Maybe because that was concept art used to actually make them game, not show off, and it was concept art for specific sets of armor and putting random [censored] on the character would just confuse the hell out of the modelers?

:thumbsup:

The OP does seem to have some degree of obsession with wanting male characters able to wear dresses, and a similar obsession with not wanting female characters to look female in armor. Hmmmm...

Hush! We can't have common sense getting in the way of irrational pessimism!

It may not have been as instant a hit as its successor, but Morrowind and its expansions sold a few million copies too. There's still retailers which stock their shelves with it, and the Xbox GotY version was re-released on multiple occasions if I recall. I'm tired of Morrowind bashers jumping to the conclusion that whatever Morrowind did was incorrect. I'm not saying Morrowind's system was perfect, but I am tired of Bethesda using the "durr hurr we're streamlining it" excuse for reducing everything in the game.

Amen.

In Absolutely NO way shape or form, do any of these teaser clips or hub updates reveal ANYTHING about armour slots. This thread is purely speculation.

I speculate now:

I think armour would be best set by:

1. Helmet
2. Cuirass
3. Arms (??)
4. Gauntlets
5. Greeves
6. Boots

With the clothing articles:

1. One Belt
2. Up to Two amulets
3. up to Four rings

Honestly, as I said in another thread, there are just too many people who are drawing way too many conclusions from what little we actually know. It's getting to the point of being ridiculous. In addition, a lot of you just need to chill on the small stuff, like gender morphing armor. As long as it looks practical, and if there's a slight difference, stop complaining! Honestly, someone is eventually going to bust a nut because there are not any sporks in Skyrim.

You don't think so? It seems clear, to me at least, that Bethesda is one of the best companies when it comes to proactively synergizing solutions to streamlining the paradigm shift back to where it was: realism and immersion.

I swear every topic this guy starts he is trying to make Skyrim look bad.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

At least this forum has mature posters. I have been reading some other forums lately of other game developers, they are filled with people and young kids arguing about everything from the way they wrote their sentence to illogical concepts that can be resolved by a simple Google search.

The majority of people here are at least interested in discussion and you can see that in threads like this even where the thread creator isn't refined when trying to make a point or bring any facts to the table.

Except you can't disagree with something when you have absolutely no facts to support it, you don't even know if you're disagreeing with the decision because the decision isn't know. Untill we know what we're getting, we can neither agree nor disagre and starting the thread number 50 to complain about something that may very well not be a concern of any kind really isn't necessary.

I'm also tired of people complaining that skills get removed and repurposed somewhere else or broken features get removed because they ruin the main purpose of the game. People need to stop equating the number value of how many skills are still in the game with "less content" when it isn't. Bethesda is getting rid of useless/broken features and skills that are useless or pointless get put somewhere else in the game instead of wasting a skill slot so that if someone picks that skill and it doesn't help their character progress, then it leaves a bad taste in someones mouth about the game, because it could become too hard/easy of a game and then people won't enjoy it as much.

Oh i know that is why i come here. I was just saying i don't think he has said one good thing about the game so far, and is only seeing the negatives. But if that is what he wants to do it's his thread, not mine :whistling:

If the armor is like it was Oblivion then it'll be fine. Pauldrons aren't needed I mean we have enough stuff that you can Enchant already.

Hasn't Pete Hines already confirmed we will have multiple armor slots? Yes I'm sure here did, and said something like "what works for Fallout doesn't necessarily work for TES".

I'm actually quite glad with the way Bethesda's handled the skills system, and if executed properly perks will provide a far greater degree of character customization than we've ever had before. I don't really mind the condensed fast travel either, and I think that the offhand magic casting system is a perfect compromise between Morrowind's and Oblivion's.

It's just armor, of all things - we're being given scars and face paint, but if all it takes is equipping a single piece of armor that covers a third of your body before you start looking like every other NPC in the area, that's kind of a step back in my opinion. I wouldn't mind Oblivion's armor system with clothing over/under, though. I'm mostly just feeding off of the OP's negativity about the system having even less slots.

The Fallout armor system won't work or will be in Skyrim because of one word, Enchanting.

My main Hopes are thate there will be piecementalarmour like in Oblivion if not better , the one big object thing of Oblivion was not good and the one whole suit thing of Fallout was really disappointing I don't know why they decided to go with this solution , probably for technical reasons of the dismembering body parts but I am sure that if they work on it a bit they can find a solution to donate all us Fans a great piecemental system ....

This and then I hope they add bling:

15. Ear rings
16. Bracelet 1
17. Bracelet 2
18. Ankle bracelet 1
19. Ankle bracelet 2
20. Nose ring
21. Belly button ring
(22. Lip/eyebrow ring)

Not enchantable.

You are making some ridiculous speculation. None of what you said has been confirmed. As many others have stated I don't see a problem with gender morphing when armors also size morph. TES has never had super skimpy female armors (not including mods). So I don't see where your worry is coming from. As far as having briast cups for female armor, depending on briast size the cups could be for comfort (larger briasts need more support) so unless every female in TES has a C cup or smaller the armor morphing is a non issue.

You could potentially have lore related reasons as to the limits of enchanting certain items. Because of the mass or material certain articles of clothing cannot be enchanted with the same power as say a large cuirass. That way you could stave the potentially abusive 'over enchantment' problem and still have multiple armor slots. You could assign an arbitrary number to different clothing and material that represented the limit of enchantment, and then tie that value into different enchantment properties. It might take some work, but it would be worth it to have multiple armor and clothing slots back in the game I believe.

This. Just give every item an "enchantment capacity" value as they had in Daggerfall. Another possibility would be to limit certain body slots to certain enchantment types. For example, I don't quite see how magic gloves have the ability to fortify your acrobatics. Leave constant effects for things such as helms, cuirasses and greaves, and extremities would just have smaller bonuses or on-cast abilities.

I look at it this way, if you're a female adventurer, mercenary etc. who wears armor every day while fighting monsters and other people, you'd have to be the stupidest person alive not to invest in armor that's not agonising to wear, why try to squeeze into male armor that obviously doesn't fit? That's a good way to svck in combat right there.

And regarding streamlining, I'm getting tired of people desperately clinging to the past like it's some holy grail. Evolution is a necessary aspect of game design, no matter how good a game forumla is, it will get boring eventually. If you want to play what is essentially the same game over and over again for the rest of your life then be my guest, but I don't, nor does the vast majority of people. If TES never evolved, guess what, the games would not be that fun to play, not to mention the sales would be virtually non-existant. Evolution and change is absolutely necessary.

I don't see how anyone can actually hate streamlining while still understanding what the word means, streamlining is like trimming the fat off a steak. You take away the bad parts so you can get to the good part quicker, how is that not a good thing? Honestly, with the little leisure time I have, I don't want to fiddle around in menus and manage cluttered and cumbersome inventories. I just want to play the damn game, that is the content that matters. When Bethesda removes a skill like mysticism for example, it's because that skill was bloody useless and only served to clutter the game, it didn't do any good and it needs to go. The spells are still there, they've just been moved into other magic schools, so what's the problem?

I'll be blunt, i think the majority of people who are lashing out and complaining/whining about every little damn thing are just ignorant, they don't have all the facts and so they just assume the worst and throw a tantrum. I'm sick of seeing it.


Why? What's the point of preventing that exploit when there is no multiplayer for it to affect and the player can simply choose not to enchant parts of their armor to prevent being overpowered? Why even take the time to limit it when it's not necessary? Those who want to be overpowered can be and those who don't can simply restrain themselves. It's called self control, it's not that hard.

Armour slots might be a concern (I'd be content with a similar system to Oblivion; I'd like pauldron slots back), but the female armour argument isn't convincing at all, not least because it seems to place the inexplicably popular "realism" on a higher pedestal than art style, genre familiarity, and gameplay. The argument from realism is a bit ridiculous in this context. There still isn't a single realistic computer RPG in existence, and I can't imagine why anyone would want to play one.

Granted, I'm a male gamer, but I've known many gamers of the fairer six who like their characters' "sixified" wargear just fine, and expecting Bethesda to turn every armour design into a genderless wall of metal for the sake of realistic protection is... well, unrealistic. And this is without taking into account the potential for "sixified" male armours (heroes don't have to be berserkers to go around shirtless), and the fact that Bethesda are hardly the worst offenders when it comes to impractical armour designs.

@Urge
I agree completely about the streamlining. Like the term "unrealistic," it seems to be thrown about anywhere RPGs are being discussed, and few seem to know why it's actually a bad thing or where they got their opinion from. I designed my own custom ruleset/total conversion for another RPG a while ago, and I was constantly streamlining things, either because they served no purpose or because they didn't match my vision for the overall game system.