I know you have, its just nonsense that means nothing.

No, you're projecting. Or do you actually think games can be 1:1 representations?

This, stopping the target from talking too would be possible and pretty funny at least if used on player however it would require more effort and grip into lots of other part of code than the magic system.

Player and npc speaking was two totally different things.

Lots of stuff get simplified down to primary effect in games. bullets get stopped by anything is an fallout example.

No, games are not 1:1 representations. However, making an NPC stop speaking while under a spell effect is incredibly basic to do, yet they never did any such thing.

Whats more, is the story is fictional, thus, not proof for anything. So saying it does work that way is bull when the game doesn't show it, and the only proof you have is a fictional, even within the context of the game's already fictional world, story.

Not that i wouldnt have loved to see it do both mind you...any time someone annoys you just silence them...peaceful quiet

That's not effort. It's busy work, and a cluttered inventory. If, for example, you take Lincoln's Repeater to Adams Air Force Base, you will not find a single hunting rifle between the Capitol and the top of the satellite tower. It's a pointless punishment to the player to not be able to not have fully functioning weaponry because there aren't any copies around.

You used a story from the game for your argument, that was fictional in case you were unaware

Or you know it's not, because they don't want people waiting around being mute. Not to mention Silence has been in since Arena, where obviously you don't have a bunch of talking NPCs or PCs for that matter. All I've seen is bias from you and no actual arguments, ever.

...Super Mutants carry a ton of Hunting Rifles and they infest that very area...

Also it is no more a punishment than enemies shooting at you...because that is the point of conflict in a game. Challenge and difficulty are part of it, otherwise there is no point

I am aware.

That was part of the point, that the games are entirely contradictory. Likely part of the reason they removed it as its clear they couldn't decide on how it worked, then when they did, they realized it didn't make sense.

Much in the same reason why mysticism was removed in Skyrim. It originally being a catch all for the spell effects they couldn't decide on a school for, then they did, so it was no longer needed.

Arena and Daggerfall don't mean anything, their lore got thrown out and rebooted in Morrowind by MK.

What area? The Presidential Metro and Adams Air Force Base? You claim you hate metagaming. Is it not metagaming to lug a half-dozen hunting rifles around because you know there probably won't be any where you're going?

Except by that logic nothing is real in the book, including its mentioning of invisibility, which we know isn't fictional. Just because a book is fictional doesn't mean everything in it is fictional.

Except it would have made MORE sense in Skyrim by blocking traditional magic AND shouts...ya know the attack used by the game's main protagonist and antagonist...

Also Mysticism wasnt a "catch all", it made perfect sense and it actually makes less sense in Skyrim for all the spells that were "relocated" as they have nothing do with those schools compared to Mysticism

I never said everything in the book was fictional.

This is what I keep thinking

Why would mages learn a spell type only useful against a magical being that hasn't been seen in over 200 years? and even before then, no dragonborn since Tiber had ever shouted, and he lived 500+ years before Skyrim.

And yes, it was, Todd had said so numerous times. Mysticism was originally created to be a dumping ground for all the magic spells they couldn't fit into other schools lore wise, which is why mysticism's logic was "basically anything" unlike the far more defined roles of the other schools.

O-o Lincoln's repeater is in the museum...which is SURROUNDED by Super Mutants! It is a warzone FILLED with them outside there!

Then you have no ground to pick and choose what you think is and isn't fictional. I've unfortunately, read everything you've said.

I can go only by the games, which show no such thing, but then say another.

Except by, you know, playing the games and seeing silence stops them from casting. Again, you must think no NPC or player poops or pees either, right? I mean, we've never seen it in game have we?

Regarding weapon degradation, you answered yourself to the question you asked:

Regarding skills I'm indifferent. What I do know is that I want to have something to grow and raise up, to give points to... And that to effect the game in how good my character is at something. It's not the name that's important, it's the essence.

As for weapon degradation and having to fix stuff, well it is kind of tedious and boring. And a thing that if it goes away, doesn't make its absence very noticeable.

You know what ? I'd be ok with a degrade system if I could fix the guns or armors myself without being averted by the game because some numbers are not of a high value enough.

For example if I only had to have 'hammers' in my inventory to use them for fixing stuff, and my 'armor fixing' skill didn't forbade me from fixing the only piece of armor I have because my skill isn't at a ridiculously high number, I'd be ok with it.

But if I don't want my character to be a professional armorer, and I don't like the armoring gameplay enough to spend lots of time in it to upgrade my skill so I can then go out adventuring without the fear that my only gun will broke in the middle of a dungeon and I won't be able to fix it, then I shouldn't have to. I should be free to do what I want, and play the way I want.

How convenient to ignore statistical growth of the video game market, which weighed in at a sum of 7 billion in the 90's and blew up to an expected growth of 90 billion in 2015. This doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of the general growth of the gaming populace, which directly influences the sales of video games. The market has grown to include a wide demographic of individuals. Whether you continue to ignore this fact is your prerogative. But, don't let design decisions made by devs mislead you into some [censored] mentality that devs are actively hamstringing their own product to appeal to a wider audience.

What a load of [censored].

If that was the case, Oblivion would not have kept the leveling system that drove Morrowind if they felt people were too [censored] stupid to put the square in the square hole and the triangle in the triangular hole. Morrowind pushed 200,000 copies in the year it released (which saved Bethesda from going under after their previous TES titles didn't do well). Oblivion pushed 1.7 million the month it released. Better yet, going into Fallout 3 from Oblivion, they didn't scrap the SPECIAL system (which functions like attributes in TES) like they did to Skyrim's attributes, because they believed the perks system would work without it.

Oh, and let's also not forget the marketing growth of video games and how social media and constant connectivity to the internet has driven the sales of video games between now and the [censored] 90's.

I remember in 2011 when games were being pressured to release multiplayer support because people somehow felt it was the only way to make it big and sell well. Skyrim stuck to its guns, shipped with no multiplayer (something that isn't changing in Fo4) and sold like a mother [censored]. The devs didn't cave into some belief that multiplayer would improve the sales of their game. They delivered a single player product that punched well above it's weight and KO'ed many titles of that year.

I absolutely hated what happened to the sand-box world of the Hitman franchise, and how the game became akin to a story-driven, third person shooter. I also hated what happened to Splinter Cell's slow and steady stealth system in favor of a more run-n-gun game. However, I didn't get up on a [censored] soap box and point at casuals as being the cause of the game's design decision. I looked at the devs and blamed them for making a poor decision to gut a lot of the core-constitutions of each series.

It's so convenient to scapegoat casual gamers like they're second class citizens and the main reason games are apparently being "dumbed down." It's disingenuous as hell and insulting to the intelligence of people who frequent these forums. Cut that [censored] out.

I know where the repeater is. My point is taking it out to Adams leaves you without any option to repair it, other than metagaming.

Your move, slick.

It wasn't people in general. Just EA and the websites that lick their boots.

That is the POINT! The game isnt supposed to be a cakewalk slick! If you have a gun and dont want it to break, GET PARTS! Make it a mission for yourself to go and buy or scavenge the needed weaponry! How about we remove ammo from the game? If i cant find that ammo type i want i guess that is unfair -cries uncontrollably-

The laziness of people is horrifying! If anyone ever wanted to use casual gamers as an example of dumbing down gaming YOU are the epitome of the concept!

You have yet to establish how it adds anything meaningful to the experience other than tedium. It's not difficult to kill level 1 super mutants. Just tedious. That's what you're arguing for. A busywork task that eats time.

O_O I have never been so afraid of humanity's evolutionary future than i am right now...and ive taken a trip to the GTA forums...

It is tedious to kill an enemy? DAFUQ is wrong with you??????

It is PART OF THE GAME! Why collect caps to buy ammo? Why search through containers to find stimpacks? Why shoot that hostile molerat? Why consume that Radaway? Using your mindset id say there is no reason, it is just tedium that prevents me from...doing something...not sure what...