How should the next Elder Scrolls Game be handled?

[deathstrikesquirrel]

Allow me to clarify. When I speak of Skyrim's complexity, I am not talking about the click-click-loot-repeat combat system. I am talking about the vast majority of systems and number crunching (which is briefly addressed in my full comment) that goes on behind the scenes to determine whether said click-click will lead you to victory.

Think about it. The combat system in all Elder Scrolls games is basically to whack the enemy over the head with a stick until it stops moving. At first glance this seems like the epitome of "dumbed down." However when you realize that each attack and its correlating damage is the product of a vast amount of statistics being calculated behind closed doors and one soon realizes that the aforementioned click-click-loot-repeat formula is the tantamount modern role-playing game experience, the old-school dungeon crawlers translated into a beautiful 3D world.

Now, throw all this in with armor stats, enemy stats, crowd control,resource management, exploration,a deep leveling system (although that, at least, was some what dumbed down from its precursors) weapon stats, and a mountain of other intertwining systems culminating in whether or not that simple click defeats Alduin, or forces you to reload and keep leveling up, and you realize that Skyrim (and Bethesda games in general) are far more complicated than most role-playing games available today.

I'm not saying TES series is perfect, because it's not; nor is Skyrim one of my favorite games. However, calling it a casual experience is, in my book, words spoken out of ignorance of how Role Playing games, fundamentally, work.

Now, I'm not saying you are one of these "ignorant" people. For all I know you really enjoyed Skyrim, as I did, and were just answering a challenge I foolishly threw up onto the internet.

Anywho, I hope that cleared everything up.

Peace out.

You do realize when people say that Skyrim is dumbed down, they aren't talking about the programing right? They're talking about the fact that combat skills have been reduced to One handed and Two hand, the fact that a whole school of magic has been removed, the fact that they just took out Classes and Attributes rather than in any way attempt to fix the "problems" they seem to think those two systems have.

Hell, to be frank, simply because a game uses background statistics does not mean it's still complex. When people say dumbed down or Casual experience, they mean it's so ridiculously easy and you don't have to put any thought into it, which is true. The best example is to compare Realms of Arkania(old RPG) to Skyrim, in Skyrim, you don't really need to know anything about how the game mechanics work, and except for one or two skill, there isn't really a substantial reason to level up your skills.

In Realms, you need to understand how the skills work with the gear, you need to understand what determines whether you hit and how much damage you will do. If you don't level up certain skills, there will be things you can't do with that character. In essence, the best way to finalize is to say that when Realms was released, it could barely be considered "hardcore" because it's system was in most RPGs at the time, but now when you compare it to Skyrim(Or most modern RPGs, Except Spiderweb Software's stuff really), it's considered hardcore.

I don't want this to start an arguement, but I had to point out the difference.

I don't see how Skyrim is overly easy, maybe because I use light armor but it is very much possible to get your ass handed to you in Skyrim if you don't know what you're doing.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

The best example is to compare Realms of Arkania(old RPG) to Skyrim, in Skyrim, you don't really need to know anything about how the game mechanics work, and except for one or two skill, there isn't really a substantial reason to level up your skills.

I know this is a bit of a tangent, but just for the record, that kind of challenge has never really been the focus of The Elder Scrolls (since Morrowind anyway). The way skills and stats are structured simply reflects this. You don't have to know about complicated synergies and such, at least not on the same level, to succeed because the idea is you design your build to taste. It's not that challenge and learning the game isn't important, it's just that exploration is emphasized, and that goes for the skills, too. That's why when you say "there isn't really a substantial reason to level up your skills", I can just tell this is not the game for you.

But if we're comparing TES games to each other that's a little different story. Combat skills have been folded into one and two handed but they are distinguished further through perks. I'm not spending those perk points lightly, so in practice I have six choices for melee weapons. And three of them also give me the option to use a shield or dual wield. Or I could dual wield two different types, but it will cost me some extra perk points. Oh yea, and then I'll be investing in dual wield perks as well. Or I could scoot over to the Sneak tree and boost daggers, further narrowing down my options. I'm not sure how unarmed fits into all this because I haven't experimented with it. But that's not so bad. I'm not saying I don't miss spears, but there are some areas where I really don't see how Skyrim is more dumb or less sophisticated than Oblivion or even Morrowind. I'm just making a case that while "streamlining" is frequently a convenient euphemism for "dumbing down", one is good and one is bad (in this instance). I say Skyrim did both.

There weren't classes really and thank god they got rid of attributes. They were nothing but pointless, redundant, and inconsistent design, which is why everyone just ignored them anyway. The only difference between having attributes and not having them is I no longer have the opportunity to overpower or underpower my character by grinding out skills I don't want to use and tallying up hundreds of skill increases on notebook paper. Too much level-scaling also makes those problems completely insane.

For spells I'm conflicted. Before we had like twenty ways to do the same thing, now we have one way to do five things. At least the melee weapons in previous titles were a little different. Magic just had way too many redundancies. I'm not complaining because that made the game more sophisticated, I'm complaining because it didn't. Even spell making just led to people using less and less interesting spells, not more. And I actually use the options I'm given in Skyrim, because I can't just break the game so easily or make one or two all-purpose kill spells.

But I'm not blind to what Bethesda is doing. They obviously made efforts to keep stats invisible to the player where possible.

 

[charge52]

I don't see how Skyrim is overly easy, maybe because I use light armor but it is very much possible to get your ass handed to you in Skyrim if you don't know what you're doing.

It's overly easy because there are few enemies that can really hang your ass off a castle, but they can only do it because you aren't high enough level, not because you're flailing into combat without thinking.

 

[DarkishFriend]

I think having another Dragonborn wouldn't make sense, unless you kill your father or other dragons you won't be able to shout, making the title useless.

I think it should just be; You're a mercenary, take odd jobs at guilds or from civilians themselves.

The main story can involve something politic-y, so long as your character remains in the shadows of the whole thing so guards don't have to mention you're the hero of the land. Plus then people being utter dicks towards you makes sense as they think you're nobody, instead of the Archmage-Fighter-King-Master-Thief-Grand-Lord-of-Everything.

You mean the Witcher?

 

[charge52]

I know this is a bit of a tangent, but just for the record, that kind of challenge has never really been the focus of The Elder Scrolls (since Morrowind anyway). The way skills and stats are structured simply reflects this. You don't have to know about complicated synergies and such, at least not on the same level, to succeed because the idea is you design your build to taste. It's not that challenge and learning the game isn't important, it's just that exploration is emphasized, and that goes for the skills, too. That's why when you say "there isn't really a substantial reason to level up your skills", I can just tell this is not the game for you.

But if we're comparing TES games to each other that's a little different story. Combat skills have been folded into one and two handed but they are distinguished further through perks. I'm not spending those perk points lightly, so in practice I have six choices for melee weapons. And three of them also give me the option to use a shield or dual wield. Or I could dual wield two different types, but it will cost me some extra perk points. Oh yea, and then I'll be investing in dual wield perks as well. Or I could scoot over to the Sneak tree and boost daggers, further narrowing down my options. I'm not sure how unarmed fits into all this because I haven't experimented with it. But that's not so bad. I'm not saying I don't miss spears, but there are some areas where I really don't see how Skyrim is more dumb or less sophisticated than Oblivion or even Morrowind. I'm just making a case that while "streamlining" is frequently a convenient euphemism for "dumbing down", one is good and one is bad (in this instance). I say Skyrim did both.

There weren't classes really and thank god they got rid of attributes. They were nothing but pointless, redundant, and inconsistent design, which is why everyone just ignored them anyway. The only difference between having attributes and not having them is I no longer have the opportunity to overpower or underpower my character by grinding out skills I don't want to use and tallying up hundreds of skill increases on notebook paper. Too much level-scaling also makes those problems completely insane.

For spells I'm conflicted. Before we had like twenty ways to do the same thing, now we have one way to do five things. At least the melee weapons in previous titles were a little different. Magic just had way too many redundancies. I'm not complaining because that made the game more sophisticated, I'm complaining because it didn't. Even spell making just led to people using less and less interesting spells, not more. And I actually use the options I'm given in Skyrim, because I can't just break the game so easily or make one or two all-purpose kill spells.

But I'm not blind to what Bethesda is doing. They obviously made efforts to keep stats invisible to the player where possible.

You contradicted yourself in the first sentence. That challenge, while not being the main focus, was always there in the first 3 Elder Scrolls game, and then they started dumbing it down. Funny, because I remember loving Daggerfall and Morrowind, so and since they were supposed to set the standard for the series, It should be a game I would enjoy.

The problem with this illusion of "choice", is that none of it matters. Oh sure, there are a few things that are limited if your low level, but really you could spend the whole game as a sneaking thief in light armor and a Dagger, switch to Heavy Armor and a Warhammer, and you won't face any real challenges. It doesn't cost you any perk points to duel wield, only if you want your swords to swing slightly faster. If you boost a skill, you aren't narrowing your options at all. I could specialize in Warhammers, and nothing is stopping me from just using a dagger and not being penalized.

Er, yes, there were classes in previous Elder Scrolls, so...
I'll state right now, they could have easily fixed the attribute system, they easily could have revamped it without dumbing it down, instead they decided to just remove them entirely so no one who plays will have to make tough decisions. Though it isn't surprising, Bethesda seems to be fans of taking the easy way, if the reasons for lack of medium armor is any indication(according to Todd they removed it because it was difficult to balance). Not to mention, the risk of making a bad decision was one of the many reasons for attributes, to give you meaningful gameplay decisions that make you actually think.

What people have you been watching make spells, everyone I've seen used it to make fun and interesting spells. In Morrowind for instance, there were people making spells that Drained enemy fatigue, and increased speed for a swift retreat. Some people would make spells that turns you invisible and shot fire just to mess with the NPCs. There were people making levitation spells that caused mass death! Again I say it, they could have easily fixed the redundancies that they had. Instead they opted to just take out half of the spells and spell making, because according to them "we just have to make it easier to learn and easier to play" or else console players won't enjoy it.

 

[WillieDaKid3]

Allow me to clarify. When I speak of Skyrim's complexity, I am not talking about the click-click-loot-repeat combat system. I am talking about the vast majority of systems and number crunching (which is briefly addressed in my full comment) that goes on behind the scenes to determine whether said click-click will lead you to victory.

Think about it. The combat system in all Elder Scrolls games is basically to whack the enemy over the head with a stick until it stops moving. At first glance this seems like the epitome of "dumbed down." However when you realize that each attack and its correlating damage is the product of a vast amount of statistics being calculated behind closed doors and one soon realizes that the aforementioned click-click-loot-repeat formula is the tantamount modern role-playing game experience, the old-school dungeon crawlers translated into a beautiful 3D world.

Now, throw all this in with armor stats, enemy stats, crowd control,resource management, exploration,a deep leveling system (although that, at least, was some what dumbed down from its precursors) weapon stats, and a mountain of other intertwining systems culminating in whether or not that simple click defeats Alduin, or forces you to reload and keep leveling up, and you realize that Skyrim (and Bethesda games in general) are far more complicated than most role-playing games available today.

I'm not saying TES series is perfect, because it's not; nor is Skyrim one of my favorite games. However, calling it a casual experience is, in my book, words spoken out of ignorance of how Role Playing games, fundamentally, work.

Now, I'm not saying you are one of these "ignorant" people. For all I know you really enjoyed Skyrim, as I did, and were just answering a challenge I foolishly threw up onto the internet.

Anywho, I hope that cleared everything up.

Peace out.

You do realize when people say that Skyrim is dumbed down, they aren't talking about the programing right? They're talking about the fact that combat skills have been reduced to One handed and Two hand, the fact that a whole school of magic has been removed, the fact that they just took out Classes and Attributes rather than in any way attempt to fix the "problems" they seem to think those two systems have.

Hell, to be frank, simply because a game uses background statistics does not mean it's still complex. When people say dumbed down or Casual experience, they mean it's so ridiculously easy and you don't have to put any thought into it, which is true. The best example is to compare Realms of Arkania(old RPG) to Skyrim, in Skyrim, you don't really need to know anything about how the game mechanics work, and except for one or two skill, there isn't really a substantial reason to level up your skills.

In Realms, you need to understand how the skills work with the gear, you need to understand what determines whether you hit and how much damage you will do. If you don't level up certain skills, there will be things you can't do with that character. In essence, the best way to finalize is to say that when Realms was released, it could barely be considered "hardcore" because it's system was in most RPGs at the time, but now when you compare it to Skyrim(Or most modern RPGs, Except Spiderweb Software's stuff really), it's considered hardcore.

I don't want this to start an arguement, but I had to point out the difference.

I don't see how Skyrim is overly easy, maybe because I use light armor but it is very much possible to get your ass handed to you in Skyrim if you don't know what you're doing.

Allow me to clarify. When I speak of Skyrim's complexity, I am not talking about the click-click-loot-repeat combat system. I am talking about the vast majority of systems and number crunching (which is briefly addressed in my full comment) that goes on behind the scenes to determine whether said click-click will lead you to victory.

Think about it. The combat system in all Elder Scrolls games is basically to whack the enemy over the head with a stick until it stops moving. At first glance this seems like the epitome of "dumbed down." However when you realize that each attack and its correlating damage is the product of a vast amount of statistics being calculated behind closed doors and one soon realizes that the aforementioned click-click-loot-repeat formula is the tantamount modern role-playing game experience, the old-school dungeon crawlers translated into a beautiful 3D world.

Now, throw all this in with armor stats, enemy stats, crowd control,resource management, exploration,a deep leveling system (although that, at least, was some what dumbed down from its precursors) weapon stats, and a mountain of other intertwining systems culminating in whether or not that simple click defeats Alduin, or forces you to reload and keep leveling up, and you realize that Skyrim (and Bethesda games in general) are far more complicated than most role-playing games available today.

I'm not saying TES series is perfect, because it's not; nor is Skyrim one of my favorite games. However, calling it a casual experience is, in my book, words spoken out of ignorance of how Role Playing games, fundamentally, work.

Now, I'm not saying you are one of these "ignorant" people. For all I know you really enjoyed Skyrim, as I did, and were just answering a challenge I foolishly threw up onto the internet.

Anywho, I hope that cleared everything up.

Peace out.

You do realize when people say that Skyrim is dumbed down, they aren't talking about the programing right? They're talking about the fact that combat skills have been reduced to One handed and Two hand, the fact that a whole school of magic has been removed, the fact that they just took out Classes and Attributes rather than in any way attempt to fix the "problems" they seem to think those two systems have.

Hell, to be frank, simply because a game uses background statistics does not mean it's still complex. When people say dumbed down or Casual experience, they mean it's so ridiculously easy and you don't have to put any thought into it, which is true. The best example is to compare Realms of Arkania(old RPG) to Skyrim, in Skyrim, you don't really need to know anything about how the game mechanics work, and except for one or two skill, there isn't really a substantial reason to level up your skills.

In Realms, you need to understand how the skills work with the gear, you need to understand what determines whether you hit and how much damage you will do. If you don't level up certain skills, there will be things you can't do with that character. In essence, the best way to finalize is to say that when Realms was released, it could barely be considered "hardcore" because it's system was in most RPGs at the time, but now when you compare it to Skyrim(Or most modern RPGs, Except Spiderweb Software's stuff really), it's considered hardcore.

I don't want this to start an arguement, but I had to point out the difference.

I don't want this to start an argument, either, so I will just say that while spiderweb games (which I've never played) are undoubtedly more complicated and hardcore than Skyrim, the general starting point when looking for a deep RPG this generation, has been Bethesda. I'm not arguing that Skyrim isn't simpler than Oblivion, because it is. But taken as a whole, it is still one of the deeper releases of 2011.

Also, just real quickly, I contest that Skyrim was overly easy. My Argonian archer was way overpowered. But my Elven Mage? That was actually difficult, and required preparation; what with all the potions and spells that needed to be managed on the fly.

 

[WillieDaKid3]

Oops. Double post.

 

[Rack]

You contradicted yourself in the first sentence. That challenge, while not being the main focus, was always there in the first 3 Elder Scrolls game, and then they started dumbing it down. Funny, because I remember loving Daggerfall and Morrowind, so and since they were supposed to set the standard for the series, It should be a game I would enjoy.

The thing about power gaming in Morrowind is it's like having a running race with a tortoise. It can be done, and you can push yourself hard if you like, but it takes only the absolute vaguest effort to succeed. They're exploration driven games and embarrassingly simple to break wide open. Truly optimising in them can be challenging but it's the difference between demolishing the toughest enemy in the game at level 1 or merely crushing him.

Similarly with the spell making you COULD make a spell that drained enemy fatigue and increased your speed, or for less mana you could cast familicide. If it could be fixed then great but I think it needs an entirely different approach to Morrowind and Oblivion.

Morrowind is difficult to play, easy to master. It's just the wrong way round. That said I think there can be some common ground in where we'd like to see it grow, even if we're never going to agree on attributes and the like. I'd suggest a sequel add in options that make sense. Go up to light weapons, one handed weapons, dual handed weapons and polearms. You might not like that a warrior can swap from a sword to a mace to an axe with little penalty but to me those weapons perform similar roles and there is little choice in forcing players down one path.

 

[charge52]

The thing about power gaming in Morrowind is it's like having a running race with a tortoise. It can be done, and you can push yourself hard if you like, but it takes only the absolute vaguest effort to succeed. They're exploration driven games and embarrassingly simple to break wide open. Truly optimising in them can be challenging but it's the difference between demolishing the toughest enemy in the game at level 1 or merely crushing him.

Similarly with the spell making you COULD make a spell that drained enemy fatigue and increases your speed, or for less mana you could cast familicide. If it could be fixed then great but I think it needs an entirely different approach to Morrowind and Oblivion.

Morrowind is difficult to play, easy to master. It's just the wrong way round. That said I think there can be some common ground in where we'd like to see it grow, even if we're never going to agree on attributes and the like. I'd suggest a sequel add in options that make sense. Go up to light weapons, one handed weapons, dual handed weapons and polearms. You might not like that a warrior can swap from a sword to a mace to an axe with little penalty but to me those weapons perform similar roles and there is little choice in forcing players down one path.

Funny thing is, you can't even pose a challenge to the toughest enemy at level one, the only way to prevent it from being 100% in his favor is if you specialized in heavy armor and axes, found the axe in Seyda Neen, equipped the best heavy armor you could find, cast some fortify skill spells, and then drank about 50 sujamma. He would still kick your ass.

You could make a powerful spell, or you could cost the less effective but cheaper spells. Yeah, I'm sure a high level mage would much rather use a cheap but weak spell when they can make a way more powerful version with a few added perks.

It's not that I don't like the fact that using a sword makes you better with a mace, it's the fact that it is just wrong. Plain and simply wrong. The art of the sword is incredibly different and requires a different skillset than utilizing a mace, someone who trains in one will not become better at the other. It's plain and simple logic. Hell, melee weapons can differ so vastly from each other I could probably give a speech about how a Katana and a Broadsword are entirely different styles and how they should technically be two different skill trees(I wouldn't though, because they are at least similar enough that it still makes some sense). If you really think it makes sense for a swordsman to gain skill with a mace or an axe by training with a sword, than look up videos of different weapon techniques, there is a vast difference.

 

[SajuukKhar]

It's not that I don't like the fact that using a sword makes you better with a mace, it's the fact that it is just wrong. Plain and simply wrong. The art of the sword is incredibly different and requires a different skillset than utilizing a mace, someone who trains in one will not become better at the other. It's plain and simple logic. Hell, melee weapons can differ so vastly from each other I could probably give a speech about how a Katana and a Broadsword are entirely different styles and how they should technically be two different skill trees(I wouldn't though, because they are at least similar enough that it still makes some sense). If you really think it makes sense for a swordsman to gain skill with a mace or an axe by training with a sword, than look up videos of different weapon techniques, there is a vast difference.

Trying to use real world logic in a game series where the main character can pause time at a whim because he realized that the entire universe is actually a dream of a being known as the godhead makes your argument laughably broken.

And really, if that bothers you, you mst be unable to play MANY RPGs because they use systems were skills don't level up by use, as the naturally would. There is not a single RPG out that uses a "realistic" or "logical" skill system.

 

[Longstreet]

This was my first TES game, so cant comment on the dumbing down part of skill i see some of you talking about.

They main change they should atlest intergrate is the fact that you should NOT be able to join the Assassins AND the companions AND the thieves guild AND the mage guild (did i leave any out, there are so many) but be able to only run with one.

Companions where only good for packing mules, once you are strong enough and can use the wearing heavy / light armor cost nothing perk they are completely useless.

Mariage had no benefit at all. Dont think i ever slept in a bed to regain health, just use the wait option. This is a story of you hacking dragons in two with a dagger (or two). no i DO NOT want a nagging wife when i come home with not enough dragon bones.

Skill wise, it was ok for me, like i said i never playd any other TES game before, the only thing, with so many skills, and you being able to them all it could become a cluster fuck.

AI. Oh god the AI. I know a game the size of the Elder Scrolls ones isn't going to have fantastical AI that can make NPC's seem truly "alive" but sticking a basket on their heads while you rob place isn't very believable.

It was great fun to do that though.

 

[jollybarracuda]

Yah as others have said, bring back the depth so that it can actually be called an RPG. The perks are a fine idea, and it's definitely fun to be able to have them, but scrap the basic "level up health, magic, or stamina?" thing and bring back all the skills in both their major and minor forms. People like points, i don't know where this idea that people who play RPG's don't like stat screens came from, but it's annoying.

If they could just get the Morrowind RPG depth, Oblivion's excellent quest design, and Skyrim's combat, it would be the best game ever.

 

[SajuukKhar]

They main change they should atlest intergrate is the fact that you should NOT be able to join the Assassins AND the companions AND the thieves guild AND the mage guild (did i leave any out, there are so many) but be able to only run with one.

-Why do they need to put a limit on something that is purely optional?
-Why do they need to prevent you from joining all the guilds when the only thing that determines if you join all the guild or not is you?
-Why should people who want to join all the guilds be limited because of other peoples desire of not wanting to be able to when those people can just not join all the guilds?

Joining all the guilds is like fast travel, no one makes you use it, and just because you don't want to use it doesn't mean that everyone else who does should be prevented from using it.

Mariage had no benefit at all. Dont think i ever slept in a bed to regain health, just use the wait option. This is a story of you hacking dragons in two with a dagger (or two). no i DO NOT want a nagging wife when i come home with not enough dragon bones.

Getting married and sleeping in the same bad as your spouce gives you a bonus to how fast your skills level up. It's called Lovers Comfort, and it raises skill leveling speed by 15% for 8 hours.

Yah as others have said, bring back the depth so that it can actually be called an RPG. The perks are a fine idea, and it's definitely fun to be able to have them, but scrap the basic "level up health, magic, or stamina?" thing and bring back all the skills in both their major and minor forms. People like points, i don't know where this idea that people who play RPG's don't like stat screens came from, but it's annoying.

The problem with the attribute system is that it kills character diversity.

In all previous elder scrolls games there would come a point where you would max the attributes relevant to your playstyle long before you actually finished leveling all your skills. The result of this would mean that when you level up next you would have to level up all your other attributes because your major ones were already maxed. The result of that is that by the time you were done leveling almost all character would have 100, o nearly 100, in all stats making all characters the same.

The whole attribute and major/minor skill system was removed because it provably killed character diversity in the long run.

Morrowind and Oblivon's skill system can be described as "start off unique but become the same", while Skyrim is "start off the same but become unique"

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

The Elder Scrolls game could have such an amazingly engaging story if they put some decent effort into it.
They got the feeling of being in another world down pretty well, especially in Skyrim, but once you get past that novelty there's nothing to make you care about the world.

Hire some damn character writers, Bethesda!

Imagine if the quests in Skyrim had relatable stories like in Heavy Rain or The Walking Dead game.

 

[SajuukKhar]

The Elder Scrolls game could have such an amazingly engaging story if they put some decent effort into it.
They got the feeling of being in another world down pretty well, especially in Skyrim, but once you get past that novelty there's nothing to make you care about the world.

Hire some damn character writers, Bethesda!

Imagine if the quests in Skyrim had relatable stories like in Heavy Rain or The Walking Dead game.

The story of the Elder scrolls has always, and most likely always will be, told outside of the games themselves in interviews, and developer made forum stories.

Elder scrolls actually has an over arching plot that connects all the games together, and many of the characters from across the games, in ways most people don't realize.

 

[Navvan]

Elder Scroll protagonists are one time unique chosen ones usually foretold by prophecy and I like it that way. It allows them to focus on new story elements rather than beat a dead horse.

I would like better dynamic gameplay and realistic character interaction. They have been steadily improving on it, but the still have a ways to go. A better balancing between the skills as well would be nice it was still really easy to overpower yourself accidentally.

They need to do something new with the factions/guilds. More interaction, more choices, all I know is that they haven't really innovated anything in that department in a long time.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

The story of the Elder scrolls has always, and most likely always will be, told outside of the games themselves in interviews, and developer made forum stories.

Elder scrolls actually has an over arching plot that connects all the games together, and many of the characters from across the games, in ways most people don't realize.

Why wouldn't they put it into the game on purpose? That's idiotic. That's like making a bland, boring TV show littered with 2-dimensional, archetypical characters and then saying "but the fanfiction this generates is gold! So it's a lot better than people realise."

 

[The White Hunter]

I think it should just be; You're a mercenary, take odd jobs at guilds or from civilians themselves.

That.

Also, add in a bit more variety to the fucking dungeons, I don't want to keep seeing the same stuff over and over.
Also, a bit more depth to the combat would be nice, flailing wildly is all well and good but all you'd have to do to spice it up is rip off Demon's Souls just a little bit. Add countering and stuff, etc.

Finally: Fix the way your game handles save data Bethesda.

 

[SajuukKhar]

I think it should just be; You're a mercenary, take odd jobs at guilds or from civilians themselves.

That.

That's never going to happen, the game is called elder scrolls for a reason, i.e. all the games are prophecies foretold by the Elder scrolls, everything is going to be a "chosen one" scenario. Its the whole premise of the game, and the game's title.

Hell, every main character of every ES game is the freaking avatar of Lorkhan, also known as Shor, and Shezzar, the creator of the mortal realm, you CANT be him and not be some uber-hero.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

You contradicted yourself in the first sentence. That challenge, while not being the main focus, was always there in the first 3 Elder Scrolls game, and then they started dumbing it down. Funny, because I remember loving Daggerfall and Morrowind, so and since they were supposed to set the standard for the series, It should be a game I would enjoy.

The problem with this illusion of "choice", is that none of it matters. Oh sure, there are a few things that are limited if your low level, but really you could spend the whole game as a sneaking thief in light armor and a Dagger, switch to Heavy Armor and a Warhammer, and you won't face any real challenges. It doesn't cost you any perk points to duel wield, only if you want your swords to swing slightly faster. If you boost a skill, you aren't narrowing your options at all. I could specialize in Warhammers, and nothing is stopping me from just using a dagger and not being penalized.

Er, yes, there were classes in previous Elder Scrolls, so...
I'll state right now, they could have easily fixed the attribute system, they easily could have revamped it without dumbing it down, instead they decided to just remove them entirely so no one who plays will have to make tough decisions. Though it isn't surprising, Bethesda seems to be fans of taking the easy way, if the reasons for lack of medium armor is any indication(according to Todd they removed it because it was difficult to balance). Not to mention, the risk of making a bad decision was one of the many reasons for attributes, to give you meaningful gameplay decisions that make you actually think.

What people have you been watching make spells, everyone I've seen used it to make fun and interesting spells. In Morrowind for instance, there were people making spells that Drained enemy fatigue, and increased speed for a swift retreat. Some people would make spells that turns you invisible and shot fire just to mess with the NPCs. There were people making levitation spells that caused mass death! Again I say it, they could have easily fixed the redundancies that they had. Instead they opted to just take out half of the spells and spell making, because according to them "we just have to make it easier to learn and easier to play" or else console players won't enjoy it.

I did not say the games weren't hard, I said the challenge does not come from learning how to take advantage of stat/skill/gear synergies and planning. Not in Morrowind, Oblivion, or Skyrim. Actually, the games tend to break wide open if you attempt it. Morrowind was harder in lots of ways but that wasn't one. I then attempted to account for why that is other than Bethesda is dumb and wants dumb people to purchase. I think it fits what they are apparently trying to accomplish with the series. I'm not saying The Elder Scrolls is as smart as Arkania, I'm saying not every game should be that smart.

If you punish me for using a build, that's one more build I can't use. Letting me explore the possibilities and personalize my character has taken priority since Morrowind. That's fine, it fits THIS game quite well. Not every RPG has to be like Arkania, especially not one that sacrifices so much in the name of freedom and exploration. These games are sprawling and broken as fuck. Turning the skill system into a complex brain teaser that rewards smarts and punishes dumbness is both a doomed effort and a failure to take advantage of the elements that make The Elder Scrolls unique.

When I say I'm surprised you like The Elder Scrolls, I don't mean that as a criticism. I'm only trying to understand how your opinions of the games relate to your criticisms. Telling me why you liked Morrowind despite not thinking much of the choice it offers is exactly what I'm fishing for.

It seems like every time I see someone criticize Skyrim I find out they're playing it on easy mode. That's the only explanation for why you could think perks don't matter, and why you said in an earlier post that hard battles could be won by flailing mindlessly. If you are playing on a difficulty that challenges you, you will need perks to succeed. Not for every single enemy, but there is no way you could play through a hard dungeon and tell me perks don't make a difference. You could probably find a way to beat the game without spending them, but if you're telling me they don't make the skills they go into obvious choices over the alternatives I'm calling bullshit. If you play without perks you are gimped, period. Skyrim is the first Elder Scrolls game I have played where my high level character can't do everything equally well.

Why tweak the attributes? Just for the sake of having attributes? They sucked. What you say you want attributes to accomplish, we now have. I agonize over the perk calculator in a good way. Spend your points wrong and you will regret it. That doesn't mean making a good build necessarily requires a functioning brain, but it does mean you have to make choices. And that beats the fuck out of grinding and counting up multipliers. You just pretend perks don't offer meaningful advantages and that's straight bullshit. Perks cut the cost of my spells in half and double my melee damage, and that's just to start with.

As for classes, I'm only going back as far as Morrowind. The "classes" weren't really anything I would describe as real classes, they just grouped some skills together and called them "Knight" or something. Nobody even used them except maybe for laughs. No big loss. Getting rid of them emphasizes the theme of choosing your own personal style and exploring your options.

I said I was conflicted about the magic. You brought up the use for spell making that I neglected, which is dicking around. Spell making was cool but I don't view it as a big deal. It was little more than a curiosity, not something really important that I couldn't live without. There are advantages to a more structured system and they are visible in Skyrim. Some feel so strongly about spell making and I just don't.

I said Skyrim was both streamlined in a good way and dumbed down in a bad way. But I think the extent to which it is dumbed down compared with Oblivion is overstated. I think it is actually more sophisticated in some ways, specifically: perks>attributes, the way melee weapons are organized and separated, and the magic effects being a little more organic and varied than "on touch" and "on target".