Skyrim Streamlining Removes Confusion, Says Bethesda

[Enkidu88]

So instead of making a tutorial for more than introducing the basic mechanics and giving us a big name actor to start the story (before promptly killing him), they're just gonna cut features instead.

Yeah, nothing can go wrong with that idea.

 

[Fightgarr]

Well that's too bad. I thought that removing the amount of skills they did for Oblivion was a mistake. Now they're removing more? Ah well, it was unlikely I was going to buy this one anyway.

 

[Zhukov]

Heh. You'd think developer would've learnt to stop using the 'S-word' by now.

Because, y'know, clearly less numbers means that it's going to be a brown shooter for dumb people... or something. Apparently that's the way these things work.

 

[Joshimodo]

Streamlining is fine, simplifying is not. Skyrim has dabbled in both, it seems.

 

[Jordi]

Whichever camp you might fall into though, it's hard to argue that removing confusion is a bad thing. You can build amazing systems, but if no one can figure out how to use them, then the effort is wasted.

This only applies when you accept that the system they're streamlining was indeed confusing. Streamlining a confusing system is good, streamlining a complex one isn't necessarily. A couple days ago I read the Skyrim Fan Interview [http://forums.bethsoft.com/index.php?/topic/1207390-skyrim-fan-interview/] and I was a little sad to see that most answers showed it was going to cut down on (to me) interesting options/choices. There were a lot of questions asking "is X going to be interesting/deep/complex like in Morrowind, or will it be more simple/streamlined like in Oblivion". It's not really surprising, but almost every answer was "like Oblivion".

There's still a lot to love though.

 

[draythefingerless]

perhaps delaying accessibility to more confusing skills would be better. and wen they do come, teach them their use.

 

[Dr_Horrible]

At this point, I'm still going to buy this game. The only reason I am doing so is that I know mods will bring back skills, re-separate the armor, improve the mechanics, and otherwise use the game engine the way it should be used.

 

[StriderShinryu]

Sounds good to me. I know that one thing I've always hated in any RPG, regardless of origin, is when you can make bad choices or can be given useless skills. I agree with some of the other posters in that simplifying things doesn't have to mean removing those choices. It can really be about improving your game design such that A.) a player has more knowledge of what they are choosing and how useful it will be before they choose it and B.) there are no skills that are useless (don't simply cut skills that aren't great, do what you can to make them better).

 

[orangeban]

I agree with removing hand to hand (I presume it'll be added to blunt or something) 'cause really, hand to hand sucked, but if you added it to melee weapons then it'd be a good back up if you weapon broke.

 

[TheBadGamer]

I like how many people seems to know exactly the game is going to be. I mean how can you even say that this is a bad or a good thing, have you guys played it yet? If so can you tell me how you got your hands on a copy?

 

[Vibhor]

Meh. Skyrim still seems like Oblivion 2.0
That may not be a bad thing for some of you but for me, a person who grew on Daggerfall, is most atrocious insult you can do to a series. I am still waiting for the day when someone does a RPG on the scale of Daggerfall. Upgraded graphics be damned, if they even get the gameplay right(improve upon it) then I would play the game even if it had the graphics of Wolfenstien.

 

[Brian Hendershot]

Good.
Besides im sick of people complaining that streamlining is ruining games.
It makes me shake my fist I tell you!

See look, Bethesda is just trying to make the game better. This reminds of how people whined about the loot system being removed from Mass Effect 2, even though it was just annoying and didn't add anything to the first game at all.

Truly these two people speak the truth! I am going to wait until the game comes out before I start raging. If you ask me each Elder Scrolls got better then the last. (Kinda. Oblivion is debatable.)

Plus all this nerd rage on the forums is not gonna help. We have raged about Online Passes and draconic DRM and that stuff is still there.

 

[Dr_Horrible]

previous Bethesda games had asked players to make choices on skills and classes before they had proper understanding of what they did

...except that the target audience of this game, by which I mean RPG fans, already know and understand the systems involved in an RPG. That's the beauty of creating a game in this style is that you can have the target audience be people who undestand and are experienced with the material already; you do not introduce new gamers to an RPG to star

Actually, no. Skyrim does not have the same audience as titles like NWN or the first Witcher. Do you really, honestly believe, after playing Morrowind and Oblivion, that Bethesda wants hardcore CRPG fans? What the fuck have you been smoking?

Honestly, I can see a lot of reasons to be worried about what Skyrim will turn out to be, but this isnt one of them. Even in games like NWN you do pick a rough class for your char in the beginning but there is a lot of things he or she can branch out to be in later stages. In Oblivion, you picked exactly what you wanted to be when you left the first dungeon, and if you wanted to be a mage that deals damage with fire and decided you wanted to be a mage who deals damage by summoning creatures instead, even if you were only one hour into the game, you were fucked. Really, Oblivion was a terrible game from that standpoint.

I wasn't saying that Bethesda was still after the hearts of hardcore cRPG players, though I wish it was, but considering how simple the skillsets in Oblivion were, it seems obvious to me (and pretty much everyone I know) what skills do what already. After all, what the skill is is in the name; do you want to pick locks? choose lockpicking. Want to jump? You sound like an acrobatics guy. Like sneaking? I suggest Sneak.

If Bethesda really wanted to make the game better, there are a lot of things that could be streamlined to good effect. For example, how about their awful interior design? some streamlining would actually be welcome there.

 

[dragongit]

If all else fails someone will make a mod along the way that will do what the developers don't.

 

[Nazgual]

Except that there's a difference between removing bad features because they're bad, and removing good features because they're too lazy to make people understand what they are.

It wasn't a good feature, it was just checking if you picked up a gun with better stats. ME 2 had you pick from a handful of guns that were very different from each other with clear strengths and weaknesses, which gave the player a meaningful choice. The loot system was just picking up dozens of weapons and and picking one with the stats.

 

[Booze Zombie]

I don't get why that means I can't be a drunken boxing badass.

 

[cthulhumythos]

See look, Bethesda is just trying to make the game better. This reminds of how people whined about the loot system being removed from Mass Effect 2, even though it was just annoying and didn't add anything to the first game at all.

but i still complain about that! (i'm one of the few who preferred me1, but whatev's)

As much as i cringe at the word streamlining like a bunch of other people, picking crap skills at the beginning has been a problem for me in elderscrolls games; so i guess this is actually a welcome change.

however i now need to grieve the loss of pants as well as pauldrons. you win some you lose some it seems.

however i hate sounding whiney so i'll end this post by saying: nonetheless, this looks like the best elderscrolls so far and i'm buying the hell out of it.

 

[Wieke]

Good saves me the trouble of installing a classless mod ;-).

On a more seriuos note. The classes were next to useless anyway. No class features or unique game mechanics. They just hampered your skill growth in certain areas. Hell with the maddening way ability score increases were handled you were usually better of picking skill you wouldn't use often as class skills anyway.

Also we are getting perks, so some of the complexity (like the weapon types) are represented elsewere.

 

[Dr_Horrible]

Except that there's a difference between removing bad features because they're bad, and removing good features because they're too lazy to make people understand what they are.

It wasn't a good feature, it was just checking if you picked up a gun with better stats. ME 2 had you pick from a handful of guns that were very different from each other with clear strengths and weaknesses, which gave the player a meaningful choice. The loot system was just picking up dozens of weapons and and picking one with the stats.

I was saying that removing that mechanic in ME2 sounded like a good idea (I haven't played either because I'm not into third person shooters). I meant that removing a bad mechanic is fine, removing choice is not usually.