You cannot make the game 100% realistic and still have a playable game. So don't make the things that you can't have realistic and still have a playable game realistic. But please, make everything that you can make realistic and still have a playable game more realistic if you are going to make the graphics more realistic. The more the graphics and physics are realistic the more distracting it is when certain aspects don't fit. I can let Morrowind and earlier get away with dummy corpses and no blood stains because the graphics are very abstract compared to real life no matter how good they were for the time. I can only *just* barely let Oblivion get away with this treatment without it bothering me. Skyrim-level realism without fatal blows appearing fatal in how the newly made corpse reacts to them is going to be very distracting and annoying. Its going to be something we have to put up with to get to the rest of the game that is good.

You can't have realistic gore appear while hitting an enemy 50 times with an ax? Then don't. You can have realistic gore appear when the character dies? Then do.

The same argument could be made for performance. If you can't have a playable game with waving tree branches and running water, then don't. if you can, please do. Etc. Etc. Etc. If you make the graphics updated to this level the actions that the characters take, including dying, should be brought up to the same speed.

Uhm.. about the realism=decapitation and stuff: Isn't it supposedly near impossible to cut someones head off? Executioners sometimes had to hack at peoples necks several times before the head came off, and that was with an axe/sword designed to chop off heads.

And guess what, there's a crap load of blood in the process. I guarantee there are videos of beheading on the internet, though I wouldn't recommend checking them out.

Are we not getting special finishing moves sneaking up behind someone and running a knife through them? The visual of watching a blade go through someone wouldn't be enough justification for their death? Or do we plan to undress them and look at the length/width of the entry and exit wounds?

Ah, yeah, I know there's blood and all, and I'm all for blood if I decapitate someone, it's just that it sounds like someone wants decapitations and limbs falling off all the time, which would get... I don't know, boring (at least in a game like this, in i.e. GoW it's okay).

Well, just read up on one of the executioners in Saudi Arabia, and it seems like he gets most of his beheadings in a single stroke. And I don't think there should be constant beheading or amputations either, but there should definitely be a sense of added realism in the combat. And from there videos there seems like there will be, but the extent is hard to gauge. The reactions to getting hit are definitely a good start.

Erm, there is blood on your sword, but not on enemy?
Now that's realistic! :rolleyes:

Yes, they really are.
Btw, do we have any idea how often those Finishing Strikes will appear? (that sounded weird, but I'm too tired to think of a proper way to say it)

Yes, given the rules of the gameworld fireballs are realistic. The enemy not charring is not realistic. And without wounds are you sure they died from your weapons? Did the blood come from the enemy? How? They have no wounds.

Some blood spatter on my weapon or on the opponent is all I need. I could care less about gurgling bleed-outs, aputations, etc.; that's just window dressing.

No, there was blood on their armor most of the time and on the ground/walls behind them. I didn't know someone was going to pick at my post.



Because it's a fantasy RPG not a combat simulation? Pretty sure when I kill a bandit with a mace it was because I beat him to death with it.

you shouldn't even be able to buy skyrim because you start talking how bad something is from a 1 second screen....just my oppinion

I love these simulation arguments. They can be used for not adding anything to the game.

It all comes down to personal taste. How people choose to justify their taste is somewhat irrelevant.

I'm really starting to think all these no "simulation" people should really just go play text based games. Seems like it'd fit their personalities better.

You realise that argument is just as useful.

It does seem to be what they're advocating for, whether or not they realize it.

All good points so far. Aside from the nagging reasons why some people like gore and some don't, the best argument for it not working gameplay-wise is because of the leveling system. However, there are many good arguments for why it should/could be in the game.

First off, a point in reply to Summer's posts about the gore not having been in other TES games. Read through The Infernal City. It is canon. It was written under the direction and guidance of Todd Howard, Pete Hines, Bruce Nesmith, Kurt Kuhlmann etc. That book vividly illustrates the amount of gore I would expect to see in the TES universe. Obviously the developers agreed, otherwise the book would not have the detailed gory description of combat, death, and bodies that it does.

One huge irony in this is that the book doesn't have the warning that Halo and Gears of War novels have about the book being based off of a Mature-rated game. And yet the gore in TIC is actually more graphic in many ways than what is described in the Gears of War novels, for instance. After comparing all of those, I am astounded by that fact. I will have to say that I was extremely pleasantly surprised that Greg Keyes fleshed out the universe in such a way to make me believe the combat was real. It would have severely diminished the quality of the book if that had been left out.

Now, I understand how the transfer from novel to game won't work with TIC because of TES's leveling system prohibitations and marketing issues, but it is interesting by comparison that those other game-based novels had equal (if not less) gore than the games themselves.

I suppose what it comes down to is that I expect Bethesda to take as much liberty as they can get away with and still keep it M-rated. I mean, remember what happened to Lucien Lachance in Oblivion?? When you saw what was done to him, didn't you get the point that Bethesda really wanted you to be shocked?? I know I did. And I certainly wouldn't have been nearly as horrified and enthralled by that story if he had just been comfortably laying on the floor like a doll. I think Skyrim will surprise us with how brutal it can really be, based on what the devs have done before.....

we should have the chance to have it on or have it off we should be able to say ehll yeah i want that or hell no i dont nwant any of that :swear: on my game thats what i have to say.

I argee...to a point. I don't want Skyrim to become a hack and slash gore fest, but it would be nice to be able to impale an enemy with your sword and have a little blood come out of the wound. The decapatations might be going a little far though. I would LOVE to have clerics and healers tending to the wounded though. Plus, if you just wack at something leg over and over again, it shouldn't die. There needs to be a little more realism then in oblivion and MORE COMBAT MOVES

Just give an option to turn it off in Options. For those of us who like extreme gore, we will enjoy it turned on.

I don't think so. It's part of a common and tiresome argument that often arises whenever the word realism starts getting thrown around.

Strange, can't remember it.
Still, cutting of a limb would make things way more enjoyable.
People want realistic?
Then let it be realistic.
Gore is one of the first things on my realism list.

Whatever you say, but how about you actually discuss the matter at hand.

i like gore its just that it gets boring after awile(like in fo3)i just got tired of it.