Does Skyrim need Kinect/Move?

I want to be able to hack at minotaurs with a sword wielded by my own two hands! I want to be able to aim a bow without the awkwardness of crosshairs on the screen. I want to be able to cast spells using specific gestures of my hands and my whole body, and to cast them better the more closely I follow the 'ideal form' of the gesture! I want to dodge and duck swords and spells. Bonus? you can do away with a lot of menus - none needed for magic, and as for weapons, pull a sword out of its scabbard, and pull an arrow from the quiver on your back. VOTE YES IF YOU WANT HANDS FREE!


Does Skyrim need a hardcoe mode?

I want to have to eat, drink, and sleep to survive. I want to have to put up a tent and build a fire in cold weather. It won't be possible for me to live on potions alone, or go for 108 hours without sleep. I want my uber-marksman skills to pay off in hunting deer for survival. The meat shouldn't stay fresh long though, and I'll have to cook it at a campfire to eat it, unless I'm an Argonian. Since surviving is hard, my foes don't have to be uber-men to make for a challenge. Plus visiting the local inn for a fresh beer and a clean bed won't be pointless. VOTE YES IF YOU WANT hardcoe MODE!


Does Skyrim need full economic participation?

Now that I have to eat, drink, and sleep, I need a way to get money. I should be able to escort caravans (or own them!), protect towns, bodyguard VIPs, or maybe just have my own little farm on the edge of civilization that I tend, bringing wheat and veggies to market. Maybe I could even herd my own reindeer in the frozen far north, and sell meat and skins. But it shouldn't be easy to get rich - It should be bloody hard, with bandits threatening my caravan, wolves eating my reindeer, and healers draining my money patching me up after my latest escapade. But if I'm a really, really good fighter, I should still be able to live on loot alone. Biggest bonus? Escorting a caravan makes not-fast-traveling worthwhile. VOTE YES IF YOU WANT THIS!


Does Skyrim need a larger game world?

I want the world to be big - big enough that I could explore to my heart's content in one game and then be able to go live a different life in a completely different part of the world the next go-around. Oblivion was 17 sq miles? Give me 50 - or 100. Give me the world, baby. VOTE YES IF YOU AGREE!


Does Skyrim need Co-op?

I want to raise heck with my bros - defeat bosses together, storm planes of oblivion, stand back-to-back against a circle of whatever-the-bad-dudes-are-this-time. Maybe we could own competing caravans, or go into business together. VOTE YES IF YOU WANT TO OWN WITH YOUR BROS!

Yes to all but a big world is by far most the important because hardcoe modes and complex economy will be fixed with mods (and most fans get the PC version in addition to console versions of the game) but a map can't be expanded by mods (not the main map, or "the hub").

PC.
Meh.
Meh.
YES.
NO.

No, I don't want a stupid gimmick like Kinect in TES.
Yes, hardcoe mode could be very immersive.
Yes, that seems very interesting and would add the realism I always wanted.
Meh I think the Oblivion map is big enough but wouldn't care if it was bigger.
No I don't want any sort of multiplayer.

No
Yes
Yes
Yes
and
Yes

This sums up my feelings on the matter.

I don't get why so many people want a larger game world
to me, that just increases the spread of interesting sites, basically ensures oblivion style fast travel and discourages exploration, since there will be fewer things to see between a half an hour of walking in the wilderness, occasionally being assaulted by wolves and the like.
I would prefer for it to be the same size, if not smaller, than oblivion, as long as that ensures for it to be more full and exciting

No, meh, meh, meh, no. Kinda catchy, you know!

What does Skyrim need most?

An immediate release date! :celebration:

kinect is the end of gaming as we know it. i despise it and may consider not buying the game if you have to use kinect

No.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Meh.

No
Yes
No
No
No.

The world is big enough already...

First of all, this game is multiplatform so no Kinect, but thats a terrible idea anyway and...just no.
I don't think hardcoe would fit as well in a fantasy setting as it does in a post-apocalyptic one. So no.
The economy thing, maybe. Although Bandits and animal attacks on caravans shouldn't be a huge problem and the town guards should be able to protect the towns. Again, this isn't fallout.
Larger game world? Hell to the YEAH. MOAR MOAR MOAR MOAR MOAR is the name of the game. Oblivion and Morrowind were HUGE but there could always be room for more.
Co-op? No. This is a single-player experience. Always has been, always will be. Thats the way we like it. TES is one of the last remaining series that continues to offer epic single player RPG experiences that follow the idea that we shouldn't have to choose between "Quantity" and "Quality"

You don't want lots of space for modders to put their stuff in?

Plus Oblivion's nature was much more realistic than Morrowind's or Fallout 3's dense worlds. If it's open world it needs to be big!

Dwemer

hardcoe means XXX stuff, yesn't?

I voted yes for the larger world map. AS LONG AS IT WORKS. I was personally happy with Red Dead Redemption's map style. that was large, but still immersive and explorable.
However, I do NOT want fast travel *remembers Morrowind and smiles at the stilt striders* *remembers Oblivion and furrows brow at fast travel, but smiles at the horses, and large roads*

Man, I feel jaded. The only thing I didn't put 'No' on was a bigger world (Where I put 'meh').

1. It's to cross platform for Kinect/Move.
2. hardcoe mode (as implemented in F:NV) just makes companions worthless.
3. 'Economic Participation?' Look, do work all day. Work svcks. I don't want to work. I want to hit things with swords.
4. Larger Worlds mean less detail. I like some detail.
5. Bethesda can't even balance the game for one player, imagine how bad that would be for two.

It needs more snow.

No to Kinect, Co-op, economic participation. And how do we know if it needs a larger game world if we don't know how big the game world will be? or is this in relation to Oblivion, if so then its not needed but would be nice to have.

I think its very easy for someone to shoot down a feature like kinect or move if they don't have kinect or move. If it can be implemented well as a secondary peripheral, by all means put it in.

I could do with or without hardcoe mode. It seems more relevant in a game like Fallout because theres a survival aspect but for the more hardcoe roleplaying audience it may be useful.

I proposed a great idea in terms of becoming a merchant. I'd really like to see NPCs participate in economy as well though.

I really don't think it matters what the game size is. If the area is smaller theres probably going to be more content. So i'm in impartial to this idea too.

Aside from Battlespire, multiplayer has never really been the TES way of doing things. So I don't really see it happening now.

Kinect-If implemented well enough it could be fun, but this will most likely not happen.

hardcoe- I really don't care, I never used it in NV

Economic Participation- I'd rather not have a job in a game, because I play games to get away from life, not live the boring life of a merchant. What I would like is that the citizens of a town and you are involved in its economy, so if you buy something that merchant gets a bit richer and can afford better stuff. And citizens should sometimes go to buy supplies.

Larger Map- If they can fill it up sure, but I'd rather have a content-rich small map than a barren, uninteresting large map.

Co-op- I'd rather not. First of all, Bethesda is already well into the development process and can't implement it at this point with out potentially pushing back the release date. Second, as Mikedzines said, it's just not their way of doing things.

No Kinect/Move.

Yes hardcoe mode.

Yes full-economic participation.

Yes larger game world.

No co-operative mode.

It doesn't really need any of this, but a larger game world, economic participation, and hardcoe mode would be nice. I'd enjoy co-op but it shouldn't really be a priority. What I want even more is simply incentive to explore. This means no, or fewer leveled enemies and loot, and more unique and rare loot and situations.

How did hardcoe mode make companions worthless for you?
I found that it made them far more necessary. Gotta have some pack mules for my loot if food and ammo have weight!

I could care less for kinect/move funtionality
hardcoe mode could be interesting, though I only stuck with it in F:NV for the achievement.
Economic participation could also be interesting depending on how it was implemented.
I would much rather have a world the same size as Oblivion but with far more hand placed and interesting places to go so I have a incentive to explore. (morrowind)
I voted meh on co-op. If actually made it work I would use it.