Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Darts, Throwing stars, etc...

And wouldn't you prefer good looking, customizable armour to either of those, Wolf?

No, Manchu, it's not what I'd call the definitive aspect of an Elder Scrolls game. The unique levelling mechanic and vast worlds are the hallmark of TES. However, it's something that was in a previous game, and wasn't widely decried (or seen by common sense) as a flaw or something that detracted from the game- so why are they reducing armour customizability?

I just use the armour sets provided and rarely mix and match as to my eye the mix and matching rarely looks very good.

Though the armour sets in all of the TES games I've played have been rather boring looking.

Anvildude wrote:No, Manchu . . . [armor "customizability"] wasn't widely decried (or seen by common sense) as a flaw or something that detracted from the game- so why are they reducing armour customizability?

Todd Howard, Matt Carofano, and Bruce Nesmith wrote:The armor system is very similar to Oblivion’s. The main difference is that the upper and lower body armors, the cuirass and greaves, have been combined into one piece. This helps create armor styles that have the look we needed for Skyrim. In most of the Nordic designs we created, the upper armor would completely cover the lower armor, making it unnecessary. We get much better visual results combining those pieces, and it renders a lot faster too, so we can put more people on screen, so that was an easy tradeoff for us. We can also make a lot more armors now, so the number and variation types are more than we’ve ever had.

[. . .]

As far as medium armor, that’s not a time or polish thing, it’s a design choice to focus on two armor types and making sure those feel different and the player appreciates them. We try to make your character move and feel different between light and heavy and having a 3rd one in the middle just muddies it up in how it plays, as well as visually. And even now, we still have to tweak those two armor types so they feel different, while remaining fun. Every time we slow down heavy armor more, it feels bad, but it’s the main way of balancing it. We’ve added other ways of balancing it that feel right—like different stamina drain rates when sprinting and such.

Hope that clears up the confusion.

Thanks for that Manchu, puts a different light on it.

I just noticed your name was Sasori..kudos.

Cheesecat wrote:I hope you can have romantic relationships with NPC's, in this one. I'm annoyed that the the only ranged weapons mentioned at this moment are bows, it would nice for ranged non-magic characters to have other options like crossbows, spears, throwing axes, etc.

So you want to play Fable? Gah, last I checked, Fable fething sucked


But I do agree on missing more weapon varieties. It doesnt ruin the game for me, but it did help with the immersion of your character. And yea, thinking on the single armor sets, I loved the way they looked in Fallout3, and had very few complaints in that department, so Im sure Ill like it in Skyrim. Im just getting antsy is all, Im sick of playing Oblivion to get my Elderscrolls fix

KingCracker wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:I hope you can have romantic relationships with NPC's, in this one. I'm annoyed that the the only ranged weapons mentioned at this moment are bows, it would nice for ranged non-magic characters to have other options like crossbows, spears, throwing axes, etc.

So you want to play Fable? Gah, last I checked, Fable fething sucked


But I do agree on missing more weapon varieties. It doesnt ruin the game for me, but it did help with the immersion of your character. And yea, thinking on the single armor sets, I loved the way they looked in Fallout3, and had very few complaints in that department, so Im sure Ill like it in Skyrim. Im just getting antsy is all, Im sick of playing Oblivion to get my Elderscrolls fix

Indeed, I would NOT want to have relations with NPCs....


As for Armor Onsies, I'll be fine with it if they allow you to MAJORLY Enchant them; I want my 5x 20% Chameleon Enchants, dangit....


You guys think they should add some sort of Weapon Market like what Fable did, though?

See when I think majorly enchant, Im thinking Morrowind style, where you can go completely nuts on your enchants. Chameleon 100% feather 100pounds, restore health 5 pts constant effect restore fatigue 5pts constant effect nighteye 5pts, all that on 1 ring.

But yea, Im sure they will make it even better then Oblivion by as much as Oblivion improved on Morrowind. DRAGONS LADS! DRAGONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

KingCracker wrote:See when I think majorly enchant, Im thinking Morrowind style, where you can go completely nuts on your enchants. Chameleon 100% feather 100pounds, restore health 5 pts constant effect restore fatigue 5pts constant effect nighteye 5pts, all that on 1 ring.

But yea, Im sure they will make it even better then Oblivion by as much as Oblivion improved on Morrowind. DRAGONS LADS! DRAGONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh yeah, forgot about that; haven't played Morrowind in a fair few years.

As for Dragons, you mean "Big Chickens" right?

2:15

I'm fine with NPC relationships, I don't actually see what's wrong with them. Most of the criticism about them seems to be stemming from a game that has an overambitious creator who overhypes things (whilst no doubt telling his development team after telling the fanbase, so he has the excuse "Nobody told me it can't be done" when he gets told that, well, half of the game is not possible with current technology), and from a series that regularly disappoints.

Last time I checked, Bethesda wasn't Lionhead, Molyneux was not the CEO, and the Elder Scrolls games were actually pretty good, making them basically the opposite of Fable; like those crappy B Movies that do cheap versions of Hollywood blockbusters, Fable is the B Movie equivilant of TES.

I'm confident that Bethesda can quite clearly see where Lionhead (i.e. Peter Molyneux) have fallen over and actually do this better than we're all led to believe by how a different company has done it.

Once again, Fable =/= TES.

Avatar 720 wrote:I'm fine with NPC relationships, I don't actually see what's wrong with them. Most of the criticism about them seems to be stemming from a game that has an overambitious creator who overhypes things (whilst no doubt telling his development team after telling the fanbase, so he has the excuse "Nobody told me it can't be done" when he gets told that, well, half of the game is not possible with current technology), and from a series that regularly disappoints.

Last time I checked, Bethesda wasn't Lionhead, Molyneux was not the CEO, and the Elder Scrolls games were actually pretty good, making them basically the opposite of Fable; like those crappy B Movies that do cheap versions of Hollywood blockbusters, Fable is the B Movie equivilant of TES.

I'm confident that Bethesda can quite clearly see where Lionhead (i.e. Peter Molyneux) have fallen over and actually do this better than we're all led to believe by how a different company has done it.

Once again, Fable =/= TES.

I personally would rather have 2P Co-op before NPC relationships. Just me, though.

Why is everyone so excited for Skryim? Is it the Dragons?

Because Oblivion was spectacular, and this is so far looking to be an improvement. Norse themes and Dragons that aren't scripted events helps a bunch though.

I still think it's the Dragons.

I'm excited because Oblivion had its negatives, but if its positives were meshed with Morrowinds positives, we'd have a great game that we've been waiting for a good while.

I'm also sick to death of Oblivion CTDing for no apparent reason, so i'm looking forward to a game that actually addresses and fixes bugs instead of asking us to shell out for Whore's Amore.

coolyo294 wrote:I still think it's the Dragons.

They're Big Chickens.....

MEME IT!

It's frankly, not funny, spontaneous, clever, or original enough to become a meme.

That sir, is an insult!

iproxtaco wrote:It's frankly, not funny, spontaneous, clever, or original enough to become a meme.

I take that as a compliment considering where and who the line comes from.

It also makes no sense next to the argument. If it were meme worthy, you wouldn't trying to push it on people, and it would have already been picked up on.

my Mighty-Morphin Power Primarchs would have been a better meme. I even had Kingcracker photoshop me the emperor-ator titan.

Battle Brother Lucifer wrote:my Mighty-Morphin Power Primarchs would have been a better meme. I even had Kingcracker photoshop me the emperor-ator titan.

Link?

Anyway, to get back on topic, if Mysticism has telekinises, I still hope they take a pointer from Dead Space; I want to grab a sword from a corpse, point it at someone, and then shoot it with the power of my mind to send them flying back twenty feet.

It would be cool if it was

Telekenisis: RB
Force Throw: Left Trigger
Force Swipe (Swing it at a distance) Right Trigger

DANCING SWORD FOR THE WIN!

Please stay on-topic.

Yes, Fable isn't great at what it does as far as I'm concerned but apparently it's good enough for its real target demographic (a lot more women, for example, in the Fable fanbase). One of those things that Fable (in)famously does, which BioWare also seems committed to, is PC-NPC romance. This was not a part of Morrowind or Oblivion (or Fallout 3) and I, for one, found that refreshing. If you want that sort of thing, Fable and Mass Effect and Dragon Age all exist -- no one is stopping you from playing those games.

My prediction is that PC-NPC relationships in Skyrim will be come off as cold and emotionless, like your interactions with most TES NPCs in the past (in contrast to your interaction with the larger world itself, which was paradoxically much more intimate). This will in turn be panned by the Fable/ME/Dragon Age lovers as an example of how stilted and awkward TES is compared to their favorite games. And they'll probably have a point.

So I think it is legitimate to be a little concerned about the incorpration of this into a game. Some people think that "more is better": sure throw this and this and this into the game; the more "choices" you have, the more "immersive" the game will be. Well, my friends, never forget that immersiion is (1) a kind of illusion and (2) not the opposite of being focused and coherent.

That would be brilliant. Well, from Morrowind to Oblivion, Telekinesis went from 'activating' things from a distance, to being able to pick up and push/pull things (including throwing, if you pushed both mouse buttons at the same time), so maybe this time they'll have physics based damage?

Off-topic: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/341674.page

On-topic: I always thought having telekinesis just to move items was SO lame. I really like your idea.

Manchu wrote:My prediction is that PC-NPC relationships in Skyrim will be come off as cold and emotionless, like your interactions with most TES NPCs in the past (in contrast to your interaction with the larger world itself, which was paradoxically much more intimate). This will in turn be panned by the Fable/ME/Dragon Age lovers as an example of how stilted and awkward TES is compared to their favorite games. And they'll probably have a point.

NPC interaction in the Elder Scrolls may feel stilted, but one thing Bethesda does very well (which Lionhead and Bioware don't do at all) is to craft an intricate and memorable questline with you at the center, with your actions and random events within the sandbox environment weaving into this narrative in a largely positive way. The actual interactions may be seen cold and emotionless, but the results of those actions and overarcing narrative are almost always very satisfying and memorable in their conclusion.

You could actually have a relationship with a Khajiit in Morrowind (only if you were male, unfortunately). She takes an immediate liking to you, but she already has a degenerate Skooma addict for a mate whom she begs to be rid of, and you have a few options (depending on your ingenuity). Her reaction differs based on your actions, and in most outcomes, you end up with a wife who tends to her little plot of land, brings home groceries, and other homely things like that. Despite having to interact with her through a menu screen, I found this to be much more impactful than any of my 'relationships' in Fable.

Fable's social interaction may be perceived as 'cute', but it ultimately holds no meaning and does not benefit the main narrative in any way. That, and the actual interactions make absolutely no sense, and are a streamlined and completely ridiculous caricature of an actual relationship. I get the feeling that Bioware shoehorns sex and relationships into their games just for the sake of higher ratings, because you can have sex with everything ever, and always succeed.

Even if NPC relationships in Skyrim boil down to menu options, I'd bet money that the narrative of these relationships will be far more entertaining than anything Fable or Mass Effect could pull off, and will handle the matter in a much more mature and less gratuitous or ridiculous way. Bethesda has some great quest writers to work with. You can avoid NPC relationships if you wish; their inclusion will not detract from your enjoyment of the game in any meaningful way.

Battle Brother Lucifer wrote:On-topic: I always thought having telekinesis just to move items was SO lame. I really like your idea.

I would totally run around in Fancy Cloths with a stick if they allowed us to do that with Telekenisis.

I like sneaking into people's houses and just moving stuff, don't get caught though because apparantly just touching stuff is a crime.

Chrysaor686 wrote:

Manchu wrote:My prediction is that PC-NPC relationships in Skyrim will be come off as cold and emotionless, like your interactions with most TES NPCs in the past (in contrast to your interaction with the larger world itself, which was paradoxically much more intimate). This will in turn be panned by the Fable/ME/Dragon Age lovers as an example of how stilted and awkward TES is compared to their favorite games. And they'll probably have a point.

NPC interaction in the Elder Scrolls may feel stilted, but one thing Bethesda does very well (which Lionhead and Bioware don't do at all) is to craft an intricate and memorable questline with you at the center, with your actions and random events within the sandbox environment weaving into this narrative in a largely positive way. The actual interactions may be seen cold and emotionless, but the results of those actions and overarcing narrative are almost always very satisfying and memorable in their conclusion.

You could actually have a relationship with a Khajiit in Morrowind (only if you were male, unfortunately). She takes an immediate liking to you, but she already has a degenerate Skooma addict for a mate whom she begs to be rid of, and you have a few options (depending on your ingenuity). Her reaction differs based on your actions, and in most outcomes, you end up with a wife who tends to her little plot of land, brings home groceries, and other homely things like that. Despite having to interact with her through a menu screen, I found this to be much more impactful than any of my 'relationships' in Fable.

Fable's social interaction may be perceived as 'cute', but it ultimately holds no meaning and does not benefit the main narrative in any way. That, and the actual interactions make absolutely no sense, and are a streamlined and completely ridiculous caricature of an actual relationship. I get the feeling that Bioware shoehorns sex and relationships into their games just for the sake of higher ratings, because you can have sex with everything ever, and always succeed.

Even if NPC relationships in Skyrim boil down to menu options, I'd bet money that the narrative of these relationships will be far more entertaining than anything Fable or Mass Effect could pull off, and will handle the matter in a much more mature and less gratuitous or ridiculous way. Bethesda has some great quest writers to work with. You can avoid NPC relationships if you wish; their inclusion will not detract from your enjoyment of the game in any meaningful way.

Have you even played Mass Effect 2 or either Dragon Age game?

Manchu wrote:Please stay on-topic.

Yes, Fable isn't great at what it does as far as I'm concerned but apparently it's good enough for its real target demographic (a lot more women, for example, in the Fable fanbase). One of those things that Fable (in)famously does, which BioWare also seems committed to, is PC-NPC romance. This was not a part of Morrowind or Oblivion (or Fallout 3) and I, for one, found that refreshing. If you want that sort of thing, Fable and Mass Effect and Dragon Age all exist -- no one is stopping you from playing those games.

My prediction is that PC-NPC relationships in Skyrim will be come off as cold and emotionless, like your interactions with most TES NPCs in the past (in contrast to your interaction with the larger world itself, which was paradoxically much more intimate). This will in turn be panned by the Fable/ME/Dragon Age lovers as an example of how stilted and awkward TES is compared to their favorite games. And they'll probably have a point.

So I think it is legitimate to be a little concerned about the incorpration of this into a game. Some people think that "more is better": sure throw this and this and this into the game; the more "choices" you have, the more "immersive" the game will be. Well, my friends, never forget that immersiion is (1) a kind of illusion and (2) not the opposite of being focused and coherent.

I don't just seems a little hard to believe that a heroic adventure wouldn't win the hearts of a few women. Plus, relationships adds a sense of realism to the game.