Skyrim's combat and the action RPG genre

[Eclectic Dreck]

Skyrim's combat is improved over previous TES games. But to say that is to applaud the makers of a machine gun for doing better than the Chauchet.

Arena (or was it daggerfall? Someone will probably correct me) had combat where you moved the mouse itself to swing your sword. It was dreadful.
Morrowind had combat where literally everything was controlled via dice role. Swinging a sword at all cost fatigue as did moving faster than a stroll. Blocking was only accomplished by having a shield and hoping it did. . . something.
Oblivion ensured that all attacks that logically hit actually hit and that blocking was an active action and introduced power attacks. Player input in combat was officially above "tap button for swift victory or terrible defeat"
Skyrim offered still more options including a number of new power attacks, significant changes to magic and so forth and is finally, after a mere five games, somewhere around "ok" mechanically.

Of course, there is and always has been a fundamental problem with TES games. They are not, at any point, designed around intelligent combat mediating progress; instead, they confer advantage by intelligent build. The increased depth of the system is welcome, but like any elder scrolls a player who plays properly will rapidly gain such a significant advantage with particular skills that playing smarter is irrelevant. Why play smart when one can get Chillrend to do more than 450 damage in a single swing?

 

[Kahunaburger]

It flummoxes me that combat like that can exist nowadays when games like Dark Souls and The Witcher 2 continually push the envelope in their combat departments.

Yeah, there are a variety of mystifying design decisions in TES. Like the leveling system. Like, I get that people love sandboxes and throw money at these games, but that's no reason to half-ass massive parts of the game like the combat, the leveling system, and the writing.

 

[CAMDAWG]

The combat in the TES games has gradually improved with each game.

However, it's still utter poop.

One of the reasons I got bored with Skyrim was discovering that all I had to do was stroll up to an enemy and mash the attack button while slurping the occasional health potion.

And that's not even going into how easy it is to break or exploit.

As for examples of action-RPGs with better combat... Deus Ex Human Revolution, Mass Effect 3, Witcher 2, Dark Souls, Kingdoms of Amalur.

Elder Scrolls + Dark Souls combat = Awesomeness.

The Elder Souls: Darksky anybody? I'd buy the shit out of that.

OT: I just recently started up a new game, with a character based around magic/archery, and the archery combat is so far ahead of the melee it's hilarious. When you're at a low level, the weapons don't look like they do much, but with one of the perks, every shot has a 50% chance or something to stun the target. This makes it feel much more like something weighty is happening, the lack of which in melee always felt problematic.

This is the reason why I think dark souls is a much better game than skyrim. While skyrim gave you a huge massive world, things start to get repetitive quite quickly, and it just feels unfocused. Which is all well and good, that's what the devs wanted to do, but in dark souls, every single little aspect of the entire game just has the feeling that huge amounts of care and effort were invested in it.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I checked out that Chivalry video, and it has some neat aspects to it, but some others I'm not so fond of. The dynamic attacking thing is good, but I'm not so sure about the whole jerking your mouse about to block part. The animations kind of sucked, but that's probably just because of it being an early build. I really don't like the ducking under and jumping over attacks. It adds a very arcade-ish feel to what was otherwise looking to be a more realistic take on a medieval combat sim. I'll still probably pick up this game, but it is a minor nitpick.

It's funny, reading on people's impressions of Skyrim. I never got to a point where I could just steamroll enemies without blocking and dodging, but that could either be because I use a combat mod(Duel currently, and waiting for Duke Patrick's mod to hit a stable point of development), or because I never really tried to break the game(unlike I did with Morrowind, which was particularly prone to abuse via enchantment/alchemy).

By the way, I think that the Pax East video has a better representation of Chivalry. It's one of 5 games in the video:

 

[Scars Unseen]

Arena to Morrowind had hit/miss combat - pretty much the bare bone of RPGs. Daggarena's was actually more complex than Morrowind's, as enemies took knockback.

Then Oblivion came along, and provided this awkward mixture of RPG and action that didn't really work at all - hitting enemies didn't feel right, even at higher levels warhammers did 2 damage and seemed like they bounced right off.

Skyrim, on the other hand... it just did everything brilliantly. Looking at this thread, it's an unpopular opinion, but you really do feel like you're hitting enemies, and a couple of the perks are absolutely genius. They added in one that means sprinting at the enemy while doing a power attack causes a critical hit. What that means in gameplay? When you see a bandit across the room, you get out your warhammer and charge at them. It's a simple mechanic, but one that makes the game feel so much more real.

One of my favorite moments in Skyrim was when I was raiding the Thalmor embassy and I charged one of them with my greatsword and it just seamlessly moved into a killcam of me skewering him. Sometimes the killcam kind of jerks you out of the action, but it just worked out brilliantly right there.

 

[King of Asgaard]

It flummoxes me that combat like that can exist nowadays when games like Dark Souls and The Witcher 2 continually push the envelope in their combat departments.

Yeah, there are a variety of mystifying design decisions in TES. Like the leveling system. Like, I get that people love sandboxes and throw money at these games, but that's no reason to half-ass massive parts of the game like the combat, the leveling system, and the writing.

I like what they tried to do with the leveling system, that is, allowing the player to do what they wanted to do, but what came out of it was a system that was hilariously easy to break.
Just as an example, I was able to grind a character to about level 17 and 70+ sneak in the tutorial by getting to the bear bit, sneaking and sneak attacking the ally. Since he never dies, you can grind to infinity, and I only stopped because I was getting bored. That, and the fact that you will never have enough points to put into everything you want, and then not implementing some kind of function that regains your perk points should be outlawed.

 

[Krantos]

I have no problems with it. Frankly, I actually like it.

It's not as flashy or (honestly) satisfying as The Witcher or Amalur, but it is better grounded. For me that counts for a lot. Every fight feels organic and real. Not realistic, mind, but real in it feels like it's actually happening. It has to do with the presentation really. A lot of games disconnect the combat from the rest of the game, so it almost feels like they're part of different games/realities. Dragon Age 2 was the worst culprit.

Every fight in Skyrim feels authentic. That's why I like it. Sure, the mechanics and animations aren't perfect, but neither do they get in the way while I'm playing. Mediocre combat that is well presented is more desirable (imo) than good combat poorly presented.

 

[Krantos]

[what came out of it was a system that was hilariously easy to break.

The thing is, Bethesda has never been ones to care much about whether a system is breakable. They only make single player games so why avoid it?

I mean really, if breaking a system is bad and reduces enjoyment, why do it? I never really understood why people think just because the potential to break a system exists, they have to use it. No one FORCED you to sit there and sneak attack your companion. You did that yourself. If it reduced your enjoyment of the game, that's your own fault.


Personally, I like the fact that TES allows me to just play the way I want to play. More structured games are fun in their own right, but if I want to play the Witcher. I'll play the Witcher. No other game gives you the freedom TES does. That's why I play them.

 

[Jynthor]

I like what they tried to do with the leveling system, that is, allowing the player to do what they wanted to do, but what came out of it was a system that was hilariously easy to break.
Just as an example, I was able to grind a character to about level 17 and 70+ sneak in the tutorial by getting to the bear bit, sneaking and sneak attacking the ally. Since he never dies, you can grind to infinity, and I only stopped because I was getting bored. That, and the fact that you will never have enough points to put into everything you want, and then not implementing some kind of function that regains your perk points should be outlawed.

TES isn't multiplayer, people don't care if you break your game, plenty of people play the game normally.

Have fun getting killed by everything because you levelled nothing but sneak by the way.

 

[Scars Unseen]

How I wish I could delete double posts...

 

[Scars Unseen]

That, and the fact that you will never have enough points to put into everything you want, and then not implementing some kind of function that regains your perk points should be outlawed.

I thought I would address this for a moment. If I could pick only one thing that I could hate about World of Warcraft, it would be that it either started or popularized the idea that we should be able to reset our character's abilities on a whim in a role playing game, and that any game that doesn't allow you to is shit. If I was playing D&D and told my DM that I wanted to scratch all my feats and start my character over again, he'd tell me I should just roll up a new character if I wanted to do that.

Now I understand the feature's existence in an MMO: those fuckers can't leave game balance alone for 2 weeks, so why should you get stuck with a build that has suddenly become broken due to developer fiat? But in a game that doesn't change(beyond patches fixing technical problems)? Well I'm not going to complain if the feature exists(I can ignore it after all), but it most certainly shouldn't be considered a flaw that a game actually makes you decide on something and have that decision stick. Hell, if you have the PC version you can just use the console to remove the old perks and give yourself the ones you want.

Okay. Minirant over.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Honestly I like Skyrim's combat. It feels weighty and gritty. Honestly I don't know where this "I feel like I'm not hitting anything" nonsense is coming from because the only time I feel that is when I'm fighting a dragon. Everything else feels very satisfying to bring a warhammer down onto.
Then there's the magic. I feel that this has undergone the greatest improvement from Oblivion in that there are actually a lot of different animations and you can't just make a spell that fits all situations.
Stealth is as fun as always. Stalking the prey and then rolling out from the shadows behind them to slit their throat never really gets old for me.

Sure the combat isn't as good as action RPG's but that is to be expected because that's not what Skyrim is really about. It's about the world and then being whatever you want to be in that world. I can see how this doesn't jive for some but this is the best kind of game for me.

 

[skywolfblue]

It's pretty terrible. Much better the oblivion, good enough to be palatable, but not good enough to be truly enjoyable on its own.

- Third person, where you're aiming isn't always where the fireball/arrow will go.
- Clang clang clang repetitive one-button fighting (Hell, Assassin's Creed is largely one-button but it has weight and dodging and other context sensitive stuff so that it's not always the same)
- Jerky character movement hampers smooth combat. It's hard to hit someone when they're pathing around like a twitchy squirrel on steroids.

 

[Scow2]

That, and the fact that you will never have enough points to put into everything you want, and then not implementing some kind of function that regains your perk points should be outlawed.

I thought I would address this for a moment. If I could pick only one thing that I could hate about World of Warcraft, it would be that it either started or popularized the idea that we should be able to reset our character's abilities on a whim in a role playing game, and that any game that doesn't allow you to is shit. If I was playing D&D and told my DM that I wanted to scratch all my feats and start my character over again, he'd tell me I should just roll up a new character if I wanted to do that.

Now I understand the feature's existence in an MMO: those fuckers can't leave game balance alone for 2 weeks, so why should you get stuck with a build that has suddenly become broken due to developer fiat? But in a game that doesn't change(beyond patches fixing technical problems)? Well I'm not going to complain if the feature exists(I can ignore it after all), but it most certainly shouldn't be considered a flaw that a game actually makes you decide on something and have that decision stick. Hell, if you have the PC version you can just use the console to remove the old perks and give yourself the ones you want.

Okay. Minirant over.

The only GMs that don't allow me to adjust a feat or skillpoint distribution that is not working out at all for my characters in games like D&D are generally assholes. The problem with Skyrim isn't a lack of total perk-point reset, but a complete lack of any redistribution of perks.

Honestly... I couldn't stand Dark Soul's combat, and the only thing I liked about it over Skyrim's was the ability to land on enemy's heads with my sword. Sword+Board and Two-handed weapons were very fun in Skyrim.

With Bethesda, it's more like you have to go out of your way to try and find out how NOT to break the game. Their rpg mechanics/leveling system is so fucked up and ass backwards.

Like with Oblivion, you had to pick your major skills as ones you really didn't want to be your main ones, otherwise you would over level yourself, because everything levels with you...Just complete and udder nonsensical retardation.

I don't think Skyrim has quite the same problems, but it's Bethesda, I'm sure it has other ones. Their whole more you use it, the better you get at it system makes sense realistically, but just doesn't translate well AT ALL to a high fantasy rpg. (where realism shouldn't be a focus anyway)

Actually... I find the passive improvement of commonly-used abilities to be the best skill system ever seen in an RPG.

I'm not sure what "Action-RPGs" have a better combat system than Skyrim's - I like the absolute control I have over my character. The only complaint I have about it is the inability to tap the "Sprint" button in a direction other than forward to move quickly out of the way.

 

[Woodsey]

I hated Morrowind's combat, thought Oblivion's was alright, and liked Skyrim's. It's not as reactionary as it could be, but it still felt weighty and satisfying. I mostly played with a bow and arrow though, so nailing someone with a well-timed shot and seeing their body rag-doll may be more interesting than hitting someone's shield a lot.

I wish they'd let you choose whether you had a first or third-person kill-cam though.

With Bethesda, it's more like you have to go out of your way to try and find out how NOT to break the game. Their rpg mechanics/leveling system is so fucked up and ass backwards.

Like with Oblivion, you had to pick your major skills as ones you really didn't want to be your main ones, otherwise you would over level yourself, because everything levels with you...Just complete and udder nonsensical retardation.

I don't think Skyrim has quite the same problems, but it's Bethesda, I'm sure it has other ones. Their whole more you use it, the better you get at it system makes sense realistically, but just doesn't translate well AT ALL to a high fantasy rpg. (where realism shouldn't be a focus anyway)

Have you played Skyrim?

That, and the fact that you will never have enough points to put into everything you want, and then not implementing some kind of function that regains your perk points should be outlawed.

You shouldn't ever have the ability to put points into everything. Permanency is a lost art.

Your whole post makes it sound like you're coming at it from a MMORPG perspective actually, which is... odd. I mean sure, you could grind your sneak up, but no one's going to do that unless they really want to, and the only person it's ever going to affect is you. I'm not sure the obsession with everything being perfectly balanced is inherently a good one when it comes to single-player. Oddities that only a few people are going to stumble upon just adds that extra bit of character.

 

[kommando367]

You can decapitate people with blunt weapons and the animations for killing dragons look bad, but that's about it.

 

[Richardplex]

I actually prefer Oblivion's combat to Skyrim's, mostly because of the lack of Athletics, Speed, Agility and Acrobatics. They really underestimate the importance of movement. I built a ton of "glass cannon" fighters who relied on speed, stamina, and agility to take be successful..

My thoughts exactly, I liked (moreso than vanilla skyrim anyway) weaving in and out of attack range and smacking an enemy with a claymore, wearing only light armour so I had to get out before being hit.

Skyrim's combat was unplayable for me until I got mods for it. Now If I don't block attacks, I'm likely to die (2 2h hits will kill me for example without blocking). I also get staggered from taking direct hits, same goes for the enemy. Made the combat fairly intense.

So to answer you, without mods no, Oblivions' beats Skyrim's combat. Both run miles around Morrowwind, but that's a given, since Morrowwind's combat is absolute arse.

Better combat? See most other action RPGs.

It flummoxes me that combat like that can exist nowadays when games like Dark Souls and The Witcher 2 continually push the envelope in their combat departments.

Yeah, there are a variety of mystifying design decisions in TES. Like the leveling system. Like, I get that people love sandboxes and throw money at these games, but that's no reason to half-ass massive parts of the game like the combat, the leveling system, and the writing.

The writings a weird one with Skyrim, it's like they had some master writing plan and just... stopped. There's grey vs grey decisions everywhere, which don't amount to anything, and there's a fuck ton of essential NPCs everywhere. Want to join Mjoll and clean up Riften? Nope, Maven Black-briar is essential for the whole game, Riften's fucked forever. Want to clean out those Stormcloak camps on your way to the next mountain to hike? Nope, all the generals are immune. Want to clear out both factions in Markath since neither of them are at all desirable? Nope, arbitrary choice... et cetera. They sacrificed the sandbox for badly done narrative, don't understand.

They

 

[Black Arrow Officer]

Has anyone here played Pirates, Vikings and Knights 2? It's a Half Life 2 mod with fantastic first person combat. It has features Skyrim lacks like directional blocking, counterattacks, and more "powerful" feeling weapons. Every time you slash someone with your sword, blood spurts out and there's an extremely satisfying sound effect of flesh being split to accompany each strike. The combat in that game is much more tight then Skyrim, and maybe Skyrim could learn a thing or two from it.

 

[Rednog]

Not a fan of it, it is just too clunky and doesn't feel more than I press button and we check damage values, rinse and repeat.
Which is kind of bad because you can't always craft a character to your playstyle. I want a sneaky agile guy, ok great I sneak attack a guy with my bow, but if it happens to be something I can't sneak attack like those oh so fun dragons,I'm basically screwed. I can't really use my bow because the second I do I'm going to be right in the dragon's flame breath. When it lands I get to flail at it with my daggers, which are hilariously under leveled. Also, I get to enjoy having a giant chunk of my health ripped away when I get hit by the slightest melee attack since you don't level armor unless someone is beating on you. Which is almost never since I'm a sneaky character. Brb I have to go afk for an hour and let a mudcrab beat on me.

 

[vivalahelvig]

Has anyone here played Pirates, Vikings and Knights 2? It's a Half Life 2 mod with fantastic first person combat. It has features Skyrim lacks like directional blocking, counterattacks, and more "powerful" feeling weapons. Every time you slash someone with your sword, blood spurts out and there's an extremely satisfying sound effect of flesh being split to accompany each strike. The combat in that game is much more tight then Skyrim, and maybe Skyrim could learn a thing or two from it.

That game is the best, I was just playing it. Can't wait for the 2 new classes to come out.

OT: I quite liked morrowinds combat, it had directional strikes.
Only one was a good idea, but still.

Skyrim would be better with Atributes and stuff, making it more RPG-y.

Or just remake Morrowind in Skyrim, but just for better graphics, animations, combat, 'n such.