I also notice the argument that a lot of people use is that the lack of Athletics, Acrobatics, and Hand to Hand kills certain builds, but on the flip side, I believe that Dual Wielding, Smithing, and the return of Enchanting makes for new builds.

I couldn't make a dual wielding warrior in Morrowind. In Skyrim, I can. In Morrowind, I couldn't make a character that forged his own weapons and armor. In Skyrim, I can (I think). And I know that in Oblivion, unless I went through the Mage's Guild questlines, I couldn't Enchant my own weapons and armor.

Oblivion took away my build. But I didn't cry about it. I adapted, and created a new build that fit that game. Coincidentally, I probably like my Oblivion character better than I like my Morrowind character.

Skyrim gives me build options that weren't possible in Oblivion, or even Morrowind. Yes, the guy who jumps high and runs fast isn't a viable build anymore, but I think we got a lot more diversity. And while people are on the negative side of the coin, with their builds being removed, perhaps I get to look at it through rose colored glasses because, except for the inability to summon more than 1 creature at a time (which Morrowind allows, Oblivion and Skyrim don't), Skyrim allows for the type of build that I always wanted, but was never able to have in Morrowind or Oblivion.

Merari, you're right, 21 > 18... but I believe those 18 skills allow us to do AT LEAST as much as the 21 skills in Oblivion, and I'd even go as far as to say they allow us to do more. The 18 skills may be less in number, but I believe them to be more in depth and complexity.

And even Morrowind's 27 skills... even those skill numbers are bloated by repetitive skills. 3 skills just for armor? Is Medium Armor *really* necessary? (Unarmored is, yes, and I believe it's a shame it was taken out). 2 skills for swords.

I dunno. People are freaking out about the lower number of skills, but I really don't think it's that big of an issue. Except for running and jumping, everything else is still there (okay, my condolences to spears...), and I think will be in greater depth than Oblivion or even Morrowind. At first I was concerned about the low number of skills as well, but now, not so much.

Oblivion was better than Morrowind. My opinion....so deal with it.

I can see what you mean about armor. But short blade should never have been removed, in my opinion. It's so different to fight with a knife instead of a claymore, it doesn't make any sense for them to be the same skill. Besides, that skill made thief characters more unique too.

I've really never encountered someone who raved on and on about how much they loved the skills in Morrowind. Every time I hear somebody praising it they talk about the setting and the fact that the world was so ridiculously open and you could do pretty much whatever you wanted.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess, but to me it honestly seems like Skyrim is positively brimming with the spirit of TES. It seems like a place where I would want to walk around, take in the sights, meet interesting people and set them on fire with my flamethrower hands.

We really have little basis to compare either game to Skyrim. Skyrim is different, different skills, no attributes, AI more complexed (so we are told). Your question just can't be answered ... yet.

I actually think that the way Skyrim represents weapon skills is the most realistic of the Elder Scrolls games so far. It made very little sense that in Morrowind my warrior could use a broadsword to devastating effect but was then completely unable to use a short sword - their usage isn't that different and, parrying aside, there are a lot of techniques in swordplay and knife-fighting that overlap (mobility, footwork, use of the off hand or shield). In Skyrim the unique close-up abilities of the knife that are not covered by the 1 handed skill are covered instead by the sneak skill, represented by the now even more devastating sneak attack. This is a far better compromise than having a separate skill and preventing both short blade and long blade fighters from adaptability. There may even be a few knife/short blade specific perks in the one handed tree to represent specialisation.

The combining of the weapon types is also much more sensible - it made no sense in earlier titles that a warrior would be able to use a claymore but not a battleaxe. While a weapon specialist would know the particular ins and outs of a certain weapon and useful techniques unique to that weapon type, the basics of weapons remain the same. The basics of weapon use have less to do with the weapon itself and are more to do with positioning, speed, timing, footwork, reflex, and reach. Once a fighter has learned to fight with one weapon it's ridiculous to represent them as totally useless with a very similar one. That the perks will be giving bonuses to certain weapons is a far better representation of a warrior's abilities.

Oblivion was Bethesda's Halo 2...

No, I have the distinct impression that Skyrim will "out-Oblivion" Oblivion, so to speak.

This is as much a consequence of console-prioritised design as anything else, I am certain.

Unfortunately, the days of PC-prioritised design are long gone... except in some cases (i.e., games from a rather small number of companies).

But then, there are mods! This is why I even considered buying the game at all. And why I will, now that modding is without a doubt going to be a feature.

I don't see too much of Morrowind or Oblivion, really. And that is a good thing. I don't want Morrowind 2 or Oblivion 2. I want Skyrim to stand on it's own as a great game and a leap forward for the series. And for me, I'm sure it will. Sure, some people won't like it, but to be brutaly honest, that's not my problem.

I liked Oblivion more than Morrowind because I didn't expect much since Morrowind was much less smaller than Daggerfall and the combat system in Morrowind was terrible.... And everyone walked they had a stick up their ass. :whistling:

I find it daunting people actually support removal and or complete omission of features in past games for a series that flaunts the "Go anywhere do anything" and some of the very things that allowed you to do that are gone. but its ok theres children and Dragon shouts. :confused: if you attended the chat you'll notice pete said there was to much depth and complexity in the game, but no chance to change your chars hair in game or how Todd says how this is the biggest game they've ever made but their estimates of size and quests hover with that of Oblivion :shakehead:

I haz an opinion, I can haz cheeseburger?

I really don't care about changing my character's hair in game.

Outside of that, no I don't believe features have been omitted. I already mentioned how the "removed" skills are just combined with others. Mysticism spells are still in the game. They are just combined with other skills. Plus things, like dual wielding, or smithing, are being included that absolutely trump what's been included in the games before.

18 < 21, to be certain, but I still believe that the 18 provides more content, complexity, and diversity than the 21 of Oblivion. Because those 18 skills have separate branches and paths the player can take, where as the 21 of Oblivion were just 1 straight line (same with Morrowind's 27).

[censored] no, this game isn't even worthy to sit on the same shelf as Morrowind. The PC is like Morrowind's ex lover for Skryim, it gets in there and it does its best but it knows that Morrowind has already been there and knows that it'll never measure up. The only system that will have any replay value is the PC and that is because they can fix all the crap Beth has done to screw up the series.

I agree with whoever said this game looks like a watered down Oblivion.

You're wrong. It's a step FORWARD in that direction :thumbsup:

The focus on world design DEFINITELY points more toward Morrowind. In terms of actual gameplay, it's more Oblivion. Weren't we all looking for a game that played more like Oblivion but looked more like Morrowind, after all?

It never occured to me that those other games were based on TES lore or TES game mechanics. Always thought that Planescape was a D&D game, in which mages were characterized by being able to wield magic, in contrast to fighters, which isn't the case in TES.

Morrowind was a hit and Oblivion was built upon it. Sorry, but your argument is flawed.

The number of skills has nothing to do with how in depth they are. In oblivion and Morrowind skills where just numbers. In Skyrim the perk system allows for skills to have more depth than in other entries of the series.

*groan*

Yeah, fighting couldn't possibly have anything to do with how you use your weapon to cause damage in the first place, what the weight distribution of the weapon is, and the basic characteristics of what material the weapon is made of...

Sorry to say, but if you believe that a claymore is similar to a battleaxe, I have to doubt that you held either in your hand. A claymore is still a fencing weapon.

Your entire post is laughably false.

First off, Morrowind was a huge critical and financial success. Saving Bethesda Game Studios from a quite death and putting them on the map as one of the best developers when it came to RPGs. Sorry oldies, but that honor doesn't belong to Daggerfall.

Ken Rolston was the Lead Designer of Both Morrowind and Oblivion, yet they're both vastly different games. Bruce Nesmith is now the Lead Designer of Skyrim, someone completely different than both games.

Morrowind had "Light RPG" mechanics as well. Just because the game calculated attacks through Die-rolls doesn't automatically make it deep. Even since Daggerfall, TES games have been more about the Action than direct Roleplaying like you'd see in Dungeons and Dragons. There was very little characterization available to players in Morrowind as well, and with absolutely no limits on what the player can achieve, there was no tradeoff.

Looking at Skyrim though, with the equipment and perk restrictions, Skyrim already promises better characterization at least through gameplay. Having to choose not only what skillperks you acquire (Which are finite), but also what loadout you have in combat brings more combative RPG to the series than even Daggerfall, though it appears the game will still totally lack anything beyond that for characterization. Something that was only seen in Daggerfall.

More importantly though, Skyrim is a totally Handcrafted experience, where Oblivion was 80% Procedural. That fact alone is what's going to make Skyrim more "Morrowind" than "Oblivion".

Seems 50/50 to me.

That is one of the stupidest thing I have read around this forums. So, every fantasy game has to be settles in a completely crazy world with nothing to do with ours? Peronally, I doubt you can watch giant mountains and cliffs and tundras and dense alpine forests through your window. One thing is very clear, at least for me: the environments are going to be more beautiful than those in Morrowind and Oblivion.

By the way, there was level scaling in Morrowind. And if you don't want to level lock dungeons at level 1... then don't do it. Though the system works in such way that every dungeon has a range (for example, from 15 to 20, so if you visit it at level 1 it will lock in 15).

Skyrim is not Morrowind, Oblivion, Daggerfall, Arena, Redguard, Dawnstar, Shadowkey, Battlespire. Skyrim is Skyrim

:wink:

Very nicely said!