+1 interwebs

FFS, dynamic shadows were a new thing some 5 years ago. Maybe you should be pleasantly surprised for Skyrim being in 3D? :facepalm:

Totally off-topic but ME1 was superior to ME2 in every way but combat.
That is all.

Good we finally get dynamic shadows, and whats the info exactly on the amount of voice acting?

All the magazine says, is that there is an option to disable the HUD, and it's disabled in first-person. It says nothing about a HUD not being present at all. If there's an option to disable it, then that means there is a HUD in the first place.

The option will probably literally be just that. Disabled. It's becoming a bit of a standard feature of games these days to be able to turn off the display. For first person, it'll probably be a fade-in job. It wouldn't make sense to have blood-in-the-eyes in third person...

They said "hud-free first person" which basically means that the 1st person is there only for taking screenshots even though it can be used for combat as well (but with no hud).

In Skyrim instead of a Hud once you get hurt your screen will turn red.
Then your health will regenerate.

I'm mostly happy about the lack of classes, with one caveat. In my mind, classes were more important for determining what you were before the game began. Then again, Bethesda will probably give the player the ability to choose a few skills that will have higher skills.

I'm going to hold on the perks until I see what they are. TES is more traditionally serious than Fallout, so I don't believe they'll be silly ones like "guaranteed decapitation every strike".

From what I've seen it says NPC, not enemy. Basically the same way of 'activating' NPCs to talk to them as in Oblivion and Morrowind, I'm guessing.


They wouldn't make first person view only for screenshots and useless for combat, that's completely pointless, and TES has always been a first person focused series.

It'll be interesting to hear about how they will handle bringing the health/magicka/stamina information to the player without bars on the screen.

So wait, from what I'm hearing, you have to equip magic to a hand now? In other words, if you have a sword and a shield out, you can't cast a spell anymore?

Seems like Oblivion's craptacular combat system had magic nailed, in my opinion.

Well yes, of course they will be at a disadvantage.

Kind of like how people who choose to hop on one leg will be at a disadvantage to those who walk on two.

I recall that KOTOR had a feat chain that gave a minor bonus to people who used only a single one-handed weapon and nothing in their off-hand, so that's possible.

I would imagine that mining and wood cutting go towards making weapons and armour through forging? I hope so anyway.

Any thoughts?

I would assume that you could use the raw materials you mined for forging, yeah.

So, in theory, you could mine the ore for a weapon, forge the weapon yourself, and then enchant it yourself.

Personally, the combat system sounds good. The way the magazine described it, it's very easy to switch between a sword and a spell and can be done in combat quickly. Now about being required to have a hand free when spell casting, well that depends on the world building Beth has put in place previously. Considering it was possible in OB, it seems strange to longer be able to do it in SK. However, it's game mechanic and I'm sure has balancing issues so I'm not going to hold it against Beth. I've read several fantasy books where magic is dependent on the movement of the hands and fingers.

In terms of role-playing, I'm a little bit confused by the decision to include less skills. I mean, I'd rather have them in the game but it's by no means a game breaker. In fact, some of the new mechanics that we've heard about open up a whole new possibility of role-playing for me. A character to simply wishes for a simple life. He doesn't want to be a hero. He's a farmer. But when a dragon attacks his town . . . yeah, I can see it working well.

I could not agree more. Do not give me cheap gimmicks. Give me an ES RPG.

Risen, which really was poor man's Oblivion (with emphasis on poor) had all of that - crafting, mining, woodcutting and cooking, and I loved it (from my memory you could saw wood but it had no real effect, but the rest had some real effects in Risen). It was very simply done and didn't have much influence on your career so to speak but I loved to have it there.

Alchemy in Morrowind and Oblivion, wow, what can you say? I spent so much time picking ingredients, thinking out which potions I would need, storing potions etc. I had such a great time with it. Alchemy is absolutely fantastic. So to also get crafting, mining and woodcutting is a gift from heaven.

Also the other new design choices seem smart. And they strengthen my image of Todd, that he knows how to prioritize. He's simply the ultimate game designer.

I don't think that's a fair comparison.

Some people prefer to wear helmets, while others do not as a personal preference.

I think there should be advantages and disadvantages to dual-wielding and advantages and disadvantages to only wielding a one-handed weapon (and no magic).

hahaha good anology


and the ones that dont wear their helmets fall of their bikes, smack their heads on the ground and spray brain matter everywhere
personal preference doesnt mean its going to be advantageous or beneficial for the user

History is simply full of morons, of course!

If there are no downsides to wielding two longswords, I will cry. And then correct it with a mod.
Two daggers, okay, that actually sounds feasible. Or a shortsword and a dagger. So the question is, which advantage is there to only using one dagger or one shortsword. I can imagine things like being able to grab your opponent, but maybe they actually went with what most RPGs do, and reduce the effective skill level for both weapons.

I absolutely want HUD to Skyrim. I have never liked something "screen turns red" or "heart starts bumping" effects telling how healty you are. Removing HUD is not the best idea to improve TES games.

Actually, even if you don't equip anything in your other hand, you'll still be able to punch with it. So if you raise your hand-to-hand skill, that could be a viable way to fight.

omg I think I'm having a heart attack

:rock:

TOO MUCH HAPPINESS :ahhh:

Well look at that.

In Morrowind, you couldn't cast spells with a weapon sheathed either, but I don't see people complaining.

If you want to be a battlemage in Skyrim, just have a weapon in one hand and a spell in the other.

People have been whining and crying about dual-wielding forever, and now that they get it, they whine that they can't dual wield AND cast magic.

Nobody said you have to put your weapon away to cast magic, if you want to be a spellsword then you put "spell" in one hand and "sword" in the other. The class isn't called a swordspellsword or swordshieldspell.

I like the idea of how the hands work, seems more balanced. If you want two weapons, then you're going to have a more difficult time casting spells, that just makes sense to me. Hell, in Morrowind this wasn't possible AT ALL.