Escapist Podcast: 023: Skyrim, More Skyrim and Buyer's Guide

[The Escapist Staff]

You make me hate my job (more).

(It's one-handed -- or two, or archery, depending on what Bound you're using. You may notice random Conjuration points popping up if you summon a sword and then enter combat. When that happens, you're just getting the point for summoning the sword. Confused me for awhile, too.)

Conjuration friggin' rocks. I'm playing through on my second character, mostly using Conj (with either a shield, ward, or a Destruction spell in the off-hand).

I've been curious about the conjuration branch. Personally I'm going destro/resto assasin, but i love the idea of having a bunch of epic beasts to summon. From the brief glance I gave the spell tree, you can only summon a dremora, the wolf, or an atronach, right? If you don't get anything new, I don't really want to spend points on the tree.

 

[GonzoGamer]

I think anyone who doesn't automatically believe every corporate PR statement, knew that Skyrim would have problems.
And yes, disappearing apples isn't a problem. I think the people who are seriously pissed at Skyrim are the people who are experiencing chronic crashing and freezing.

And please... let's stop overusing the term "entitlement." And let's start using it correctly.
Example of it being used correctly: Paying $60 for a game "Entitles" you to a game that works.

Absolutely true, but some people also have unreasonable expectations as to what else that $60 entitles them to.

Yes, you're right.
I find it unreasonable that I have come to expect that after paying $60 for a Bethesda game, I?m going to spend a lot of time giving my ps3 the old hard shut down, restarting, and getting back to where I left off.

But seriously, I think that if Bethesda was not known for making peoples? consoles freeze up or at least known for swiftly fixing the big problems like that, I think that almost everyone would forgive them for missing (or just not getting around to) the minor glitches that are sure to pop up in a game this size. The problem is that past experience has left some feeling that these big problems might never get patched and that?s not an issue with a consumer base feeling entitled, that?s an issue with a consumer base losing faith. That is something Bethesda is going to have to fix...maybe...eventually...if people decide to stop pre-ordering because of it.

Also...just getting sick of the term. Especially when people throw it out there just to be dismissive of someone else's worries which is mostly how it's used now.

 

[Dastardly]

You make me hate my job (more).

(It's one-handed -- or two, or archery, depending on what Bound you're using. You may notice random Conjuration points popping up if you summon a sword and then enter combat. When that happens, you're just getting the point for summoning the sword. Confused me for awhile, too.)

Conjuration friggin' rocks. I'm playing through on my second character, mostly using Conj (with either a shield, ward, or a Destruction spell in the off-hand).

I've been curious about the conjuration branch. Personally I'm going destro/resto assasin, but i love the idea of having a bunch of epic beasts to summon. From the brief glance I gave the spell tree, you can only summon a dremora, the wolf, or an atronach, right? If you don't get anything new, I don't really want to spend points on the tree.

Understandable. It really doesn't scale well, being honest. You start out "okay," and then it's a long stretch of nothing... and then it vomits awesome at you later on, but only if you invest fully.

You can summon dremora, various atronarchs, the familiar (wolf), and you can reanimate corpses (if present). The tree increases the duration of summons, as well as power, and the tip-top allows you to summon two at a time -- you can also grab that Standing Stone that lets you raise nearby dead once per day, for added effect.

But a less-publicized benefit is at the Master Level -- you can get hold of spells that allow you to summon permanent critters. The downside is the magicka cost: You'd better have the cost-reduction perks and/or the cost-reduction enchantments to even be able to cast them.

I really think the scaling problem is why they included Bound weapons the way they did. This way, you've got something to help you fight while your spells are still kinda weenie, and it helps magical characters to continue fighting while waiting for Magicka to regenerate without resorting to steel. Also, the Soul Stealer perk? Phenomenal for Enchanting!

 

[Susan Arendt]

I think anyone who doesn't automatically believe every corporate PR statement, knew that Skyrim would have problems.
And yes, disappearing apples isn't a problem. I think the people who are seriously pissed at Skyrim are the people who are experiencing chronic crashing and freezing.

And please... let's stop overusing the term "entitlement." And let's start using it correctly.
Example of it being used correctly: Paying $60 for a game "Entitles" you to a game that works.

Absolutely true, but some people also have unreasonable expectations as to what else that $60 entitles them to.

Yes, you're right.
I find it unreasonable that I have come to expect that after paying $60 for a Bethesda game, I?m going to spend a lot of time giving my ps3 the old hard shut down, restarting, and getting back to where I left off.

But seriously, I think that if Bethesda was not known for making peoples? consoles freeze up or at least known for swiftly fixing the big problems like that, I think that almost everyone would forgive them for missing (or just not getting around to) the minor glitches that are sure to pop up in a game this size. The problem is that past experience has left some feeling that these big problems might never get patched and that?s not an issue with a consumer base feeling entitled, that?s an issue with a consumer base losing faith. That is something Bethesda is going to have to fix...maybe...eventually...if people decide to stop pre-ordering because of it.

Also...just getting sick of the term. Especially when people throw it out there just to be dismissive of someone else's worries which is mostly how it's used now.

There are plenty of genuine concerns regarding Skyrim bugs - particularly on the PS3 - and I wouldn't suggest anyone who simply wants their game to run (not even well, just RUN) is being a whiner or is acting overly entitled. There are degrees of bugs, and some of the ones facing some Skyrim players are truly crippling. I thought we made it clear during the podcast that we were talking about people experiencing minor issues and acting like it was the end of the world, not people with serious problems, but perhaps I'm simply wrong about that. In any event, I never meant to suggest that anyone was in the wrong for complaining about major bugs like corrupted saves, freezes, and broken questlines.

 

[GonzoGamer]

I think anyone who doesn't automatically believe every corporate PR statement, knew that Skyrim would have problems.
And yes, disappearing apples isn't a problem. I think the people who are seriously pissed at Skyrim are the people who are experiencing chronic crashing and freezing.

And please... let's stop overusing the term "entitlement." And let's start using it correctly.
Example of it being used correctly: Paying $60 for a game "Entitles" you to a game that works.

Absolutely true, but some people also have unreasonable expectations as to what else that $60 entitles them to.

Yes, you're right.
I find it unreasonable that I have come to expect that after paying $60 for a Bethesda game, I?m going to spend a lot of time giving my ps3 the old hard shut down, restarting, and getting back to where I left off.

But seriously, I think that if Bethesda was not known for making peoples? consoles freeze up or at least known for swiftly fixing the big problems like that, I think that almost everyone would forgive them for missing (or just not getting around to) the minor glitches that are sure to pop up in a game this size. The problem is that past experience has left some feeling that these big problems might never get patched and that?s not an issue with a consumer base feeling entitled, that?s an issue with a consumer base losing faith. That is something Bethesda is going to have to fix...maybe...eventually...if people decide to stop pre-ordering because of it.

Also...just getting sick of the term. Especially when people throw it out there just to be dismissive of someone else's worries which is mostly how it's used now.

There are plenty of genuine concerns regarding Skyrim bugs - particularly on the PS3 - and I wouldn't suggest anyone who simply wants their game to run (not even well, just RUN) is being a whiner or is acting overly entitled. There are degrees of bugs, and some of the ones facing some Skyrim players are truly crippling. I thought we made it clear during the podcast that we were talking about people experiencing minor issues and acting like it was the end of the world, not people with serious problems, but perhaps I'm simply wrong about that. In any event, I never meant to suggest that anyone was in the wrong for complaining about major bugs like corrupted saves, freezes, and broken questlines.

I'm not sure but I think it may have been in reference to the disappearing companion, which was annoying enough in New Vegas when you had to go to Vault 22 to pick them up after they "wandered off."
Or maybe I just heard the word ?entitled? for the 50th time that day (gamers aren?t the only ones overusing that word lately) and went ape-shit. If that?s the case, Sorry.
However, I do think that disappearing companions are one of those bigger problems. Not quite CTD big but much bigger than a trick step that can swallow any item dropped on it. At least, it would make me angrier than the occasional backwards, fire farting dragon.
Besides, all those little issues get patched within the month. The crashing could be around for a while. New Vegas still crashes on me a lot and that came out over a year ago.

 

[lomylithruldor]

It is possible to have an evil party that works in a RPG. The way to do it is a bit how you can be evil in a video game. Instead of having a campain, you need a sandbox.

My group in my Exalted modern game is currently evil (even if they don't really know about it). Something happened to the island of Montréal and the buildings got destroyed and the population mutated (a Wyld storm, it's complicated). The characters saved a bunch of people and decided that since people from the outside world are freaked out by the appearance of the population of Montréal, they would use their influence to mold Montréal into a new society (bring back the old realm's system). The thing is, what they want to do is a meritocracy. The problem is that Exalted is a world with clear classes of power. The solars are better than everyone, the celestial exalted are leaders in their fields but are made to serve the solars, the dragon-blooded are extraordinary humans without the demi-god like power of the solars and celestials and the rest of humanity is nothing more than disposable work force. The players are, of course, solars. So here we have a group of people that are actively working to build a society base around inequality with little respect for the common man, in a modern setting.

 

[Susan Arendt]

You make me hate my job (more).

(It's one-handed -- or two, or archery, depending on what Bound you're using. You may notice random Conjuration points popping up if you summon a sword and then enter combat. When that happens, you're just getting the point for summoning the sword. Confused me for awhile, too.)

Conjuration friggin' rocks. I'm playing through on my second character, mostly using Conj (with either a shield, ward, or a Destruction spell in the off-hand).

I've been curious about the conjuration branch. Personally I'm going destro/resto assasin, but i love the idea of having a bunch of epic beasts to summon. From the brief glance I gave the spell tree, you can only summon a dremora, the wolf, or an atronach, right? If you don't get anything new, I don't really want to spend points on the tree.

I specialize in Destruction, with Conjuration as a supplement. It's great for giving you lots of options, but you do have to beef up your mana a lot. The better summons cost a lot. Right now I have a Frost Atronach (who I call Joey) who's just a beast. He's a great tank for me, which works well with my long-distance fire and shock spells. Combine him with my follower, and I'm out of harm's way most of the time. Also, Conjuration is what governs Soul Trap, which you'll want if you plan on doing any enchanting. (Of course, you can buy filled soul gems if you like, but it's far cheaper to just fill the ones you find laying around, especially since you'll be killing things anyway.)

The two areas of magic I've found less than helpful so far are Runes and Wards. Runes are basically just land mines, and in certain situations can help, but I find the action to be too frenetic to use them well. Wards are a constant drain on mana, and running away is usually more effective.

 

[Endocrom]

Anyone against a Skyrim mod that made kids killable to everything except the player character?

That way the players aren't automatically child murderers and they get the realism from a dragon attack truly wiping out a settlement.

*EDIT*

[sub]Now that I've ordered mine it's safe to spread the news...[/sub]

Spoiler: Plush Portal Turrets are back in stock at ThinkGeek! Excellent Christmas gift!

Aren't there spells you can cast on a person or thing that make everything around want to kill it? Then you've got news stories with titles like "Skyrim lets players feed children to wolves" Same song, second verse.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Anyone against a Skyrim mod that made kids killable to everything except the player character?

That way the players aren't automatically child murderers and they get the realism from a dragon attack truly wiping out a settlement.

Aren't there spells you can cast on a person or thing that make everything around want to kill it? Then you've got news stories with titles like "Skyrim lets players feed children to wolves" Same song, second verse.

Well it seems preferable when compared to someone walking through town gutting children...

And if it's a mod we're talking about, I'm sure there's ways to say "selected spell does not work on target NPC".

 

[Slycne]

It is possible to have an evil party that works in a RPG. The way to do it is a bit how you can be evil in a video game. Instead of having a campain, you need a sandbox.

My group in my Exalted modern game is currently evil (even if they don't really know about it). Something happened to the island of Montréal and the buildings got destroyed and the population mutated (a Wyld storm, it's complicated). The characters saved a bunch of people and decided that since people from the outside world are freaked out by the appearance of the population of Montréal, they would use their influence to mold Montréal into a new society (bring back the old realm's system). The thing is, what they want to do is a meritocracy. The problem is that Exalted is a world with clear classes of power. The solars are better than everyone, the celestial exalted are leaders in their fields but are made to serve the solars, the dragon-blooded are extraordinary humans without the demi-god like power of the solars and celestials and the rest of humanity is nothing more than disposable work force. The players are, of course, solars. So here we have a group of people that are actively working to build a society base around inequality with little respect for the common man, in a modern setting.

That strikes me as being for more neutral than truly evil, though Exalted is inherently a little outside in that the solar are disconnected from everyone else by nature. True evil wouldn't have bothered to save them in the first place unless their was suitable benefit. That's generally the dividing line for me when I think PNPRPG classic alignments. Good characters are selfless, evil characters are selfish and neutral characters fall somewhere in between.

This is ultimately what destroys evil campaigns from my experience because once the players begin behaving in-character the group will almost inevitably shatter. The thief wants all the treasure, the fighter doesn't want to protect the mage and baring continually common goals there is not much to hold them together for extended lengths. This also puts unnecessary stress/work/trouble on the GM as you'll have to constantly call players into other rooms, divide experience unevenly, etc.

They can certainly be fun as one-offs or short stints, but I think you'd need just the perfect mix of players, setting and GM to really pull off an extended and Evil campaign. Another route however is to run the bait and switch where the party is evil in that they are working for the bad guy faction, much in the same way that a group of German soldiers during WW2 were not evil themselves per say. This starts to broach one of my preferred methods of alignment where good and evil represent more you faction standing and less your personal morality.

 

[careful]

yup i know a freind whos high lvl character data irrovocably corrupted