Why The Elder Scrolls Isn't Dumbing Down - General

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEI4yS7sFEw[/media] This is a response to a video called The Elder Scrolls: The Dumbing Down. I posted it here a few months back. He basically responds to all the points made in that video and outlines why he doesn't agree or believe they are a symptom of dumbing down. An interesting video and I agree with much of what he says. [editline]11th July 2013[/editline] Apologies if this has already been posted. I did search but I didn't find anything.

Phew, what a video. I agree wholeheartedly.

This guy has earned a subscriber. Thanks for sharing, Jester. Also, there's a part 2: [video=youtube;KHa8c2EPFNY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHa8c2EPFNY[/video]

Aw fucking Christ, part 2 is 46 minutes long. Well, time to grab a Dr. Pepper and some Nilla Wafers

[QUOTE=Protocol7;41415793]Well, time to grab a Dr. Pepper and some Nilla Wafers[/QUOTE] I'm jealous.

My Nilla Wafers are stale :(

[QUOTE=Protocol7;41415793]Aw fucking Christ, part 2 is 46 minutes long. Well, time to grab a Dr. Pepper and some Nilla Wafers[/QUOTE] want to fight? I have sarsaparilla and fig newtons on topic i agree

His point about radiant AI is a give and take concept honestly. While it does make the world feel a little more real it takes away other aspects that make the game feel real as well. I prefer the more lively world than the option to kill an NPC but I can see why other people may think differently. It would've been nice to see a mix of both though. Have the world be unable to kill important characters but make an exception when the player tries to.

I only ever post when I see something worthy of my post, but this is one of the more interesting videos I have seen in a long time.

Honestly, I never bothered watching the original video because half an hour just to listen to someone bitch about something I don't have a problem with, is a long time. Maybe if he just posted a list of bulletpoints or something.

His first video was pretty solid (although a lot of what he said is not "dumbing down" still constitute terrible design choices by Bethesda). However in his second video his points make less and less sense as he goes on. How is the fact that Dragonborn appeals to hardcore gamers even matter? His whole spiel on that point is meaningless and does not contribute to the main idea of his video, he is simply bashing "hardcore" Elder Scrolls players. And why does he not foster the idea that they could have kept in game directions in along with the quest marker? Is that not the first idea that should pop into everybody's head? Why remove the directions? Even Oblivion had some directions in the journal (sometimes). I don't know. I agree with points from both sides of the argument.

Very good video. I agree with pretty much everything. Not going to watch the second one right now, but I hope many people with the nostalgia goggle affect watch and understand this.

Who would even complain about that whole "IMPORTANT NPCS CAN'T BE KILLED" and blame it on casuals

I watched the first video, but stopped as soon as he got to the first bullet. Bethesda could easily have just made it to where only the player can permanently kill quest-important npcs but they didn't. I don't think Bethesda is actively trying to dumb down the elder scrolls games, but the end effect is that they are.

[QUOTE=Abeevau;41420190]I watched the first video, but stopped as soon as he got to the first bullet. Bethesda could easily have just made it to where only the player can permanently kill quest-important npcs but they didn't. I don't think Bethesda is actively trying to dumb down the elder scrolls games, but the end effect is that they are.[/QUOTE] And since you didn't watch the videos, you didn't see that he directly addressed that in the second video. It was one of his first points.

[QUOTE=Abeevau;41420190]I watched the first video, but stopped as soon as he got to the first bullet. Bethesda could easily have just made it to where only the player can permanently kill quest-important npcs but they didn't. I don't think Bethesda is actively trying to dumb down the elder scrolls games, but the end effect is that they are.[/QUOTE] If it is so easy to program, why don't you do a mod for us that does this?

[QUOTE=Abeevau;41420190]I watched the first video, but stopped as soon as he got to the first bullet. Bethesda could easily have just made it to where only the player can permanently kill quest-important npcs but they didn't. I don't think Bethesda is actively trying to dumb down the elder scrolls games, but the end effect is that they are.[/QUOTE] He debated that allowing only players to kill important characters would be just as immersion-breaking as making them invincible. You could watch a random peasant beat a dragon to death with his fists and then stab him in the stomach with a rusty iron knife and watch him slump dead.

[QUOTE=Crazy;41421685]If it is so easy to program, why don't you do a mod for us that does this?[/QUOTE] I don't know if it is or it isn't easy, and it doesn't matter; and neither does the fact that it can be fixed by modding. This aspect of the game is flawed in that it restricts player freedom in a way that trivializes their decisions and offers the illusion of freedom, and the fact that this is part of the base game means that it must be judged on its virtues alone without the aid of third-party mods. [QUOTE=.Isak.;41421756]He debated that allowing only players to kill important characters would be just as immersion-breaking as making them invincible. You could watch a random peasant beat a dragon to death with his fists and then stab him in the stomach with a rusty iron knife and watch him slump dead.[/QUOTE] I can kind of see where he's coming from, but it's still a flawed premise, and if this is from the second video then it reinforces my faith in choosing not to give a shit and to stop watching. If a character is important enough to be marked essential they probably aren't going to be as trivial as a random peasant, and if an essential marked NPC isn't going to be strong enough to fight dangerous creatures like dragons then it would make sense to put them in some secluded location where deadly fauna can't get to, or at least surround them with disposable mooks.

The only reason 90% of the NPCs are immortal is because of laziness, it's that simple. I can understand the main quest ones being immortal but there's just no excuse for the side quest NPCs, they just find it easier to do every quest as a straight line or simple two choice that makes no fucking difference in the end rather than putting some actual work with multiple choices and outcomes. It has nothing to do with their made-up "radiant AI" or dumbing down for casuals, it's Bethesda being terrible.

Nah, I couldn't take this guy seriously considering a majority of his arguments (if not all of them) were based on issues of development integration or bugs and not actually stating why the game wasn't being dumbed down. He also faulted on ad hominem fallacies multiple times and that pretty much discredited anything he was going to say then on, in my opinion. Why insult people when making your argument? He spent over an hour collectively trying to prove points and did it while along the way occasionally making unnecessary insults. The first 3 minutes alone, before he even talks about any issues in particular, are calling people who don't agree with him "nonsensical." [editline]11th July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Crazy;41421685]If it is so easy to program, why don't you do a mod for us that does this?[/QUOTE] It's literally an internal NPC flag. You check a box and that's it. Wow, so difficult.

Top rated comment sums up my thoughts well. "When people talk about TES being dumbed down, they're talking about how the mechanics are becoming simpler (which they are), the writing is becoming dumber (which it is), and that the game just holds your hand for you instead of leaving you to* figure out ANYTHING for yourself (also true). Morrowind had flaws and oversights, but lots of the ones you list there are also present (or even worse) in Oblivion and Skyrim. Listing a bunch of them doesn't excuse how the series has become worse over time."

I think what a lot of the problems come down to is exactly what he pointed out in the video: The design teams are not at all the same between games. A lot of things could have (and should have) been improved upon from the previous games. Things such as story/quest writing, creating deeper NPCs, and improving combat are things that are consistently ignored by the devs, and I think this is simply because [I]they are not the same devs who made the previous games[/I]. Every game tries progressively harder to dazzle the audience with huge explorable and believeable worlds, but little attention is payed to the smaller, but annoying problems of the previous game. A great example of this, and a point that I rarely see brought up is the sheer terribleness of the guilds in Skyrim in comparison to the Morrowind and even Oblivion. Morrowind's Fighter's Guild had 31 quests total from 5 different quest givers, although there were different ways you could finish the questline which would lead to different results and you couldn't do all of them in one playthrough (what a revolutionary idea). Morrowind's Fighters Guild not only had a large amount of quests, but they all progressed logically from grunt work to more difficult inter-faction struggles. All the while they were building up to your confrontation of the leader and takeover of the guild. Oblivion's Fighters Guild had 19 quests from 3 different quest givers. Although it is an admitted downgrade in sheer quantity of quests, it is still a decent amount and I don't think anybody would necessarily complain that the questline was too short. It followed a similar path of moving up within the ranks until you began to take on the main storyline which lead to your rise to guild head. Now, keep in mind a key element of both of these questlines. [B]They had both skill and work requirements to rank up.[/B] This not only increased the game length (as stated in video 2) but also added to a sense of accomplishment when you actually gained a rank within the guild. You knew that you were more powerful and deserving of a new title. This system of gaining ranks through requirements also allowed quests to be taken out of a specified order. If you had exhausted one quest giver's quests and you still needed to do more work to gain rank, you could go to another quest giver. This gave the guild the sense that it was an actual guild that took jobs from actual people who paid for their services. In Skyrim, the guilds are little more than extended sidequests. Despite so much potential with the radiant quest system, Bethesda took 10 steps backwards. I am not even going to discuss how bad I think the Companions storyline is. That is besides the point. What is most disappointing is that the Companions faction, despite being one of only 4 guilds to play,[B]has only 6 quests.[/B] Bethesda attempted to use the radiant quest system as a way to include more quests, but they should be a supplement to a faction's actual scripted quests, not a replacement. These radiant quests could have been the perfect way to do more jobs to rank up, [B]if there was an actual rank system[/B]. This means that players (like me on my first playthrough) can simply play the 6 quests without actually doing any side jobs. Why would you? You don't benefit in any way. In fact, the terrible, rushed storyline of the Companions actually discourages partaking in any of these quests. Almost as soon as you join the guild you are thrust into their internal crisis and there is no time to lose. The urgency of the story actually encourages the player to simply play through the guild without stopping. The Companions was actually not the worst example of this. The College of Winterhold was so disappointing, had such a short and shitty storyline, and was so rushed and childish that it was the first time while playing an Elder Scrolls game that I was jarred out of the immersion and pondered what was going on. I'm not even going to go into detail with this though. It is hard for me to categorize these problems into a larger problem (i.e. "Dumbing Down"). Rather, Bethesda simply did a terrible, shitty job at writing and designing the guilds. So yes, while dumbing down is an actual problem and can be seen in some aspects (like the removal of the guild rank requirements), this is not Skyrim's major problem. The developer's failure to improve on the problems of their previous releases (including FO3) is the main problem. And it may simply be caused by the fact that the development team changes between games. This has lead me to believe that Bethesda is not even necessarily a good game developer (or at the very least they have become lazier and worse at making games as time has gone on). The Elder Scrolls universe they created is fun and engaging, and the detailed worlds Bethesda create are without rival, but that's basically it.

[QUOTE=EcksDee;41422973]Top rated comment sums up my thoughts well. "When people talk about TES being dumbed down, they're talking about how the mechanics are becoming simpler (which they are), the writing is becoming dumber (which it is), and that the game just holds your hand for you instead of leaving you to* figure out ANYTHING for yourself (also true). Morrowind had flaws and oversights, but lots of the ones you list there are also present (or even worse) in Oblivion and Skyrim. Listing a bunch of them doesn't excuse how the series has become worse over time."[/QUOTE] Yeah, there was NEVER a moment of confusion or trying to figure out what to do in Skyrim. Every quest showed you exactly where you need to go and it wasn't even necessary to read your journal or listen to any dialogue whatsoever. [editline]13th July 2013[/editline] Yeah the Faction's really pissed me off in Skyrim. In Oblivion you had to get a recommendation from every Mage's Guild just to be accepted into it. In the time it takes you to complete that you'd have already become Arche Mage in Skyrim. I was not a powerful mage at all, I felt really undeserving of the title.

[QUOTE=Abeevau;41422102]If a character is important enough to be marked essential they probably aren't going to be as trivial as a random peasant, and if an essential marked NPC isn't going to be strong enough to fight dangerous creatures like dragons then it would make sense to put them in some secluded location where deadly fauna can't get to, or at least surround them with disposable mooks.[/QUOTE]That's totally bullshit assumption. Many quest essential characters are hardly fighters at all. An important character =/= a skilled and powerful fighter. Most essential characters couldn't kill a dragon, at least not on their own. If they could, dragonborn wouldn't be all that big of a deal.

I really enjoy this discussion. Grade A youtube content, and the absolutely enthralling TES soundtrack compliments it brilliantly. Personally I regard these videos as strong factors in why youtube content beats whatever's on TV by a long shot - the makers should be commended.

[QUOTE=OutLawed Blade;41416211]His point about radiant AI is a give and take concept honestly. While it does make the world feel a little more real it takes away other aspects that make the game feel real as well. I prefer the more lively world than the option to kill an NPC but I can see why other people may think differently. It would've been nice to see a mix of both though. Have the world be unable to kill important characters but make an exception when the player tries to.[/QUOTE] Little known fact, but they really did have radiant AI at the beginning. Basically all the NPC's acted like the player, which was nice and all, until all they did was...well...act like the player. So they basically started fights and killed people all damn day, they even stole things and got arrested, more than once the playtesters would have to find important NPC's in jail to continue the quest, and that caused a whole bunch of problems, there was even a guy who was testing it and dropped the skull of corruption, and an NPC picked it up and made an evil clone of the player. As you can imagine, it still needs a bit of testing.

I would like to see a game as big as Skyrim that didn't have quest markers though. I remember when I first started playing Dark Souls, it felt genuinely adventurous not knowing where you're going.

I'd personally would love to see weapon degradation come back, why the hell would you remove armor and weapon damage when it's been in most of the TES titles before? I mean in oblivion and TES had times where if your weapon or armor breaks you could be in some serious shit and die possible or pay shit load of money to fix your armor. Now you can run around with master crafted Daedric armor and weapons and rofl stomp people without having to give two shits if your armor broke because the Nords of Skyrim have unbreakable armor. And of course the reintroduction of the old magic system and some the old tree's like I'd like to see the ability to make some ridiculous spells and have a chance to cast them depending on my skill with them rather then have them fail because I lack the proper magicka pool.

"Not dumbing down", its bullshit. Look at morrowind compared to oblivion - suddenly weapons lost their piercing, slashing and chop damage stats, instead its "Damage 15" now. It's less detailed, less complicated. Why? So more (dumb) people can play the games so they can earn more profitzzz.

[QUOTE=AleXzorZ;41453728]"Not dumbing down", its bullshit. Look at morrowind compared to oblivion - suddenly weapons lost their piercing, slashing and chop damage stats, instead its "Damage 15" now. It's less detailed, less complicated. Why? So more (dumb) people can play the games so they can earn more profitzzz.[/QUOTE] Did you watch the video, at all?