply advocating considered discussion on open-world RPG design as it pertains to TES.

I don't dispute that Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, or Oblivion were less/more sophisticated in various aspects of their design. Contrary to what some people THINK they read, I didn't directly criticise Skyrims various features or lack their of, I merely presented a range of features we know about, compared them to the previous TES games and then asked questions to prompt discussion.

A reduction in skills might well reduce choice, its a valid question to which we do not have a certain answer.
You cannot say perks will replace the function of all attributes because we honestly dont know... but isn't it worth discussing what attribute functions we do want to see in some form?
Criticisms leveled at non-killable NPC's are valid, wether or not I agree with them, they are legitimate concerns that have a right to be discussed.
And dragonborn/nevarine whatever, is it wrong to understand what negative impacts might be of this so that they can be avoided or worked around?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KN7cKO8-P0 what city life? the walk around and do nothing city life? of course quests, realistic landscapes? pfft ooohhh they sleep

Thanks for the valuable contribution. :facepalm:

To Code2501 - Nice read!

I have played all the games, and I share your concerns. To me, the TES series role-play opportunities are devolving into the generic Fighter, Mage and Thief classes that are normal for most CRPG's. What I have always enjoyed through the years is that TES series was outside the typical game, but now it seems to be approaching the typical style of RPG. After the disappointment of the Radiant AI, I am concerned that the Radiant Story will turn out to be as over-hyped as its predecessor.

Once again thanks for the thoughtful discourse.

JimC

I have to agree with you; the game hasn't even come out and he is already getting ready to jump off a bridge.

I played Arena and Daggerfall and they were both great then but not now because there was nothing to compare them to at the time that equaled their RPG options.
Now there are better graphics
NPCs actually do something instead of just stand there (I wanted to attack the nobles in Wayrest several times but that option was not available)
Combat in DF and Arena was good at best not great as what I'm seeing in obivion
Weapons were just different colors
Etc...etc..etc.......................................

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faR7Tf8VLjU&feature=related

LOL
AI was non-existent in Arena and Daggerall and minimal in Morrowind...Oblivion has the best AI for a TES game so far, but I believe Skyrim should be better

Nice opinion you got there. Gladly :

1. Maybe true for whatever you think an RPG is supposed to be. Thing is your opinion on RPG's is just that, your opinion. I can't think of an upcomming RPG on par with Skyrim. Only dark souls comes close and even that has a fraction of Skyrim's RPG. Can you name an upcomming RPG with more rpg elements than Skyrim? IF SKYRIM is not an RPG that means the genre is dead. You're probably going to list indy niche games that noone will buy or hear of.

2. It'll win tons of RPG-GOTY awards, probably more than WItcher2 and Dark Souls - both of which have less RPG elements.

Why do people still use the word "whilst"? It's archaic. Use it's modern variant "while" like everyone else.

I never said they were perfect, but better than Morrowind, in which it was non-existent...

Not entirely.
If they remove a weapon skill, but the weapon is still in and still usable, it is still a choice, right?

By themselves, no they won't.
Skills and attributes do the same thing, make the character different, unique. Because there were a lot of overlapping it can be changed that only one of them remain.

For essential characters it is more valid, but what is the differences between disallowing and punishing the player?
Is it so much better doing something but getting punished by it instead of not being able to do it at all?

All games started out with the main quest, and you always had the option just to ignore it. You could always forget about that order from the emperor or the ghost-lady in your head and do your own thing.
Don't see it how it's going to be different in Skyrim, except you can now get more unique powers, but those aren't that different than having a unique birthsign either...