Stopped reading right here. First person is what brought me to TES and what keeps me here. If I want 3rd person action, games that provide that exclusively are almost as common as first person shooters.

No first person = something other than an Elder Scrolls game.

I read it all and you actually ALMOST convinced me that it might be okay, but then I watched the video and thought about some more and realized, IMO, this is not for TES.

Combat does need a revamp, and I don't know exactly what that revamp is, but it's just not this.

+1

you havent played dark messiah have you. i would suggest that you try that game out since it has the best first person fantasy setting combat that ive seen. i even like warbands combat although its a bit clunkier.

I definitely don't want lock-on of any sort(same goes for VATS)

and I'm not really digging the the whole Jedi Knight style of combat. While it does provide a more interesting combat. It's not what I would want for TES.

They just need to improve on the fluidity of the combat system and allow more options, not a whole new combat style. I guess like an official much improved Deadly Reflex-like system implemented into the game. Anything else wouldn't feel right in an Elder Scrolls game to me.

Sorry guy, but this isn't a turn-based styled game, nor should it be preset to third-person camera combat moves that stick themselves to some sort of lock mode. The Elder Scrolls' combat system, at its core, is fine just the way it is, and I love the combat through the first person perspective. At the MOST, Bethesda should just add more dynamic power attacks and body language. That's all I see that is necessary.

I look at that link of yours and feel no interest whatsoever in having that in my Skyrim... none whatsoever.

Devil May Cry? In my Elder Scrolls?

Ok, thanks for those of you who actually read my post, I appreciate it.

For the others who obviously didn't read it but still posted about lock on and third person, Please read the post. I explain in detail that lock on as I describe it is NOT a cheap "auto-aim " or anything of the sort, it is merely a way to make combat more tactical, realistic and provde an importance to DEFENSE, yes, defense. I am not taling about your cheap console auto-aim/lock on systems.


As far as third person, I mention it because if you have played Oblivion/morrowind/Dark messiah, whikle first person view is more personal, the melee combat is by far not a strong point. Yes I have played Dark Messiah, I enjoyed the game but again, it made the fatal flaw that Oblivion/Jedi knight games made, it based combat around your physical movements.

I said in my post that I am not saying take OUT first person, however if you could design combat like Severance in a first person game, I d love it. I just think third person fits better when it comes to melee combat. Becaues it allows the combat to be more acrobatic whereas in first perosn this becomes "disorienting" and developers tend to not use it because of such.

I actually prefer first person when it comes to ranged. I play Moupnt and blade and to me it has the best implementation of both Ranged and mounted combat in a game. However the melee combat again, is no where comparable to Severance in term sof depth and movement. IF you can take the melee combat of severance, the ranged/mounted of Mount and blade, make it all work in a first person view in the TES World, that would be marvelous.


As far as Action gaoes, for those of you saying this is an "rpg" have you played the older TES games and seen the shift? TES games are goign more and more toward action as far as combat and player controls go. Oblivion was an ACTION rpg. I love the rpg elements of building your character up, learning new skills, etc. H owever combat wise the older style Die rolls systems are dying. TES has moved toward action as well as many other western rpgs.

I am not saying take the JRPG out of the game, by far I'm not. I'm just saying we are ALREADY playing an action rpg, it was like that with Oblivion, it'll be like that again with TES V. Having combat that is fun to the player and has more depth to your actions is what I'd likle to see. I don't see how that is "un-like TES games."

Pressing your buttons to command your character is player skill, not character skill. If we take away the ability to control one's character, wouldn't that actually be in favor of RPG mechanics? Let's just have your character play itself after you build it. That way it is entirely based on character skill.

I don't really care, but we must keep first person.

Anything that forces me to use 3rd person view is a big no in my opinion. I think a better approach would be to take a cue from a few of those other games out there that do get 1rst Person melee and unarmed combat right, and implement something that raises the bar and its enjoyable. Its probably a lot of work, but certainly not impossible. Bethesda has the time and funds to make it happen, if they make it a priority. It would definitely work wonders towards making TES5 a worthy addition to the series.

Is there a general combat thread yet? Because we need one. In my personal opinion TES is very lacking in executional challenge, it's always been Character Skill > Player Skill while I believe that player skill is the most important of those two. One of the biggest problems with Oblivion was that you used the same attacks with a dagger as you did with a warhammer, if they included unique attacks and animations for each it would add more depth and give players an incentive to try and master other weapon's playing styles. Severance seems interesting in that position and distance/knowing the enemy's openings matter quite a bit and the inclusion of a dodge option just looks fun to play with, while in the Elder Scrolls it's just slashing wildly until they die and blocking occasionally.

What? People don't read posts...
Anyway, I think lock-on would be great for combat. And I think targeting might be a better word for it, because people seem to associate lock-on with automatic hit. That way your character's skills would become more important. I'm pretty good at FPS games, but it would be nice if the RPG part of the game would play a bigger role than how much damage you do. It would also make combat more fluid.

Exactly

Why deny depth?

Interesting post that illustrates nicely something I've felt for a long time.

A good RPG combat system is not a good Console Action Combat system and vice versa.

Attempts to provide a system that will satisfy both perspectives is very difficult to manage and risks satisfying no one.
It might be better to pick one (RPG or Action) and accept you will delight half your audience and turn off some.

Personally, Console Action games don't interest me at all. That is, I never, ever play them.

I think we need to go backwards rather than forwards when looking at combat in TES games. On paper, Morrowind had the best combat system by far. It's the execution that was botched. The reason Morrowind's combat felt lacking in execution was that the technology of the time could not properly simulate the combat that was meant to be conveyed. Now, especially with a new personalized engine, it would be much easier to incorporate a dice rolls system that actually simulates whats happening. The problem with Morrowind wasn't that you were missing the enemy, the problem was that you saw yourself hitting the enemy even though you really didn't. Depending upon the stats that determined a hit or miss, the game would simulate the hit. If the enemy has a really high agility, then the attack would be a miss because the enemy jumped out of the way.

Now the biggest problem is that if the enemy is cornered against a wall or cliff, what happens if they have the agility to dodge the incoming blow? Well, this adds a new element to the game which makes combat even more intuitive and strategical. If an enemy is cornered, then the AI senses that they cannot dodge the blow, and therefore they won't dodge the blow. So a character that may not be skilled in stats may still make up for it with the skill of the player. This is a solid compromise between player and character skill. Player skill becomes less about twitch reflexes and more about tactical thinking, and character skill limits the ability of the player by challenging them to be more creative.

I certainly don't think this feature will be carried out in Skyrim, but I think it's something to shoot for in the future. I view it as a renaissance of TES combat rather than starting from a blank slate.

If it requires third perso, I plain refuse that system. Oblivion combat wasn't that good but it didn't require third person so it's plain better that this proposal. TES V like all TES before should be playable 100% in FPS view (except for vanity screenshots ) and it's not negotiable.

It's true that third person and auto aim will bring combat that is completely independent of player skill, however, I feel that one of TES unique assets is that it is a fantasy roleplaying game in first person, and I would like to keep it that way.

However, I still understand where you're coming from. Oblivions combat was good, but stats should have more influence on it. I like that hitting was determined by physics rather than dice rolls, given that a first person perspective demands more player involved control, but stats and skills should have been implemented in another way, which leads me to my suggestion.

I want critical hit and critical failure back in the game, I want damage to be an interval rather than a set number. These would allow stats and character skills to have more influence on combat taking control away from the player.

I want power attacks to be something that you can learn on all times, but that an successful power attack is determined by you're skill with that type of weapon. It doesn't have to be power attacks either, it can be fighting styles, or a combination of attacks as well. The chance of failure could then be 0% when you reach the appropriate skill level. This would mean that you don't just magically learn a new ability over night, because you leveled up. This could apply to magic as well, so that you don't have to "unlock" certain high level spells.

Examples:

Critical failure could be something which was relatively high with a skill below 25, but gradually decreasing as you near lvl 25.
Again the same could apply with Critical Hit, only in the other end of the skill level scale.

Basically all Critical failure and Critical success could be applied to all skills, giving stats and skills greater impact on behavior where they are required.

I read it all and I do not want 3rd person view ever, you could suggest the best 3rd person combat system ever designed but I′d still hate it as long as it is not in 1st person, sure make combat better in 1st but never ever go into 3rd person, I would not even notice if they removed 3rd person from the game entirely.

Personally I like both Morrowind and Oblivion fighting, I like Oblivion more since as much as it feels immersive (and immersion is what I seek in a TES game) to sometimes miss if you are not skilled, it decreases the immersion even more if your sword goes through the enemy yet you do not hit, so in my mind Oblivion has the superior fighting system.

The Dark Messiah system interested me but it would have to be so that you had to be of some skill to be able to execute some specific move with a specific weapon, like let′s say I had a warrior type character that was a master with some weapon and a shield, and I could knock people down with my shield and do cool stuff with my sword, I′d not like to load a save with a mage character that has low skill in the particular weapon and shield, and be as much of an expert on him as my warrior, for him the skills should be "locked" until I′ve swung the weapon often enough to reach the skill I need to learn the move, and I want diversity, my warrior can be a master with a sword and know all the skill-attacks but if he picks up a mace or a spear he should only be able to do the basic attack you do when you simply click the mouse button once, after all if he hasn′t used the weapon he isn′t going to be good at using it.

Oblivion as well as other Elder Scrolls games are rpg's with action elements. In my opinion they shouldn't feel like the "great action games" out there because then they would be something they are not. The day we see overly complex combinations with on screen, interactive button displays is the day that The Elder Scrolls series has been corrupted. Similarly, we also shouldn't have long series of button combos that take an hour to formulate and two to execute. This type of combat, although visually stimulating, doesn't give the player a sense of achievement that they feel when they have to work towards building their character in order to defeat their foes. The rpg elements in The Elder Scrolls should always outweigh the action elements.

I for one definitely felt a connection when i swung my weapon and it was blocked which sent me staggering, leaving me open for a strike. But that's just me.



Stop right there criminal scum! The main thing that keeps the combat immersive is the first-person view.



Now this I agree with. Power moves being based on the direction you were moving made them difficult to land. The vast majority of people would agree that combat for the next Elder Scrolls game needs to be improved, but not in the ways you are suggesting.



See, now this is bad. I don't want to have to be forced to be a defensive fighter. The best thing about The Elder Scrolls is the freedom of choice. I should be able to be an aggressive warrior if i want to. Changing that would be very, very bad :wink_smile:. Reading this reminded me of Assassin's Creed combat system which I personally appalled. Standing around, defending and waiting for the right moment to press your button is just so unrewarding.



Lol.

I watched the clip and that is definitely not how i would expect combat to look in real life. It was rather slow paced and the movements seemed clunky. I'm pretty sure medieval warriors didn't do a spin move every time they wanted to strike their opponent.


Lock-On has no place in Elder Scrolls. Ever. I feel that The Elder Scrolls is on the right track to a good combat system that just needs some minor tweaking and a faster pace. I was somewhat intrigued by the combat system you described until I saw the video by which I acquired a foul taste in my mouth and was instantly reminded of Fable.

We are waiting for Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, not Elder Scrolls V: Severance.

The problem with limiting first person is it would kill the game for alot of RPers.

I absolutly do not want the third-person to be the focus of the game. TES has always been about first-person. That's what makes this game so *personal* for most of us. Combat in first person CAN be done right. Dark Messiah is my favourite example of it. Also, you mentioned Mount&Blade and it can be played in first person very well.

What are the arguments for and against third/first-person?

I agree that the combat needs some serious improvement, but I disagree with your way of doing. There are plenty of first person games that have great combat. The problem is not the view, it's the combat itself. Admittedly highly dynamic action and jumping through the air doing somersaults etc. does not mix well with first person view, but there is far more to making good combat than doing that kind of thing.