Wonder why they took out Attributes? III : V - Skyrim

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:30 am

I can understand why some people like the new system and others don't but it amazes me how eager some people are to throw Attributes under the bus the moment Bethesda say it's okay to do so. It's not like there have been hordes of people screaming (or even suggesting) that attributes be removed, yet, in the space of a couple of days they have suddenly become an archaic game mechanic that has no place in the modern RPG.

Actually, we had this conversation the first time we found out there were no attributes in Skyrim with the GI article and most people were against the removal of attributes but myself and others explained why it was okay with logical conversation and many of them decided they thought it was a good reason and this second round here had Todd explaining the same thing we did months ago and even more have seen it. We aren't saying that attributes were so terrible and we all saw it, we are saying that they are far less useful in comparison with the new system and that there really isn't a reason to be offended with their removal as their central function is still in the game. The new system has the same function and more as the old system did, I really don't see a downside of any conceivable way. It just seems nostalgia is the only driving force in being offended with attribute removal. Nostalgia seems to be a corrupting force. Nostalgia was the reason some people couldn't enjoy Oblivion for what it was and the reason why Morrowind is so highly overrated. However, Nostalgia affects different people on different topics. They may have nostalgia that makes them hate Oblivion for reducing the number of skills but not have nostalgia make them hate the removal of attributes and so on.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:28 am

Actually, we had this conversation the first time we found out there were no attributes in Skyrim with the GI article and most people were against the removal of attributes but myself and others explained why it was okay with logical conversation and many of them decided they thought it was a good reason and this second round here had Todd explaining the same thing we did months ago and even more have seen it. We aren't saying that attributes were so terrible and we all saw it, we are saying that they are far less useful in comparison with the new system and that there really isn't a reason to be offended with their removal as their central function is still in the game. The new system has the same function and more as the old system did, I really don't see a downside of any conceivable way. It just seems nostalgia is the only driving force in being offended with attribute removal. Nostalgia seems to be a corrupting force. Nostalgia was the reason some people couldn't enjoy Oblivion for what it was and the reason why Morrowind is so highly overrated. However, Nostalgia affects different people on different topics. They may have nostalgia that makes them hate Oblivion for reducing the number of skills but not have nostalgia make them hate the removal of attributes and so on.

Despite your incredible persuasiveness, I don't think the number of people against the removal of attributes has changed much

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:59 am

Well you might think it's archaic, but these traditional rpg traits are what makes TES my favorite rpg series. I agree with you; rpgs seem to be moving in the same direction (Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Fable), and I don't like it. I want a game that covers what these other rpgs are neglecting. But that's just me I guess.

No - it's not just you. That's why this thread is in its third iteration and it's not the only thread on the subject. Nor will this be the end. I will bet anyone who wants to that in coming months, Beth will announce MORE ways in which they're scrapping traditional RPG mechanics and replacing them with sheer nonsense like slow-time and bleeding effects.

Actually, we had this conversation the first time we found out there were no attributes in Skyrim with the GI article and most people were against the removal of attributes but myself and others explained why it was okay with logical conversation and many of them decided they thought it was a good reason and this second round here had Todd explaining the same thing we did months ago and even more have seen it. We aren't saying that attributes were so terrible and we all saw it, we are saying that they are far less useful in comparison with the new system and that there really isn't a reason to be offended with their removal as their central function is still in the game. The new system has the same function and more as the old system did, I really don't see a downside of any conceivable way. It just seems nostalgia is the only driving force in being offended with attribute removal. Nostalgia seems to be a corrupting force. Nostalgia was the reason some people couldn't enjoy Oblivion for what it was and the reason why Morrowind is so highly overrated. However, Nostalgia affects different people on different topics. They may have nostalgia that makes them hate Oblivion for reducing the number of skills but not have nostalgia make them hate the removal of attributes and so on.

Oh please Sleign. If Todd Howard announced tomorrow that the new focus of the game was killing puppies, you'd be on here repeating all of his talking points about how much killing puppies was going to add to the game and accusing anyone who opposed it of simply being filled with nostalgia for the days when TES games didn't center around puppy-killing.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:31 am

Yes, its archaic. Like i said before, most RPG are heading towards cool traits/perks/abilities and moving flat numbers to be behind the scenes and effected through other mechanics.

This sounds exactly like "dumbing down" to me. I like to see numbers. I like to see them in spreadsheets and study different "builds" of characters, and strategize to optimize my build. Perks just don't give me that same pleasure.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 10:54 am

Actually, we had this conversation the first time we found out there were no attributes in Skyrim with the GI article and most people were against the removal of attributes but myself and others explained why it was okay with logical conversation and many of them decided they thought it was a good reason and this second round here had Todd explaining the same thing we did months ago and even more have seen it. We aren't saying that attributes were so terrible and we all saw it, we are saying that they are far less useful in comparison with the new system and that there really isn't a reason to be offended with their removal as their central function is still in the game. The new system has the same function and more as the old system did, I really don't see a downside of any conceivable way. It just seems nostalgia is the only driving force in being offended with attribute removal. Nostalgia seems to be a corrupting force. Nostalgia was the reason some people couldn't enjoy Oblivion for what it was and the reason why Morrowind is so highly overrated. However, Nostalgia affects different people on different topics. They may have nostalgia that makes them hate Oblivion for reducing the number of skills but not have nostalgia make them hate the removal of attributes and so on.

I don't think it's nostalgia I think it's the fact that a feature in the game is being removed. It was the same thing with Spears, Levitation, Werewolfs, etc when they got removed. Change takes time to get used too and I usually would be skeptical of Change too but this particular change had to happen. The 8 Attributes wouldn't have worked in this system and the perks can easily do the same things that Attributes did not to mention that Morrowind and Oblivion didn't help the Attributes cause.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:16 am

Oh please Sleign. If Todd Howard announced tomorrow that the new focus of the game was killing puppies, you'd be on here repeating all of his talking points about how much killing puppies was going to add to the game and accusing anyone who opposed it of simply being filled with nostalgia for the days when TES games didn't center around puppy-killing.

Despite your thought about somehow I only follow Todd Howard, my motivations are my own, you just believe that everyone just blindly follows dev posts. How do you explain the fact that months ago we had this same discussion and I was on the same side. There was no Todd Howard video talking about attributes back then. Nice theory... with each of your posts you get less and less credibility from me.

I don't think it's nostalgia I think it's the fact that a feature in the game is being removed. It was the same thing with Spears, Levitation, Werewolfs, etc when they got removed. Change takes time to get used too and I usually would be skeptical of Change too but this particular change had to happen. The 8 Attributes wouldn't have worked in this system and the perks can easily do the same things that Attributes did not to mention that Morrowind and Oblivion didn't help the Attributes cause.

But that is Nostalgia. If Skyrim was the first TES game, then no one would be complaining about everything that has been revealed. Thus it's nostalgia. It's an unfortunate side effect of having a series because most series have this problem because people remember the wonder in the first of the series and they remember how it made them feel and when they think it won't make them feel the same, they start to get disappointed and when they actually play the game, they still have an air of disappointment and thus it doesn't feel the same, it feels worse and then they think it's a lackluster game when in reality it isn't.

» Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:47 pm

This sounds exactly like "dumbing down" to me. I like to see numbers. I like to see them in spreadsheets and study different "builds" of characters, and strategize to optimize my build. Perks just don't give me that same pleasure.

I don't know if either system is "better" per se, but I would tend to disagree with you in my opinion. Perks have the potential to alter your experience more than numbers do. The way I look at it, if you have 8 attributes, you have 8 things to modify. This might change a bit if one attribute effects a couple things (strength effecting damage and encumbrance). However, all in all, attributes didn't effect your gameplay much. In contrast, perks (if implemented properly), can give you a very large range of different additions to the game, whether that comes in the form in different abilities with weapons, different situational bonuses, or those straight number bonuses you mention. Numbers are limited in the sense that they don't change how you play the game (ability wise), they just impact how effective those same actions are. That being said, I can kind of agree that there is something nice about creating a character that is intrinsically oriented a certain way (nature vs nurture thing). Fiddling around with those values gives you a sense of control before you start playing (engages your imagination). Unless you look at the perk tree beforehand, they don't really function in that same way. So I share some of the same feelings, but I don't think it is necessarily dumbing it down. It isn't so much a new way of reaching the same goal, but a bit of a different goal.

That being said, I don't think this is Beth straying from their roots. My impression is that this has been the route they have wanted to take for a while (heavy emphasis on nurture, less focus on statsheet). I think the past couple games have been sitting kind of in the middle, not eliminating the precontrived statsheet, but having your actions effect stats automatically. Now, I think they are just heading further along that "you are what you play" path. As weird as it sounds, I would almost like the ability to have both perks and attributes, the latter affecting your natural talents (proficiency at picking things up), and perks as the special benefits you gain through experience.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:14 am

And is this a bad thing? I'm sure if you were in Zenimax's place or Bethesda's place, making more money on a product is a good thing, and your decisions would also be the same. In this day and age, and in this economy, it's the way things work. What isn't about money, when it all boils down?

Bethesda doesn't design games to suit what YOU like, and what only YOU merely believe should be included in THEIR game. A monetary-based economy will only continue to place monetary gain first and foremost, so why is there so much complaint? Don't like it, boycott Bethesda along with every single corporation in existence and live life as a hermit. Otherwise, stop all this negativity and enjoy the game when it comes out. Or better yet, go to art school and get a degree in video game development and start designing games how you think they should be designed, and see what happens when millions of people say they hate a certain thing you've done, while another million people will praise you for it. That's life.

Chill dude, I wasn't blaming Bethesda for acting like a rational company, and I realize the world doesn't revolve around me. Thanks for stating the obvious though...

I was just making the point that Bethesda's intentions are pretty similar to the intentions of all companies. Sometimes fans forget this in their fervent worship

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:27 am

Despite your thought about somehow I only follow Todd Howard, my motivations are my own, you just believe that everyone just blindly follows dev posts. How do you explain the fact that months ago we had this same discussion and I was on the same side. There was no Todd Howard video talking about attributes back then. Nice theory... with each of your posts you get less and less credibility from me.

But that is Nostalgia. If Skyrim was the first TES game, then no one would be complaining about everything that has been revealed. Thus it's nostalgia. It's an unfortunate side effect of having a series because most series have this problem because people remember the wonder in the first of the series and they remember how it made them feel and when they think it won't make them feel the same, they start to get disappointed and when they actually play the game, they still have an air of disappointment and thus it doesn't feel the same, it feels worse and then they think it's a lackluster game when in reality it isn't.

Gonna qoute your post without the qoute blocking both parts of your message and ask, what do you see wrong here. your response against what he says and what you say he is doing is very similar to what your doing. this isn't nostalgia, people aren't blindly following nostalgia and sticking to Tradition, they see somethings up and they aren't quick to say oh its ok no problem.

I.E you say don't generalize me, your silly for thinking people hang on todds every word and with that the worth listening to you diminishes.

Ok Part two: Oh they are all just nostalgic, they can't get over the past and seemingly wont enjoy the game with it.

So...your not generalizing with that statement either? So if people don't agree with your particular reasoning, or if they have Legitimate concerns, they are nostalgic. ok I didn't know there were qualities of opinion or that a differing group didnt have merit in there concerns.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:14 pm

Perks have the potential to alter your experience more than numbers do. The way I look at it, if you have 8 attributes, you have 8 things to modify. This might change a bit if one attribute effects a couple things (strength effecting damage and encumbrance). However, all in all, attributes didn't effect your gameplay much. In contrast, perks (if implemented properly), can give you a very large range of different additions to the game,...

You are talking about the way that attributes were implemented in previous Elder Scrolls games, which I didn't like either. They should be more than something that gives you +X to magicka for every Y in intelligence. People would like this old system improved rather than removed. Not arguing about getting rid of perks either -- perks, as I see it, are like spells in your spellbook. They are learned over time. Attributes, on the other hand, stick with you for your lifetime, and define your character (i.e; limitations (I'm clumsy with low agility), and strengths (I've got high intelligence and can learn new languages quicker)) and should play a stronger part of gameplay.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:24 am

Copying over my post from http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1181579-gamesas-gutting-attributes/page__st__20 in case admoni feels like carrying the discussion on. Not trying to goad him into it or anything, I was just enjoying talking about it.

Splitting your post up into smaller quotes because I responded point by point - not trying to misrepresent your argument or anything like that.

Am I going to have to get a perk to be more balanced?

I don't imagine there'll be balance perks, particularly, though maybe under armor (more agile use of armor = harder to knock over because you're more in control of your momentum). Perhaps pick up a perk for blocking or parrying to allow you to stop those knock-down blows before they hit you? Why satisfy yourself with just one way to go about doing something when you could approach the problem from multiple angles?

Am I going to have to get a perk to jump higher?

The removal of Acrobatics means I'd say probably not, but the gameworld probably isn't going to be made to keep things from people who can't bound over buildings like Superman - the ability to jump probably simply wouldn't be that relevant of a skill. And if there WAS a perk to increase jump height, I don't see anything much wrong it - though I have no idea how they'd fit it under any of the current skills.

Am I going to have to perk up in order to be rewarded for using the skills of being a real life person interacting with the world?

Well... why not? You learn by doing as much as you learn by studying, don't you? Frankly, I've only recently started to learn to cook and was just learning how to boil rice a couple months ago. It used to take me hours to chop vegetables for a dish - I was incapable of making supper in a timely manner at all. Now, I'm still slow, but I've cut prep time for most things down to an hour at most through the use of new techniques I've naturally picked up just from using the knife. If the overall skill is Cooking and I've been working on it for a while, I'd consider that taking a perk in knife handling.

Am I going to have to get out my trusty spreadsheets in order to determine what magic perks can be done away with to ensure that my mage that has been running back and forth from one side of the country to the other battling dragons has some semblance of strength or is he going to be as weak and unbalanced as some bookworm that's never left the library?

I think you're overthinking things - spreadsheeting probably only matters in particular when you're optimizing a character, and that is certainly fun to some people but you seem to want more immersion and RP. To that end, why bother worrying about how many perks you can "spare" to get a character that fits your concept? Make choices as you're given them and build your character organically, then deal with the challenges that arise from inefficiencies in that arrangement (or, perhaps, enjoy the benefits of unexpected synergy). Isn't that the point of roleplaying? If Beth manages to balance the game well enough, it shouldn't be possible to gimp your character into unplayability merely by taking a few perks for flavor instead of optimization.

Will my mage (with no intelligence or will power attribute) be able to dangerously chug fortifiy willpower/intelligence potions, taking their conciousness beyond the scope of the normal reality where the only the uber high power potions/incantations/spells can be done?

Or will all of this be lamely confined in a magicka meter and skill perk? (perk: press B for Awesome spell!)

You could just represent that a different way and get the same effect - chug Fortify Magicka and Fortify (Skill) potions. Once you're sitting at Destruction 150 and have a pool of Magicka as deep as the sea, I'd say you're capable of performing feats of magic far in excess of anything a mere regular mage is capable of. You're on a different plane of existence - the only difference is what you're buffing, not what you can do with it. It means you have to use more focused buffing items, yes, but that's a relatively minor thing - I mean, if you're a skilled enough alchemist you should have no trouble churning out skill and magicka-fortifying concoctions. Hell, after all that time spent focusing on the craft, you might even pick up a perk or two towards it to help your output. The sky's the limit.

EDIT: Updated my post to reflect changes in yours.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:25 am

As a power gamer, this hasn't changed much at all.

Let's see... every level, increase Luck, Endurance and Strength / Intelligence / Agility... because I want more hitpoints, loot and to maximize whatever makes me kill things better.

What has changed:
Now I don't have to manage an inane attribute increase system to make sure I get max attributes every level by increasing skills in an arbitrary, rather than natural, manner.

Really, what's changed by the removal of attributes for anyone who actually understands this game? The default choice to make a crippled git of a hero? Yay.

Do you really need to have sneakiness to be tied to agility to make you feel sneaky? If the sneaky perk makes you just as sneaky and works the same way, what do you care?

Don't sweat the small stuff. Attribute removal is nothing for this game but the removal of a boring and tedious chore.

This is not to say they can still miss the mark with the perks... but quit crying over this. You can still make a talking fop of a potion maker...

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:48 am

Really, what's changed by the removal of attributes for anyone who actually understands this game? The default choice to make a crippled git of a hero? Yay.

Hey! We want the freedom to make a crippled hero that can't even kill a mudcrab!

But seriously though, your post is exactly right.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:59 am

I'm guessing that at least some of the 280 perks will be considered useless. You could always make a character who focuses on Security, Speechcraft, and Smithing and pick the worst perks you can access.

» Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:09 pm

I don't see a compelling reason to keep this thread open what with all the sarcasm, flamebait, circular arguments, and general disrespect for one another I see here in lieu of actual discussion. Not to mention long, drawn-out arguments targeted specifically at one other member- there's a PM system in place for that, please use it.

Locked.