Armor/weapons can't Degrade/Break, Bethesda things that's a good thing?

[polluxval]

crap!!! oh no dragon age 2 syndrome!!!!

[idonotlikeusernames]

I will probably wait and see what the modding community does with this game if they can actually improve it significantly and remove some of the dumbing down I'll most likely get the GOTY edition (or it's equivalent) in any case just like with Oblivion I'll wait and see what becomes of it after the modding community has had at least a year to go over it.

[Mashi]

Well we're still getting a SDK last I heard, along with the toolset for skyrim. So modders will be able to fix any huge problems like they have in the past. Removing durability from an item now is trivial, especially in FO3/NV/Oblivion. It's all wait and see, but I'm hoping.

[stgmilleralive]

I guess I'm the only person who isn't very bothered by this...

 

"One is the loneliest number..."

 

And don't mention dragon age syndrome Poll, fable 3 started that outbreak which killed any hope for the series lol.

 

But in all seriousness as long as they don't limit this to a city, give me a dialogue wheel with only one entertaining personality, and a skill system that amounts to jamming the 'attack' button, I'll enjoy Skyrim.

 

I dare say I'll enjoy it over vanilla Oblivion after seeing the combat system, the skills, and world building. And by the gods stringing up sods we're getting SDK as well, it's like Bethesda knows why their games are popular on the pc. As for now I can't find a reason to hate on Skyrim. Even after they removed the attribute system I wasn't phased by that because I just played the Witcher 2.

[polluxval]

witcher and elder scrolls never shared an attribute system or something similar, also they both are rpgs but there is a HUGE difference beetween them. anw, i will just wait for the release. ill not comment anything till i played it, its like making criticism from a movie wich isnt filmed yet.

[leddis3]

See to me attributes in TES are part of making my characters who they are.

It's more than appearance, I like thinking of every aspect of my character and tailoring it to what I want. Are they strong or weak? Charismatic or socially useless? And so on.

 

In the Witcher you are always the same exact guy with the same exact personality and physical build so who cares.

[HanPL]

Well making character you want in the Witcher would be rather pointless since game is based on Andrzej Sapkowski novels so main character always will be Geralt. so comparing this two games is mistake (while comparing TW2 and DA2 is other thing... I still remember Bioware deleting topic on bioware social regarind how much DA 2 sux... and when TW2 came out..

One of the Bioware workers gave DA 2 10/10 in metacirtic review while TW2 got ...0/10 from him..

 

O and agree about TES.

Skyrim will suck for now (well not for casual players and since Im not casual player I won't change my mind for now ) but if modding him will be as easy as Oblivion/Fallout then there is still hope for this game...

On the other hand,good mods for Oblivion like LoversPK etc are rather new... so we had to wait over 5 years since Oblivion release...

[stgmilleralive]

I was never comparing the Witcher to Elder Scrolls.

 

TL:DR, unless you care about my opinion of course.

 

I just mention that I can see how, with a different system, an rpg can work without attributes. And that's what Skyrim has. In the context of six years ago, it would be heresy for Oblivion to have no attribute system because everything was based on that. Bethesda is designing Skyrim to be something different, in the context of what it is now, with perks, dragon shouts, and skills, an attribute system would just add one additional layer of "complexity". A buzz word that gets many gamers giddy.

 

If this is a good thing to you, then it's that, I can't argue with what YOU love. But I can explain myself.

 

I can explain that in the context of Skyrim, an attribute system isn't needed as with the right amount of tweaking and proper game design the other systems can replace the attribute system. Think of a perk that just increases your Melee damage it can be ranked up, that's what Strength does as far as I'm concern. In fact I would personally say it is pretty redundant when from the looks of the perk numbers, skills, and dozen-or-so shouts Bethesda has hinted at, you'll get the same amount of customization as you would in Oblivion.

 

Now from a series purist, I can understand why you might boycott this change. Why you might see it as "dumbing-down" or other words that have a sour taste. But I don't see the replacement of a feature as "dumbing-down for casuals" I see it as an attempt to better a series. Which should be the duty of any developer, Call of Duty aside...

 

Sequels now-a-days aren't the carbon-copies with some new features but the same ground work. Interests change over time and new tech allows new ideas to be put from paper and into a game. Bethesda is trying to make their next Elder Scroll game a new taste, a new game that will hopefully net them the revenue and respect they need to continue making games.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

But this is a talk on sub-features especially that of armor and weapons not degrading. The removal of features that kept me less from the action and more in a menu neither vex me nor make me very giddy. Label me with that title of 'casual gamer' and I'll tell you I've immensely enjoyed rpgs from Planescape to Demon Souls to even parts DA2. I'm in a camp that does this.

 

Does the sequel have the key features of the previous? (Character-Building, world-exploring, loot-gathering, etc.)

 

Does it sound like a good idea from the onset? (Yes, I just have to wait and see how the release, press, and E3 showings goes.)

 

Now yes arguably subtle features in a game, such as lore in DA, have impact on me too. But I look in the context of the game as a new title to try something different. If I want the same as before, I play the previous game. I despise when a sequel doesn't try to change some things to make the series feel fresh. Now of course there are obvious bad things that happen when a series tries too hard to be different from it's sequel (Battlespire) but we're all intelligent enough to know that. And fundamentally, I'm surprised Bethesda isn't being stupid like most of the other devs/publishers and try to appeal to a crowd that could never get hooked on rpgs to begin with...And they aren't, you don't start with one race and one story, one class. You make your journey, as the Elder Scrolls' main games have always allowed.

 

Now I could type you're eyes out from now on, but I think I've made myself clear on my standing.

 

Skyrim, right now, is going to be a meaningful rpg on it's own without mod-support.

 

This isn't DA2 to me, I don't see a possible trainwreck from even after all this information. And if the game was going to suck, I ensure you I wouldn't have typed this much to explain an opinion.

 

Which an opinion on the internet is a lot like a fart, it's only heard when it's loud and not everyone agrees on if it's funny.

[stgmilleralive]

And don't be hating on the Witcher

 

A patch gave me the capability to change my hair! plus I modded him to have no facial scars and black hair, HA!

 

But really, the Witcher offers a load of choices that outshine anything I've ever played.

[leddis3]

I don't hate the Witcher, I'm just stating that Geralt, being an established character isn't as "personal" or "definable" and so attributes are less significant.

Also RPGs with a set character, particularily a male one, do not interest me. That's just a personal preference.

 

As for Skyrim. Well, it's always possible Bethesda are going down some unique route where attributes are replaced with other equally deep aspects.

But their track record is one of dumbing down. Look at Morrowind to Oblivion. I still find it ridiculous that one skill (Blade) encompasses everything from daggers to giant claymores (because rogues and assassins are well known for their ability to swing giant 2 handed slicing implements right?).

[stgmilleralive]

I don't hate the Witcher' date=' I'm just stating that Geralt, being an established character isn't as "personal" or "definable" and so attributes are less significant.

Also RPGs with a set character, particularily a male one, do not interest me. That's just a personal preference.

 

As for Skyrim. Well, it's always possible Bethesda are going down some unique route where attributes are replaced with other equally deep aspects.

But their track record is one of dumbing down. Look at Morrowind to Oblivion. I still find it ridiculous that one skill (Blade) encompasses everything from daggers to giant claymores (because rogues and assassins are well known for their ability to swing giant 2 handed slicing implements right?).

[/quote']

 

The Witcher thing was a joke . Despite being an established character they gave me even more leeway in my choices than Commander Shepard is allowed. For that I was impressed.

 

But anyways the path from morrowind to Oblivion wasn't really watered down to me.

 

They removed one 'meh' skill and melded a few to give the player more freedom to choose their weapons. Admittedly they removed a few fun weapon classes but that was for the purpose of balancing and tweaking to ensure that Blunt, Blade, and Marksmanship were all entertaining. And to that regard, Oblivion modders brought back throwing weapons, spears, and even crossbows.

 

And actually I found it crazy as a thief that I had to pick up the long blade skill even though I had a short blade skill. The whole 'stick them with the pointy end' argument from GoT was what I had in my head that entire time. I know it sounds odd but swordsmanship isn't fundamentally different unless we're talking about rapiers and knife-fighting. There are nuances but in a game setting it feels limiting to me.

 

Besides, haven't you tried sneaking around with a claymore, it's impractical but fun as hell lol.

 

And to me the inclusion of fast travel was something I welcomed after my fun with Daggerfall, and they don't even push you to use it since you miss 85% of the game just clicking a map.

 

[HentaiGnome]

In all honesty, I'm glad Bethesda went with this route. I've always found weapon and armor degradation as more of a hassle rather than a suitable challenge. As for the whole Break-Undies thing, as others mentioned, I'm sure modders will find a way to implement that. But for core gameplay, I can definitely live WITHOUT armor/weapon degradation. Just my opinion.

[polluxval]

they should put weapons degradation toggleable. if u want it on or off justa a change at the beginning of the game or during game and issue solved.

 

about the skills, im not happy with that. im still thinking that they are removing a very important and "traditional" feature. i dunn care if they implement a new feature, when they implement something new they always mess it up and/or most of the gamers arent happy with the change. so why the hell to take the chances? lets keep the same way as old school and thats all. i find witcher an exellent game, one of my favorities but becouse of the history, drama, voice acting, etc. but i hate the implemented skill system. so u tell me u can make geralt a good negotiator and a sneak assassin? or maybe an expert mage that summon fiends and make his own magic items? in witcher Geralt (even with black hair and no scars) will be always a meele fighter/expert swordsman no matter how many changes u try to make. so maybe bethesda its making a mistake with this change. but as said before, this is still a maybe, will know for sure on 11/11/11.

 

sry for my english.

[stgmilleralive]

they should put weapons degradation toggleable. if u want it on or off justa a change at the beginning of the game or during game and issue solved.

 

about the skills' date=' im not happy with that. im still thinking that they are removing a very important and "traditional" feature. i dunn care if they implement a new feature, when they implement something new they always mess it up and/or most of the gamers arent happy with the change. so why the hell to take the chances? lets keep the same way as old school and thats all. i find witcher an exellent game, one of my favorities but becouse of the history, drama, voice acting, etc. but i hate the implemented skill system. so u tell me u can make geralt a good negotiator and a sneak assassin? or maybe an expert mage that summon fiends and make his own magic items? in witcher Geralt (even with black hair and no scars) will be always a meele fighter/expert swordsman no matter how many changes u try to make. so maybe bethesda its making a mistake with this change. but as said before, this is still a maybe, will know for sure on 11/11/11.

 

sry for my english.

[/quote']

 

Hmm? I played through Witcher 2 without ever having to swing my sword at non-boss enemies. The signs are the shit lol. The skill system really allows you to perfect your play-style, is it Elder Scrolls? No. I never said it was, I was just joking when Leddis mentioned little customization .

 

As for skills, they're still in Skyrim, without armor degradation you can possibly count out the armorer skill. I'm not saying anything yet but Bethesda has really been talking about player-crafted armor and weapons, and the armorer skill could be re-purposed to that. The only other skill they removed was Mysticism, but they took the spells from it and moved to Alteration and Conjuration I believe. Which I love because Mysticism is generally the most useless school of magic in Oblivion and me being a mage and all would prefer if utility-spells were more condensed.

 

And I know it's your opinion, but I think anything new Bethesda has added to their game series generally works perfectly. The retooled combat system in Oblivion. The artistic style of Morrowind. The ridiculous size of Daggerfall. None of these three games were perfect or, in my opinion, the greatest rpgs of all time. But each one steadily improved on a formula that still makes Elder Scrolls unique no matter if it has an attribute system or not.

 

 

 

 

[stgmilleralive]

 

Interesting opinion from quite a good commentator.

 

skip to 5:46 to hear his opinion on sequels in RPG's specifically Skyrim. The letter that he reads out before the commentary summarizes much of the criticism I've seen coming at Skyrim.

[polluxval]

well in less words hes trying to say that if something is missing the mod community will add it. shouldnt be good a time when modders only add armors, weapons and new quests? and not trying to fix every mistake done by the company?. anyway, hes right, they have to care about sales and if that means a change, thatll do it. who cares what comes out anyway, they got what they wanted, money. maybe another dragon age 2 to the list wouldnt be that bad. what im trying to say is: if a formula worked fine before, why change it? they can remove many other unnecessary skills, but degradation wasnt a plus, im talking about immersion. i mean, doesnt look weird if u hit the face of a dragon with ur metal short sword, once u killed him, ur weapon will still be shining?. but well, im wasting text and space in lovers, doesnt matter what a "casual" gamer thinks, as i said before, its their game so they can do whatever they want with it. but if the game ends to be a joke, modders will fix it, so bethesda doesnt have to worry.

 

ps. i prefer yatzee.

[schijnn]

As for skills' date=' they're still in Skyrim, without armor degradation you can possibly count out the armorer skill. I'm not saying anything yet but Bethesda has really been talking about player-crafted armor and weapons, and the armorer skill could be re-purposed to that. The only other skill they removed was Mysticism, but they took the spells from it and moved to Alteration and Conjuration I believe. Which I love because Mysticism is generally the most useless school of magic in Oblivion and me being a mage and all would prefer if utility-spells were more condensed. [/quote']

 

Actually, they removed a lot more skills than that. Athletics, acrobatics, mercantile, speechcraft, hand-to-hand, blade, and blunt. Of course, they're replacing blade and blunt with one-handed and two-handed weapon skills, and the sneak skill is now going to affect dagger damage.

 

I still miss Arena's skill system: One primary skill (that could start as high as 60), five major skills, five minor skills, and ten miscellaneous skills.

[vayrin]

Though technically Skyrim doesn't have "Speechcraft" it does have a skill called "Speech", Which is either just a simple renaming or possibly a combination of Speechcraft and mercantile.

 

This article about perks has a list of all the skills in it: "Let's talk about perks"

[gubnillec]

Meh, I am not too concerned. Granted item damage did make it so that you had to watch condition in FO3 or invest/make a lot of weapon repair kits. In Oblivion though after you got 100 in Smith you didn't have to worry anyways because you never broke your hammer.

 

If item degradation is going to be put into a game it needs to not only lose durability over time but MAX durability with every repair. That is real item degradation. Seriously, how often can you repair something until its just fuckin borked for good?

 

 

Hmm....mod idea for Skyrim ;p

[Silk]

Oh dear, they took out something that was more of a hassle than really immersive. Yes, armour breaking and swords blunting is Immersive. But if you think about it in gameplay terms you would carrry around enough hammers (or tongs) to not even bother with the skill, or not simply be bothered by it at all.

 

They could have made it more immersive by forcing you to visit a forge to actually hammer your breastplate back into shape after fighting that troll cave. But I bet after the tenth time that becomes boring and repetitive.

 

Instead, they have replaced it with smithing. Something far more immersive and allowing those that just found armour degredation a minor annoyance to completely ignore it, and those that like roleplay still get to hit things with a hammer.

[schijnn]

This article about perks has a list of all the skills in it: "Let's talk about perks"

 

Oh, my. Seems I'm a bit behind. Apologies.

 

[polluxval]

thats why i said that they could included it as toggleabe instead of completely remove it.

[stgmilleralive]

As for skills' date=' they're still in Skyrim, without armor degradation you can possibly count out the armorer skill. I'm not saying anything yet but Bethesda has really been talking about player-crafted armor and weapons, and the armorer skill could be re-purposed to that. The only other skill they removed was Mysticism, but they took the spells from it and moved to Alteration and Conjuration I believe. Which I love because Mysticism is generally the most useless school of magic in Oblivion and me being a mage and all would prefer if utility-spells were more condensed. [/quote']

 

Actually, they removed a lot more skills than that. Athletics, acrobatics, mercantile, speechcraft, hand-to-hand, blade, and blunt. Of course, they're replacing blade and blunt with one-handed and two-handed weapon skills, and the sneak skill is now going to affect dagger damage.

 

I still miss Arena's skill system: One primary skill (that could start as high as 60), five major skills, five minor skills, and ten miscellaneous skills.

 

Simple response to this is...want a link, I'm interested.

 

Otherwise, it seems too much an exaggeration that they would remove without consideration. Meld skills, yes. Even switch some to perks, but most of those skills are groundwork I saw at E3.

 

[LordJerle]

It's entirely conceivable that some of the stuff people are complaining about being removed could be modded back in.

[Jerbsinator]

Don't be surprised people, I mean this IS Bethesda we are talking about. Critics throw 9.0 and 9.5s at them like candy but in actuality their games are more in the 7.5 range. Ever since Oblivion dungeons have been very generic, too similar, no variety, not enough enemies, not enough tough enemies, no challenge, the leveling system is garbage, I could go on and on. It's nice to have a huge land to explore but it isn't fun when it's not filled with anything and the game is so easy that there's no tension whatsoever which destroys the immersion.

 

Bethesda is like Apple, they bank on the stupidity of humanity and feed off of it by offering a streamlined experience that gives you instant gratification and they hope that no one will realize that it's just a bare bones product with no real innovation or originality.

 

Skyrim does look good....unfortunately the only thing that Bethesda seems to be trying to improve is the graphics. Everything else is just Oblivion 2.0 (Lazy edition).