My friend I would be elated personally if they actually redesigned everything.
The point isn't to redesign everything. The point is to find what works, flesh out what sticks out at the edges a bit, decide what rough theme your game has going for it, do some rain-dance calculus to guesstimate which features out of what works and what sticks out should stay or go based on your theme, add in some crazy changing inspiration that might be good or bad, shake and stir through hostile office meetings where things are heatedly debated for the 100th time, and then serve to the public.
Ooh how I wish I could find the article were todd says those were poor design descisions, it even had levelscaling bashing in there as well, which was touted as so revolutionary and I was there, among the many who were like.....so I won't realize im getting stronger? but then i thought oh well it can't be that bad.
Well while you'll never see me defending level scaling as set in Oblivion (that really, really, really was a poor design decision), level scaling as a root concept has been in every single numbered ES game. As a root concept, it's not a bad design decision. As an implementation, it can get twisted and turned and pulled and prodded into a huge variety of forms and workings. Some might be fantastic. Some might be absolute flops. It doesn't say anything about the root concept or the idea of redesigning the implementation every title.
they didnt they just "from the information we have been provided" chopped away many things and left the bear bones, lol are you really using their terminology? folding? sigh :/ look Im not unreasonable, just don't plaster bare bones with some skin, give it a spit shine and call it new, perks have always been around, its just given tags and thrown in your face :/
Yes, I am using their terms. Is that a problem? It's a very good way to put it for good or bad; folding a piece of paper so that all its critical info is still showing is good folding, while folding that critical info in half is bad folding. No?
Firstly, with the above in mind, the difference between concept and implementation...
If you look at attributes, namely 8 or so static variables that the player increments when they play, as a root concept, then yeah, I can see how that might ruffle the feathers.
But I don't see 8 static player-incremented variables as a root concept.
I see them as the implementation of the root concept of a player's natural-born ability, of which there are plenty of other implementations that can be made to cover the same material that the implementation we're used to does.
Now, you say 'bare bones' with a spit-polish shine. I say that relies entirely on the begging-the-question assumption that they are incapable of reimplementing natural-born ability, because as I've said, this forum has built a list of solutions to problems presented, and as a result it's not so infeasible to think that Bethesda in 5 years' time has constructed their own elegant encapsulation of attributes into another form.