*only time will tell as some things confirmed as cut have since been restored like one hand melee blocking and, evidently, decapitation/dismemberment.

Cutting unnecessary elements in order to make things more efficient is always a good thing.

I am a die hard PC gamer, but I really wouldn't care if Todd said that some elements of the game were changed to make them work easier on consoles. I know they sell a lot of PS3 and X-Box 360 version of the game, so I'm good with that.

What I don't like is the notion that to make a game more concole friendly it has to be dumbed down, like ever console player is a 12 year old who's attention span can not keep them on a single game for more than 10 hours, or that they can't figure out how to develop or build a character on their own, or that they can't game a RPG with race or stat limitations on thier characters. I don't believe that console players are a bunch of dumbies and to make a game more friendly for consoles you don't have to assume the players are idiots.

The kicker for me is that they are making the games dumber for consoles, based on an incorrect assumption that console players can't handle a real game, and then that console version of the game is being ported to the PC. This is were I become directly affected by it.

Oh, okay. I suppose you also hate that linen shirt combined with those blacksmith pants. I bet you don't like the idea of mixing clothing with armor either. Or fighting shirtless. Why don't we merge gauntlets and helmets too? I mean, using different sets of those look ugly as hell, right? Less option is always a good thing!

Unnecessary to whom?

Cutting unnecessary elements in order to make things more efficient is always a good thing.

Q: Will Skyrim be stripped of its hard-core elements loyal TES fans are looking forward to?
A: No (with a straight face that would convince Dr. Lightman from "Lie to Me")

The majority of players. Heck, based on sales numbers alone, I can tell you that the "die-hard" fans represent a tiny fraction of the playerbase.

I don't see how you can pin the "dumbing down" of this game as a console factor. You're attributing the whole of negativity regarding flattened and simpler game mechanics on consoles?

I don't think Bethesda thinks lowly of console players at all. You are basically accusing a company of a prejudice that we have no clear evidence of. Yes, the game is simpler than it used to be, but to blame that on a whole set of people that choose a different piece of hardware? That's a broken line of logic...

The context was wrapped in comparison of the Dragon Ages, basically stating that the first left more options available to the player while the second was streamlined so much in an attempt to appeal to a larger audience that it had become dumbed down or less hard core compared to its predecessor. Albeit, Todd squirmed when asked if TESV : TESIV :: Dragon Age II : Dragon Age Origins, but I read that as sincere malcontent that the possibility had even crossed their mind.

Here's, as best I could type out, the relevant Q&A

Kevin: I loved Dragon Age for the same reasons I loved Oblivion. Dragon Age II was so streamlined that it felt as though it robbed us of the elements we came to love in Origins. I have a fear, a secret fear, that Skyrim might possible, in an attempt to appeal to more general audience, might rob some of us hard core, loyal Elder Scrolls fans. Can you look me in the eye and say, 'Kevin, no. It's not true'? Where's the speech skill?

Todd: There is a speech skill. Kevin, no. We've changed things around, but this is a very, very hard core game. We don't try to appease any crowd other than making a better game. If you liked Oblivion, I assure you this is a better game. If you don't like Oblivion, this is not going to change your mind. That's how we view it. We're Elder Scrolls fans as well. http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa150/JustinCoherent/Elder%20Scrolls/Ithinkyoulllikethegame.jpg

Kevin: So you're not gonna pull a Dragon Age II on us?

Todd: Um... *resists laughing* http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa150/JustinCoherent/Elder%20Scrolls/MicroExpression.jpg. That's a loaded comment.

Oh, okay. I suppose you also hate that linen shirt combined with those blacksmith pants. I bet you don't like the idea of mixing clothing with armor either. Or fighting shirtless. Why don't we merge gauntlets and helmets too? I mean, using different sets of those look ugly as hell, right? Less option is always a good thing!

I don't see how almost any of the things removed, like item damage/repairing, seperate grieves, short/long swords, attributes, evolving athletic ability etc. are unnecessary. If you think they are, then I argue that everything except a static, single levelled character with 1 build, 1 weapon and one way to attack is unnecessary.

Okay. Then hardcoe elements are being cut off the game.

I don't see how almost any of the things removed, like item damage/repairing, seperate grieves, short/long swords, attributes, evolving athletic ability etc. are unnecessary. If you think they are, then I argue that everything except a static, single levelled character with 1 build, 1 weapon and one way to attack is unnecessary.

We are too close to launch, I really would not rely on that if I were you.

haha awesome job with the added pictures

He stuttered. :sadvaultboy:

Repairing- Having to carry a bunch of hammers around with you wasn't necessary; it was annoying. It also had nothing to do with character variety.

Separate Greaves- If it gets rid of clipping to combine cuirass and greaves, and if it gives us more armor sets, then I'm all for it. And again, nothing to do with character variety.

Short/Long Swords- Have they confirmed that there aren't short swords in the game? Not that I see how that would be game-breaking, but I hadn't heard one way or the other.

Attributes- Numbers. From the raging debate on the forums alone, it's clear that this was only considered a necessity by some players. Still has nothing to do with character variety.

Evolving Athletics- Running and jumping everywhere just to level up a skill was tedious, not fun.

Etc.- Basically, none of the cut elements have a thing to do with the open-endedness of the game. The most important part of the Elder Scrolls series has always been the open world and the innovative skill-leveling system. Add Radiant Story, and you have a game with infinite variety. Doesn't make the game less complex. Doesn't make it less challenging. Just makes it more fun.

Repairing- Having to carry a bunch of hammers around with you wasn't necessary; it was annoying. It also had nothing to do with character variety.

Separate Greaves- If it gets rid of clipping to combine cuirass and greaves, and if it gives us more armor sets, then I'm all for it. And again, nothing to do with character variety.

Short/Long Swords- Have they confirmed that there aren't short swords in the game? Not that I see how that would be game-breaking, but I hadn't heard one way or the other.

Attributes- Numbers. From the raging debate on the forums alone, it's clear that this was only considered a necessity by some players. Still has nothing to do with character variety.

Evolving Athletics- Running and jumping everywhere just to level up a skill was tedious, not fun.

Etc.- Basically, none of the cut elements have a thing to do with the open-endedness of the game. The most important part of the Elder Scrolls series has always been the open world and the innovative skill-leveling system. Add Radiant Story, and you have a game with infinite variety. Doesn't make the game less complex. Doesn't make it less challenging. Just makes it more fun.

Repairing- Having to carry a bunch of hammers around with you wasn't necessary; it was annoying. It also had nothing to do with character variety.

No he said, A Dragon Age 2? Sounds like a loaded question. We don't create game for one specific group, we just go to create a better game.

-Translation: I am not aware that so many people hated DA2(Not good for a game developer to be oblivious with the opinion of the general audience on other games) , I only have in mind the general audience.

I'm worried.

I dont think anything can be as bad as dragon age 2

What a godawful mess that game was

This.

When I heard about smithing, I was so hopeful they'd remove repair hammers (or as someone mentioned prior, make them into a high level perk), forcing you to repair armor/weapons at a forge--if you have a high enough skill-- or paying the blacksmith to fix your armor/weapons for you. It seemed like such an IMPROVEMENT over Oblivion.

But, instead, we have NO armor/weapon degradation. What?? This isn't the TES I know and love. And this is just one thing they REMOVED that really has me scratching my head.

ALL OF THOSE THINGS ADD TO CHARACTER VARIETY. What kind of twisted logic tells you more variety of options and ways to develop your character does NOT make more character variety (not that was even what I said in my argument). And all of these things add layers of complexity to the game. Like I said, if interesting layers of complexity are "unnecessary, why not just have a one-character system with no customisation at all and everything be solved by mashing the attack button? And the argument that numbers = bad just demonstrates the increasing desire for simplistic, dumbed down hacknslash. The numbers control what your characters can do and how well, in case you've never playe an RPG before, and attributes add much needed realism when done well, getting better at using one type of weapon should make you stronger, and this strength should translate into all types of weapons (for example).

Yes, people need to understand that whatever Bethesda does is perfect and decreasing choices has nothing to do with decreased player choice!

/s

"Variety" is a numbers game. It's math. When you decrease, say, the clothes options from separate shirts and pants to one-piece "outfits", what you have done is lowered player investment, as your have fewer options to make your character feel unique to you.

It's like if Bethesda had gotten rid of sliders on character generation and simply given us a bigger list of presets that you were forced to choose. They might look good, but again, it takes away from your ability to make a character feel your own.

Also, your logic on most of these simply doesn't add up at all.



"Having to carry a bunch of healing potions or equip restoration spells isn't necessary, it's annoying. It has nothing to do with character variety."

This type of reasoning of what you personally find "annoying" is totally subjective, and could be used to justify anything.

Ok, let me be more clear.

A character who wields a blade and a character who wields a slightly shorter version of that blade are not different (except that one must be compensating for something). Requiring every character, regardless of their background to carry around 20 hammers in a sack isn't interesting- it's pointless.

And again, your opinion about attributes clearly isn't shared by everyone. I'm perfectly content with the clear variety that will be provided by skills and perks.

Nothing you listed has anything to do with stripping characters of options that will make them clearly unique. Hell, a warrior class that specializes in light armor will still be worlds different from a warrior class that specializes in heavy armor. And that's just one change of focus.