First Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Details Leaked

[TheMadTypist]

Interesting.

On one hand, the reduction to 18 skills from oblivion's already simplified 21 means even more simplification, and the restriction of using an entire hand to hold one spell means less mixing of combat focused characters and mage-esque characters, as this information might suggest that you can't run in with a sword/board or two handed weapon and still cast spells.

On the other, the mention of finishing moves suggests they've taken at least some effort to improve the non-magical combat, and they did take the time to create a new engine for this game which suggests we might finally be done with the issues that have been cropping up recently with the old one. Hopefully they'll do what they've done with their other recent titles and use popular mods as inspiration to improve the experience as well, like how fallout 3 had the equivalent of the oblivion mod to add lights shining out of structures at night or how New Vegas had functionality very similar to the enclave commander mod for fallout 3, so long as you had the right reputation with the major factions.

And out of sheer conjecture, hopefully the main storyline will be worth finishing this time around. I spent hundreds of hours and several characters in oblivion without ever getting much of anywhere in the story missions. I don't think I ever finished the whole line. I still feel like I got my money's worth from the game, but the main line should at least be representative of the rest of the content in-game.

 

[Cyberjester]

GIMME GIMME GIMME (A man after midnight)!!

Seriously though, I can't FREAKING wait to dual-wield shields!!!

If you had a helmet spike... That could actually work. And in full plate.



I still say they're consoling it. -.-

I liked Morrowind, I didn't like Oblivions console-esque boring simplicity, I shall probably hate this one on the grounds that MW is awesome. Still play it though. After Deus Ex, Shogun II, any Dawn of War game coming out, etc

 

[sumanoskae]

This looks promising. Ooh, finishing moves!

 

[XxShaihuludxX]

Cant wait to play this.

 

[maturin]

Who cares about the game?

That's Max Von Sydow narrating!

Make way you undeserving plebs, lest ye want to feel the wrath of my Hammer!

Ick.

Maybe they've wasted all their bad lines on Patrick Stewart, Sean Bean and Terrence Stamp.

They shuffled off the script to the latter without fucking proofreading it. It was just a concept pre-write that they yanked from the email of the only guy with real talent.

 

[Spudgun Man]

Hooooly Fuck.

If they deliver on this one, well... Christ, I may never leave the house, I'll be registered deadin no time.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Why am I suddenly feeling as though I'm not going to enjoy the new TES? Dual wiedling is nice (sounding) addition... but are they just going to map primary and secondary weapons to both mouse button or are they going to have both keyed to a single mouse button?

Either case I'm not sure it's all going to be that great.

And the magic system sounds a bit hokey ... it's sounds as if they just want a handful of spell types that have alternating effectiveness based on your ability in them.

Which is nice given the 800+ Spells (non modded, non self created) spells you had to navigate through in oblivion to find the one you wanted just because all your quick spell places you had occupied with spells you use more often.

But at the same time I can't help but feel a loss of all role playing aspects and a complete dive into action-adventure.

 

[Droppa Deuce]

Drop a Deuce!!!

Can't wait to make a Redguard Dragonborn hunk to take on the horde.

He'll cause more racial tension than a black Heimdall; but he'll prove his worth by slaying dragons and seducing Viking women in the masses.

I will call him:

Barodarik.

 

[adderseal]

If this is more like Morrowind than Oblivion was I'll get it within the first week. From what I've seen though, that's not going to happen. Looks like I'll pick up the inevitable GOTY edition a year later and mod it to death.

 

[murphy7801]

I have one small flaw with this cant i make female character because it says he is dragon borne

 

[ctaylor35]

ooh my lord what surly ADD victim thought up this new scheme? not all bad ideas, but the general direction makes me want to dust off morrowind and daggerfall. oh wait i still play morrowind

 

[ghost1981]

Hmmm...we'll see about this one. They haven't achieved greatness in my eyes since Daggerfall. I've enjoyed them all, but doubt it will come close to Daggerfall.

 

[Firia]

This is all well and good, but the news I really want to know, "is it using the same buggy glitchy coding nightmare as Oblivion/Fallout? Great games, but by the maker is the code a real pile. o_o

 

[FortheLegion]

Can I wield a candelabra in my left hand and a fork in the other?

 

[EvolutionKills]

Less skills is annoying, but everything else sounds interesting. I have no doubt it will be better then Oblivion. Maybe even Morrowind? well we'll see.

Story wise, Morrowind had a better narrative because of it's setting, scale, and focus.

Oblivion's story wasn't as good because it required voice actors, which made it much harder to produce than Morrowind.

To be fair, there are a number of things that they did right with Oblivion. Attempting to voice act everything was ambitious, and given the standards of the time, they did very well. Post Mass Effect and Dragon Age however, it's not as easy to forgive the fact that every person of a particular race/gender uses the same voice actors. But, if I remember correctly, something like 80% of the space on the game's disk was dedicated to audio files, so they still recorded a TON of dialogue.


I also approve of the cut down Skill list.


I believe that they where also right in trying to steam-line combat, and even the addition of the Power Attacks and the other abilities that you earned from raising your skills was a step in the right direction.



That being said, enemies that level up with you where a terrible idea.

I also hope they manage to work out some more of the kinks and loopholes in the character system.

EDIT: They dropped the total skills from 21 to 18. Now I haven't seen what the final ones are, but if I was to take a guess at what they did. They probably removed 1 skill each from Combat, Stealth, and Magic.

[I obviously cut it down for length]

I don't disagree. There was no need for a lot of the skills unless they changed the gameplay up. There was no real benefit to using smaller weapons aside from the fact that they're a little bit faster, and no real reason for having separate skills for them aside for just complexity for complexity's sake. The things I didn't like were the missing spells, (although Mark and Recall were obviously obsolete due to the fast travel system), and the much more limited spellmaking and enchantment. It would be really nice to have reflect, absorb and resist ___ enchantments once you reached mastery level in enchantment. The weapon building system sounds very promising though.

They definitely improved the combat. Regenerating magicka was a great new feature for one, having to sleep after you cleared out each room in Morrowind was just pointless. I'd honestly like them to pull out some of the level caps, or at least heighten them so the maxed out character can be stronger. It would especially be nice for mages because they could cast stronger spells. But the reason for the level caps is that the enemies have a lot of code because of the stat system, and there just can't be too many of them in one area, which means that at a certain point the game would just be incredibly easy.

It would just be nice if the combat formula was something besides "point cursor at enemy, tap the right trigger, repeat until thing dies." Of course there's also blocking, spells and arrows, but it's still a little dry.

Hopefully, the Perks will fix that. If they add in the Sykrim equivalent of Fallout's 'Bloddy Mess' ability, that would be most awesome. After playing a Bumper Sword wielding muscle bound melee meat-head in New Vegas, I found it hard to go back to Oblivion. Being able to use the Bumper Sword's forward power attack (a 360 round-house sweep) and judge the distance just right so that I purposely decapitate my foe, is just plain awesome. It really makes you feel that the weapons are actually doing something when they hit your opponent, as opposed to just draining their health bar. Being able to cripple limbs was great too, and it they bring that over into Skyrim, then we'll have some fun.

Imagine either Stealth based weapons/artifacts/Skills/Perks that allowing you to do added limb damage, enabling you to more easily cripple your foe in a fight. This was one of the tactics you used in Fallout to deal with Deathclaws, those giant mutated horned lizards almost the size of a T-rex (and with a matching temper). Unless you where especially kitted out to be a sniper and could drop them with a critical headshot, your best bet was to cripple their legs. These things can easily outrun you unless you cripple their legs, allowing you to keep your distance from their armor shredding claws.

Now in the context of Oblivion, how much more fun would the combat be if you could really target specific body parts? Cause a Nord highwayman to drop his greatsword after crippling one or both of his arms, then watch him try to put up a fight with his fist (also, make it so that looting the corpse of a disarmed enemy still allows you to get their dropped weapon, just like in New Vegas). Stealth based characters would now have a true way to disable and disarm their enemies in combat. Now the choice between a Greatsword and a Longsword/Shield isn't just about damage and reach. Now it also involves how much risk you want to take by increasing your chances of crippling limbs through brute force, but also making you more likely to be crippled in return (using a two handed weapon). Weapons like Axes could cause more critical hit damage, maces could be more likely to break limbs, and swords could do more damage with a higher critical chance, but at the cost of less limb damage. Now you have a system for greater variation with your weapons, supported by relevant mechanics.

I just think that, ironically enough, they did melee combat so much better in New Vegas than Oblivion. Skyrim had better be taking some notes of what it's post-apocalyptic predecessors did.

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

It would just be nice if the combat formula was something besides "point cursor at enemy, tap the right trigger, repeat until thing dies." Of course there's also blocking, spells and arrows, but it's still a little dry.

Hopefully, the Perks will fix that. If they add in the Sykrim equivalent of Fallout's 'Bloddy Mess' ability, that would be most awesome. After playing a Bumper Sword wielding muscle bound melee meat-head in New Vegas, I found it hard to go back to Oblivion. Being able to use the Bumper Sword's forward power attack (a 360 round-house sweep) and judge the distance just right so that I purposely decapitate my foe, is just plain awesome. It really makes you feel that the weapons are actually doing something when they hit your opponent, as opposed to just draining their health bar. Being able to cripple limbs was great too, and it they bring that over into Skyrim, then we'll have some fun.

Imagine either Stealth based weapons/artifacts/Skills/Perks that allowing you to do added limb damage, enabling you to more easily cripple your foe in a fight. This was one of the tactics you used in Fallout to deal with Deathclaws, those giant mutated horned lizards almost the size of a T-rex (and with a matching temper). Unless you where especially kitted out to be a sniper and could drop them with a critical headshot, your best bet was to cripple their legs. These things can easily outrun you unless you cripple their legs, allowing you to keep your distance from their armor shredding claws.

Now in the context of Oblivion, how much more fun would the combat be if you could really target specific body parts? Cause a Nord highwayman to drop his greatsword after crippling one or both of his arms, then watch him try to put up a fight with his fist (also, make it so that looting the corpse of a disarmed enemy still allows you to get their dropped weapon, just like in New Vegas). Stealth based characters would now have a true way to disable and disarm their enemies in combat. Now the choice between a Greatsword and a Longsword/Shield isn't just about damage and reach. Now it also involves how much risk you want to take by increasing your chances of crippling limbs through brute force, but also making you more likely to be crippled in return (using a two handed weapon). Weapons like Axes could cause more critical hit damage, maces could be more likely to break limbs, and swords could do more damage with a higher critical chance, but at the cost of less limb damage. Now you have a system for greater variation with your weapons, supported by relevant mechanics.

I just think that, ironically enough, they did melee combat so much better in New Vegas than Oblivion. Skyrim had better be taking some notes of what it's post-apocalyptic predecessors did.

That does sound much better. It would be a little awkward from the first person perspective using melee though. They'd have to change the collision, you're sword swings across you so if you aim at an enemy's leg at close range, your sword is still probably going come down on his head. I must confess I never played Fallout. I'm sure it was a good game but the setting just didn't appeal to me. I thought I recalled them having a selective aiming system though, something like that would work. Fable used to have a fun target selection system for ranged weapons too, but they got rid of it in Fable 3 for some strange reason. Too bad, because it was a lot of fun to shoot people's heads off then here the popping noise and the fountain of blood. Cartoony? Yes? But still very satisfying.

Melee combat is just always better from the 3rd person perspective, you just have much more awareness of your character's body and surroundings. The problem is the TES games just look so ugly from 3rd person, your character is extremely awkward and it's hard to tell what he/she is aiming at. I think it would be better if they fixed the third person view so that the camera was tighter and the character's motions looked more fluid and responded more fluidly, then the game would be a lot more fun. A targeting system would help a lot, there could be a lock target button (left trigger or bumper is most intuitive I think) where the camera would zoom close to being over the shoulder and you could sub-select limbs. Doing any fancy movement in 1st person is disorienting. I really liked Fable's combat system, I think TES could go a little more in that direction. It's tough though. The entire game is designed to be viewed from the first person perspective, so having a combat system that switches to 3rd is obviously a bit difficult.

 

[Antwerp Caveman]

Can we maybe not reminisce about Oblivion? It looked boring and still didn't get exciting after several hours of play.
Instead, let's all remember Morrowind!

 

[Antwerp Caveman]

-----------------------------------
Will I be able to import my Oblivion character or game save into the new game?
-----------------------------------


This is not Mass Effect.
The article clearly stated you play "Dragonborn" and the game plays 200 years later than Oblivion.

 

[EvolutionKills]

That does sound much better. It would be a little awkward from the first person perspective using melee though. They'd have to change the collision, you're sword swings across you so if you aim at an enemy's leg at close range, your sword is still probably going come down on his head. I must confess I never played Fallout. I'm sure it was a good game but the setting just didn't appeal to me. I thought I recalled them having a selective aiming system though, something like that would work. Fable used to have a fun target selection system for ranged weapons too, but they got rid of it in Fable 3 for some strange reason. Too bad, because it was a lot of fun to shoot people's heads off then here the popping noise and the fountain of blood. Cartoony? Yes? But still very satisfying.

Melee combat is just always better from the 3rd person perspective, you just have much more awareness of your character's body and surroundings. The problem is the TES games just look so ugly from 3rd person, your character is extremely awkward and it's hard to tell what he/she is aiming at. I think it would be better if they fixed the third person view so that the camera was tighter and the character's motions looked more fluid and responded more fluidly, then the game would be a lot more fun. A targeting system would help a lot, there could be a lock target button (left trigger or bumper is most intuitive I think) where the camera would zoom close to being over the shoulder and you could sub-select limbs. Doing any fancy movement in 1st person is disorienting. I really liked Fable's combat system, I think TES could go a little more in that direction. It's tough though. The entire game is designed to be viewed from the first person perspective, so having a combat system that switches to 3rd is obviously a bit difficult.

I'm guess from your posts that you're a console gamer, and not PC. So the next game I'm about to mention you might not recognize or have played, but it's worth a shot.

The absolute best first person melee combat that I've played, was 'Dark Messiah of Might and Magic' (later released with the subtitle 'Elements' on the 360). Developed on Valve's Source engine, it was a solid action RPG. Some of the reasons the melee combat felt so visceral was that the game was built in a de-facto FPS engine, the aforementioned Source (Half-Life², Team Fortress 2, Left for Dead series, etc.). So the game had solid collision detection and fluid controls. The game also had an immersive style of first person, when you looked down you actually saw your legs and chest. When you moved, your head bobbed realistically to how you were moving. But the game was mostly action with light RPG elements. It was also linear, so they had more control of the games pacing.

That being said, I still have high hopes that this game will rub off on Skyrim. 'How?' you might ask? Well, for the same reasons that I hope this new engine will hold up better than the Gamebryo one powering Oblivions, business acquisitions. Bethesda's parent company is ZeniMax Media. Zenimax Media was created as a shell company by the founders of Bethesda Softworks to expand their properties across platforms. Recently, ZeniMaz Media has made some acquisitions. They purchased developer 'id' and brought John Carmack's team under their wing in June 2009. More recently, they bought developer Arkane Studios in August 2010. Arkane Studios was the team behind 'Dark Messiah'.

So ZeniMax now has at their disposal Bethesda Softworks, id Software, and Arkane Studios; whose credits include the Elder Scroll, Fallout, DOOM, Quake, and Wolfenstein series. Arkane was also tapped by 2K Marin to help develop 'Bioshock 2'. If anybody can get an excellent handling first person combat game, running on a stable engine, and set in an engaging and deep world, it's these guys.

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

I'm guess from your posts that you're a console gamer, and not PC. So the next game I'm about to mention you might not recognize or have played, but it's worth a shot.

The absolute best first person melee combat that I've played, was 'Dark Messiah of Might and Magic' (later released with the subtitle 'Elements' on the 360). Developed on Valve's Source engine, it was a solid action RPG. Some of the reasons the melee combat felt so visceral was that the game was built in a de-facto FPS engine, the aforementioned Source (Half-Life², Team Fortress 2, Left for Dead series, etc.). So the game had solid collision detection and fluid controls. The game also had an immersive style of first person, when you looked down you actually saw your legs and chest. When you moved, your head bobbed realistically to how you were moving. But the game was mostly action with light RPG elements. It was also linear, so they had more control of the games pacing.

Yeah, I don't really have the resources or time to be a PC gamer. Because of school I now almost exclusively play online games when my friends are online. I played a little FPS on the PC back in the day (SoF). But I never liked the controls. It's true a mouse and keyboard give you far more control, but it just doesn't feel as organic as a controller to me. But this is probably because I was raised on consoles (my first game ever was Goldeneye). Though the PC is still the undisputed champ of strategy games, hands down. I have Star Craft II but my crappy laptop is below the System req., so all I was really able to do was play the campaign. Shame really, but I don't have the time to devote to being good at it anyway, I'll just stick to my beloved Halo Wars.

That being said, no I haven't heard of that game in particular, though 'Might and Magic' does ring a bell. I'll take your word for it, though I still can't quite see a first person as effective for melee combat as 3rd. Perhaps when one is only facing one enemy, but if one is surrounded a first person perspective is quite bad. Then again, one is rarely, if ever, surrounded in TES games, and they seem to be going for a more realistic feel for combat (e.i. if one is surrounded by enemies in real life they are boned). Combat is always more personal in TES too, usually 1v1 and at the very most 1v5.

This is obviously because combat is determined by crunching a lot of numbers between the stats of the player and the enemy NPCs, as well as the fact that the AI of the NPCs have to be more advanced because of their inventories and strengths and weaknesses. Obviously all this adds up so that the game cannot handle a large amount of NPCs fighting at the same time, whereas games like Fable can have 20 hobbes or mercenaries attacking the player at once because these enemies don't have a lot to them. In this latter case a third person perspective is preferable, but I can see how a 1st person perspective might be preferable when you can't have that many enemies.

I can definitely see how 1st person can feel more visceral. It's always more visceral to look through the eyes of the person who is stabbing the other person than to watch from afar; you're in the action itself. That's why all those crazy moments in Modern Warfare seemed so cool, we've all seen those sorts of stunts performed by action heroes countless times, but jumping over a falling helicopter and throwing a knife into someone's eye from the first person perspective really puts you in the action. If they include subtle things like you mentioned to make the player feel more embodied combat would be more frantic; little things like having the screen tilt and move with the player's more visible body when he does things so that the camera feels connected to the player's body and not just like a floating head.

It would also be nice if they had more context sensitive animations instead of the same 'vertical strike' 'horizontal strike' animations that one sees over and over again. For instance, after one downs a kneeling enemy have a brief scripted event where he grabs the enemy by the hair then slits his throat with his knife (though that kind of thing might warrant an MA rating). Or if the player is using a sword, he plunges it into the enemy's chest then pulls it out. Or if he has an axe or hammer he cracks open the downed enemy's skull. Of course if they were going to do this they should include a lot of such animations because no one wants to watch the same thing over and over. I know they mentioned finishing moves as one of the new innovations so perhaps it is something like this. It actually wouldn't take that much to do; just an afternoon or two in the studio with a motion capture camera. They have to do that anyway. The only rule I would keep in mind is to keep the sequence fluid and under a second in length; any longer than that and the player will be frustrated by the character's unresponsiveness.