Good point. Which article is this from?

The difference between those combinations is minimal though.

On the whole "lack of attributes makes everything the same" thing:
Have you played Oblivion on multiple chars, and you felt that the characters feel very same? Yeah, attributes haven't helped in that case.

The problem is that in Oblivion you were able to max everything, which made any "combination" approach the same end result, resulting in the same combination for every character. By putting a limit to perks and statpoints to spent, you actually have to choose between the possible combinations.

That's assuming that having a skill of 50 vs. 51 is equivalent in game diversity as a unique perk selection... an assumption I don't think you will get anyone to agree with.

I think the new system will be more streamlined(NOT casual), but I will still miss the attributes(except the grinding of course).

Likewise, no one has shown that perks are as diverse as some people think. We have heard lots of PR talk, but surely people can distinguish between PR and reality? Just look at Fallout 3: some perks were literally just "+5 to X skill".

For me the one thing I am going to miss is the fortify attribute enchantment. In Oblivion I always enchanted a full set of armor, two rings and an amulet with fortify strength so that I can carry alot of loot when I go dungeon raiding.

You do realize that you could've enchanted those equipments with Feather Sigil Stones. The 125 in Feather per stone is at least 65 points higher then the Strength sigil or the base strength enchantment.

Yes I do realize that, I was referring to earlier levels where I didnt have 8 signil stones.

Exactly, you don't develop games. You say Beth are full of ****. But in reality Beth is actually doing the what they think is the right and smart thing to do. If you'll notice most people here in the forum like the new system over the old one, and not because they didn't play past TES games, I grew up with them, and even I know it's going to be great.

Attributes are still there, only in the form of: Health, Magicka and Stamina. Plus, Speed and Agility are now replaced with sprinting, Stamina and perks. What else do you want? You want every game to be exactly like the last one only with better graphics? then continue playing Oblivion or Morrowind with better graphics and textures mods.

I can't see a downside since they created a new system in which now you have more depth in character development and now you actually have to be smart about how you develop your character instead of blindly doing things and improving at everything ending up the same as every character every other player has only with a your play style.

Try to relax and you'll see you'll actually like the new system, but instead you're judging it without trying it first. With the new info and the fact they are trying to combine Morrowind and Oblivion with Skyrim, I couldn't be more excited, so I'd suggest you to just try and have fun with it.

Dark.

One thing I'm interested in regarding the end of attributes is what will govern/effect npc interactions and disposition. In Oblivion npcs had the same attributes as the player. and npcs reacted differently according to those attributes. In particular, an npc or a player with a high personality was regarded more positively by other npcs when first encountered and they were more apt to talk to them or to defend them. We haven't got enough information right now to be pleased or dissatisfied, but I'm very interested in how perks or skills are going to replace the attributes. Is there going to be even more weight put on faction? Are npcs going to look across the room and say to themselves that that person "has a silver tongue, I really like them?"

I think it is a great idea - make me play the game more than toy with numbers. Plus, with the updated UI, animations and conversations, I think it is safe to say that Skyrim will be the most immersive game ever. The only thing that worries me is that having lots of loot will be difficult. However, perhaps they could have the stronger items to add perks of their own. Instead of saying 'Fortify Speed 50' (I know there are no attributes, just making an example with earlier games) you get a perk that increases your movement speed. Eliminates pointless numbers and make more sense in the game world.

Here's a simple example of why attributes are needed (and yes, it's been state more than a few times).

If you're using a lot of melee weapons, you're character should get stronger. If your character uses a new melee weapon he's not trained in, he should still hit more with it than someone with who never trains strength/strength-related skills. Don't tell me perks can make up for this. Strength, as well as the other attributes, needs to be a continuous statistic, not a discrete one. It's not like there are only 3 or 4 levels of strength, which is all I see perks being able to accomadate (if even that).

If you want to be liberated from numbers in a game, then I direct you to COD.

Now we have two melee skills, one handed and two handed, and when you get better with a one handed sword, you are automatically getting better with a one handed axe and mace, so no problem here, but perks could define your focus here, as they should.

Since there are only 2 weapon skills now, you would have to go from a 1-handed to a 2-handed for this to even be relevant. If you go from a hand axe to a short sword, you are still in the same skill, so you will be effective with it. By "hit more" do you mean hit more often, or hit harder? If it is hit harder, why can't there be a perk that gives a +X% to melee damage. Have one for both 1-handed and 2-handed, and have them stack. If you mean hit more often, strength has no relevence on how often you hit with a weapon.

But improving your skill with the sword should not directly improve your skill with an axe. These are different types of fighting. It should only slightly improve your damage with an axe because you're stronger. Also, your damage with 2 handed weapons should improve slightly due to your increased strength. Moral of the story here, you're simplifying the game by taking out attributes, and imo not by a trivial amount.

Played it, hated it. Seriously though, don't patronize me. Numbers in an RPG are an old tradition. Hell, it is Role Playing Game. You play a role, not a bank accountant. By allowing me to get immersed in a game, it is a far better role playing game than one where you constantly have to worry about maxing out your stats.

If you don't like "improving your stats", why don't we take out skills too? Let's replace everything with perks! I guess that's best saved for ES6

What you look for is a adventure game where you wont have to be bothered with stats. Stats help you build and decide how and what your character is and the game should also allow you to handle different situations depending on how you put your characters stats, wisdom checks, int checks, haggling or to simply bash someones head in.

This is one of the reasons why i sadly get less and less interested in Skyrim the more i read about it. Its turning out to be more and more like a adventure game with rpg elements then a rpg.

Agree completely. I feel that there are plenty of games providing the "adventure game where you wont have to be bothered with stats" experience: mass effect, gta, etc. I'm drawn to the Elder Scrolls games because they provide a different rpg experience.

WHAT are you talking about?

I've been to martial arts since I was 5 years old. Believe it or not, if you're good with a sword, you'll be good with an axe too. The difference is the weight. A good weapon has to be balanced, if the sword and the axed are both approximately the same weight and have good balance (Not necessarily the same one) then you'll probably be better with both of them. I'm personally am good with staves and swords, from the age of 5 I started learning Ninjutsu. Beth's new system is a good one considering weapons. One handed weapons are similar while two handed weapons require a different style.
Only problem with their new system is that shorter weapons are a problem, cause there's the one handed weapons and two handed weapons, and also there's the shorter weapons, like dagger. They require a whole different style and are hard (at least for me) to expertise due to the lack of range you're used to while using one or two handed weapons.

Don't write misleading facts and check it for yourself if you're messing with what's right or wrong in reality =.=

Again, this is the old view - that the only way to play differently is through numbers. And while in older games, the technology did not allow for anything else, they had to make do with what they had. However, with recent developments, you get more choices. For example, if you take Mount & Blade, the combat there is so advanced that instead of looking at how much damage it does, you look at reach, speed and weapon type because those things give you real, physical control over your character. I want this in Skyrim - I will pick my path not because it gives me 10% bonus damage or 20% bonus magicka. I want real, dynamic choices, and quite frankly, you just don't need attributes for that. We have perfected the 'stats RPG'. Time for the genre to have a revolution and try out a different type of Roleplaying.

Ok, I was just trying to make the point that an underlying strength statistic is needed. Even if what you say is true, if you train a lot with 1 handed weapons, you should hit a bit more with 2 handed weapons as well despite having no practice in the skill because you are stronger.

"You play a role, not a bank accountant. By allowing me to get immersed in a game, it is a far better role playing game than one where you constantly have to worry about maxing out your stats."

Nobody wants the old mechanic of grinding skills to max out your stats. That was a problem with the leveling system.

Also, I personally like to see the numbers. I'm not sure why people complain about spreadsheets. Using spreadsheets add a strategic element to the game, in my opinion (if implemented correctly -- i.e; Eve Online). Maybe you don't like strategy.

Magicka, Health, Stamina are statistics, not attributes. Attributes define a characters base set of strengths and weaknesses as a person (i.e; clumsy but strong, smart but in bad shape). Attributes should be more or less static (stay the same over time). This isn't how TES ever worked, but how I'd like to see it work (like D&D).

I like feats, but feats are not attributes. Feats are abilities that you develop with experience.