Poll: Skyrim: The Armour complaint.

[C.O.C]

it's almost as stupid as sonic fans complaining about sonic's eyes being colored

Wait there coloured... MY GOD NOOOOO!!!

I don't get what the fuss is about how often do you play obliivion from that god awful third person point of view?
Maybe when you go a sneaking but then your probably in the brotherhood armour so you'll be used to the one pieces of destiny right?

 

[DP155ToneZone]

Good work double posting there, server.

 

[DP155ToneZone]

Just so ya know, I'm a PC gamer who likes stats....

Not to sound like a wierdo or something, but that is such an endearing thing for a girl to say.

/suggestiveeyebrowwaggling

 

[WolfThomas]

I'm not too worried about this change, though what I really did like in Morrowind was wearing unique clothing (like a blessed shirt made out of a saints hair) underneath awesome unique armour while wielding unique weapons. So what I'm saying is bring back one of a kind weapons and armour. They had a few in Oblivion, but in Morrowind I had an entire room filled with unique weapons.

Edit: Also robes over armour, I missed that in Oblivion. In Morrowind you could hide ugly armour, look like a battle mage or roleplay in cold area with robes over your gear.

Cape would be sweet, too.

 

[Signa]

I still haven't seen any of you complainers really say why this is a problem, so let me fill it in for you. This is a bad omen not because of how it will affect gameplay, but because it shows the attitude the developers are taking while making the game. They want to be lazy and not make the game work with more armor options.

I really doubt that anyone would be knee-deep in a playthrough and suddenly stop and say "OMG, this game would be 100X better if I could wear greaves!" What likely will happen is that player will just end up getting bored with the game because while we know now that greaves have been cut, there are probably 100 other little, inconsequential things that also have been cut that would have all added to the game if they were properly implemented in the first place. If the devs can't be bothered to get greaves working for us, can we really trust them to deliver the good game we all are hoping for? I'm sure the answer is "yes" for many of you still, but you can't tell me you are as sure about that as you were before this news.

TL;DR: It's not losing the greaves that is bad, it's losing the ideas and the potential that losing the greaves represents.

 

[Poptart Invasion]

The only way I could see this as a bad move is if they failed to modify the armors quality or the damage you take in battle, which seems like an impossible rookie mistake to make given the obsessive attention to detail Bethesda has shown for this game so far.

Besides that, it all adds up to better looking pieces, a world that feels bigger and more populated, and having to use up fewer hammers for repairs. I fail to see how any of that is something to complain about.

 

[Saulkar]

It's just that it's a removal of depth. It makes things simpler, but the simplicity makes the game less interesting.
In Morrowind, you could have clothes and Armour, stacking stats and bonuses, and making interesting gameplay mechanics. In Oblivion, you couldn't, making some question, why is there even clothing? No-one will wear it, it's a pointless layer of depth.
If you take out all the detail and complexity, you end up with a game that's barely worth playing as an RPG and might as well be a simple hack and slash, fine games on their own, but not what fans want for The Elder Scrolls.

Also, while having more stuff seems like something which will be harder to learn, TES: Morrowind was my first proper RPG, and I learnt quick, and had more fun in the complex and interesting environment with the many options than I did in Oblivion, especially once I realised the auto-leveling in Oblivion effectively prevented my usual Jack of All Trades approach (I rarely make more than 1 whole play through, and only usually will make 2 or 3 characters) and discovered that being competent with blades, destruction and bows, with a decent Sneak skill, as well as developing some Alteration abilities, basically made everything impossible to kill without backpedalling madly on my over levelled Athletics skill to lob fireballs at most everything.

Streamlining is making the menus possible to use and the level paths make sense, whilst "Dumbing Down" is the removal of gameplay simply to make the game simpler.

In this case, you remove the ability to mix and match, and simplify further the choice in armour. This limits play styles and strategic decisions, and may force the player to play in a way they did not intend, and become railroaded.
The only solution that they can do, keeping this system, in my opinion (there may be other, better solutions) is to add in more variety in the kit available to the player.

Ninja'd hard and fast. You covered absolutely everything I had to say and better. Personally I feel that streamlining should be reserved for the sole purpose of making the game more easy to navigate and interact with wilst complexity being built up with each consecutive sequel to keep adding depth and thus replayability. The more you simplify the game the more easily you become bored with it as you pass it more easily, see everything more quickly, and become good at it without investing any skill or effort into it.

 

[ChupathingyX]

TL;DR: It's not losing the greaves that is bad, it's losing the ideas and the potential that losing the greaves represents.

That's what I've been saying?

Since Morrowind Elder Scrolls games have had less and less content, factions and weapon types.

In Morrowind there were crossbows, halberds, throwing stars, throwing knives and spears. In Oblivion thse were all taken out, not only that but even weapon styles were taken out (Chitin, Nordic, Orcish etc).

Not onlt that, but things such as Factions have been shrinking, in Morrowind you could choose to join three different houses complete with their own long questlines, in Oblivion no such thing exists.

The Elder Scrolls series is getting less and less role-playing options every game.

 

[MorsePacific]

I'm coming off of Fallout 3 and New Vegas, so having an armor option AT ALL is great to me. Simply put, people don't like having things taken from them. Decreasing the number of armor pieces removes a part of a feature people liked and they don't like that at all.

 

[devotedsniper]

I don't think this is a good idea, anyone who played elder scrolls or any other RPG for that matter will know having the set of armor doesn't make it good, since were always mixing parts to get the best combination (e.g. gloves which give you better sword skill, boots which make you jump high or walk on water), they've kind of limited the users choice there quite abit.

Oh well let modders be modders and undo this.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

I like freedom. Choosing what I wear is freedom too. And fuck mods. Mods mods mods. How about we ship a game that is fine as it is so us non modders can enjoy it. Not everyone mods and not every problem should be answered with "mod it".

You...don't have to be a Modder to add mods. It's ususally quite easy.

And I'm not saying adding robe design mods to DA:O absolves Bioware of their sins! Yeah, sure they were too busy making 120 hours worth of high-quality story content to add a few extra robe designs. They are at fault. Doesn't mean we can't fix that fault ourselves as opposed to just bitching about it. Calm down lady.

Also, I'm sure Skyrim will have plenty of sneaky, stabby, gothic clothing.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

Just so ya know, I'm a PC gamer who likes stats....

Not to sound like a wierdo or something, but that is such an endearing for a girl to say.

/suggestiveeyebrowwaggling

I like how your accidental double posting of that comment, made it much MORE weird than you feared the comment itself to be. Lol XD

 

[Yarkaz]

Prolly a good design choice. I don't see how combining two (just two!) armor pieces in one slot ruins the game. I'm still gonna have my stats, I'm still gonna customize the hell out of my character, and most importantly I'll still be playing a role. In a role playing game. See what I did there? Role? Playing? Role playing game?

Seems odd how people define the purity of an RPG based on how many funny little numbers it has. RPGs have always been about building characters and creating heroes, and when I look at a real life hero I don't start droning out numbers to quantify his/her attributes. Personally,I think the modern choice/consequence model that major RPG devs like Bethesda and Bioware are using nowadays involve more "role playing" than traditional RPGs, by a longshot. So if merging two armor slots Will allow me to have more interactable objects and NPCs on screen- more chances to define my character as a person- then great! Take as many armor slots as you want!

 

[bakan]

Prolly a good design choice. I don't see how combining two (just two!) armor pieces in one slot ruins the game. I'm still gonna have my stats, I'm still gonna customize the hell out of my character, and most importantly I'll still be playing a role. In a role playing game. See what I did there? Role? Playing? Role playing game?

Seems odd how people define the purity of an RPG based on how many funny little numbers it has. RPGs have always been about building characters and creating heroes, and when I look at a real life hero I don't start droning out numbers to quantify his/her attributes. Personally,I think the modern choice/consequence model that major RPG devs like Bethesda and Bioware are using nowadays involve more "role playing" than traditional RPGs, by a longshot. So if merging two armor slots Will allow me to have more interactable objects and NPCs on screen- more chances to define my character as a person- then great! Take as many armor slots as you want!

Well, they already took away some things with the transition from Morrowind to Oblivion, now you 'lose' some things again.
The next game takes away more choices as the average gamer has to be pampered and can't do shit on his own - this goes on and on until you lost the concept of the game itself...

Btw this applies to a lot of games recently and there are no signs of stopping this trend.

 

[AppleShrapnel]

My first taste of Elder Scrolls was Morrowind. I put hundreds upon hundreds of hours in that... and that was on the Xbox. >.>

It was the first (and now, sadly, still the only) game I played where pauldrons and gaunlets were seperate pieces. Heck, I could even wear basic clothes underneath all my armour. I dare say I've been kinda spoiled since then. : |

I can understand that from a developer's perspective, something like this can be a chore... putting it mildly, of course. But in the case of Morrowind, they did it, and to this day remains the most robust armour system I've ever seen... I was sad to see it go in Oblivion, and saddened a bit more to see that it's being culled back even more in Skyrim. :|

This isn't a deal breaker, though. I mean, it kinda sucks that more layers are getting peeled back and removed in each subsequent Elder Scrolls release, sure, but on the whole it's always an unforgettable gaming experience, so... *shrug*

@ Bethesda: Unveil the Collector's Edition already and take my money! D:

 

[DP155ToneZone]

I like how your accidental double posting of that comment, made it much MORE weird than you feared the comment itself to be. Lol XD

Indeed! How annoying.

 

[Gabriel Dragulia]

Okay... how I remember playing Oblivion for all the months I've spent in there... the only times I saw my armour was when I was in my inventory... that was it.
I just played my character... no paying attention to my armour that much... So I wouldn't really give a damn about having this taken away.
playing first person not showing the armour, but only the weapon... I actually did care about the weapon... and the one time I made full chameleon armour I just got bored because I couldn't do anything fun any more, and I couldn't see my weapon.
I care more about the weapon (the one thing I did see while playing) than the armour.

 

[Gooseboy]

They've been taking aspects from a game they consider to be more popular - (Fallout 3)
Because of the joinedness of the armour set, they are going to increase the amount of drastically different armour appearances. Which is ok, there's no problem. Customisation for the most customisation hungry player won't be undercut at all. Quit yo jabba please folks.

Just be glad Molyneux is not coming out saying you can wear the skin of your enemies or something drastic and over the top. Bethesda have this thing going on where they keep making outstanding games with features tested to the fullest. They wouldnt have taken out trousers on a whim.

Todd Howard is probably my favourite human.

Asked if there were going to be 300+ hours

-" We stopped counting around that mark, theres going to be loads of stuff you can do and new features that we've tried that we think you're going to love"

Kinda off topic. But yeah. Skyrim.

 

[Matthew Valkanov]

I'm not all that happy about the reduction in the number of armour slots, simply because it means I can't go for the the look I want, but hey, no doubt the game will be great anyway. However, why exactly is having more people on screen so important? A) This is Skyrim, a cold, harsh, "backwater" province of the Empire, so why would there be a bigger population than in Cyrodil? and B) There were already too many people who served no purpose other than populating the world in both Morrowind and Oblivion, are they at least going to make these extra people a tad more important? Doubt it.

 

[Yarkaz]

Prolly a good design choice. I don't see how combining two (just two!) armor pieces in one slot ruins the game. I'm still gonna have my stats, I'm still gonna customize the hell out of my character, and most importantly I'll still be playing a role. In a role playing game. See what I did there? Role? Playing? Role playing game?

Seems odd how people define the purity of an RPG based on how many funny little numbers it has. RPGs have always been about building characters and creating heroes, and when I look at a real life hero I don't start droning out numbers to quantify his/her attributes. Personally,I think the modern choice/consequence model that major RPG devs like Bethesda and Bioware are using nowadays involve more "role playing" than traditional RPGs, by a longshot. So if merging two armor slots Will allow me to have more interactable objects and NPCs on screen- more chances to define my character as a person- then great! Take as many armor slots as you want!

Well, they already took away some things with the transition from Morrowind to Oblivion, now you 'lose' some things again.
The next game takes away more choices as the average gamer has to be pampered and can't do shit on his own - this goes on and on until you lost the concept of the game itself...

Btw this applies to a lot of games recently and there is no sign of stopping this trend.

Oh, I totally agree on the Morrowind/Oblivion transition. But my problem there wasn't the lack of physical customization... Morrowind had more to do than Oblivion. More plots, deeper quest lines, more ways to define your character as a person and not as a walking stat sheet. Bethesda's excuses for taking this single slot away in Skyrim also seem like good things to me. Being able to put more armors into the game is actually very good for customization, and fitting more people onscreen makes for a more immersive world then we had in Oblivion. Seriously, did anybody else feel creeped out, walking through the Imperial City, watching the same five or six people have the same conversations with each other over and over again?

I can see the concern that this is giving way to a "trend," but it's one armor slot! If Skyrim was nothing but Oblivion with one less armor slot, I'd see a need for concern. But they have promised and shown so much more to make a deeper game. We get perks, we get shouts, we finally get complete freedom over both of our hands, and the organic level up system seems awesome to me. Getting better at things by doing them plays into the character defining thing I mentioned earlier perfectly.