Oblivion 2: Skyrim V6: Old People's Naked Bodies Fishing Secrets With Their Manly Beards

[Sector 7]

[QUOTE=stepat201;34067805]As much as I like Bethesda, I can't shake the feeling that they only begrudgingly improve features for their sequels when enough people complain about them. I just don't get the sense that they actively seek for ways to re-invent their titles or excel in innovation the way some developers do. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just my intuition speaking.[/QUOTE]

your intuition is pretty damn wrong

Skyrim is almost completely different from Oblivion, which is almost completely different from Morrowind, which is almost completely different from Daggerfall... Each game includes new and massive overhauls to almost every area of gameplay.

[rinoaff33]

[QUOTE=Sector 7;34068164]your intuition is pretty damn wrong

Skyrim is almost completely different from Oblivion, which is almost completely different from Morrowind, which is almost completely different from Daggerfall... Each game includes new and massive overhauls to almost every area of gameplay.[/QUOTE]

I would argue that Skyrim is basically Oblivion 2.0: Revenge of the Nords, while Oblivion and Morrowind have little in common, etc.

[stepat201]

I think the main point I was trying to make before which I just figured out how to word better is this: Bethesda doesn't actively seek to improve the aspects that their company fails to excel at. Bethesda cannot, to save their lives:

-Balance their games
-Tell an intricate, well-paced story (save the DB in Oblivion which was written by outside hire)
-Make it so that the player's actions truly cause ripples and changes throughout the world

Among other things. Now, where other developers might acknowledge this, and use part of their gross income to hire people who can do these things and restructure their design teams, Bethesda seems to have the attitude of "well, who cares that we can't do these things, that's just a reality of our games that you're going to have to live with as a trade-off for the amazing worlds we build."

But why??? Skyrim is the second best selling game of the year, there's no way they don't have enough money to fix these glaring problems with their design teams. Bethesda doesn't have to always be the company that can't balance their games, and can't tell well-paced involving stories with real player choice to save their lives. But I don't think they care, and I don't think they feel any need to change that about themselves.

[Leonmyster]

I have a question about horses.

I originally had Shadowmere as my main horse, but then I did the quest for Frost.

When I quick traveled, Frost is travelling with me now, where is Shadowmere?

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;34068160]Morrowind has much more of a hardcore RPG DnD-style influence.[/QUOTE]

not at all. that was simply left over from Daggerfall because they couldn't really improve much more on it.
if you've ever played DnD you'd see that DnD's system is incredibly unrealistic and silly even compared to Morrowind.

and of course the combat has nothing to do with DnD.

[Seiteki]

I like how The Elder Scrolls started off as a D&D campaign.

[rinoaff33]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34068269]not at all. that was simply left over from Daggerfall because they couldn't really improve much more on it.
if you've ever played DnD you'd see that DnD's system is incredibly unrealistic and silly even compared to Morrowind.

and of course the combat has nothing to do with DnD.[/QUOTE]

The combat has very much to do with DnD. The chance-based, stats-based combat system often used in RPGs originates from tabletop, dice-driven games like DnD. On the other hand, Skyrim and Oblivion use solid numbers and little chance-based stuff.

I also have played DnD. I've played the 2nd edition tabletop game as well as derivative ADnD games like Baldur's Gate (1 and 2).

[JackAttack]

I keep hearing new lines, they keep getting better. The more famous ones are always the best.

[sp]Curved...[/sp]

[sp]Swords.[/sp]

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=stepat201;34068196]Bethesda doesn't actively seek to improve the aspects that their company fails to excel at.[/QUOTE]

bullshit. every single elder scrolls game has a huge list of flaws.

let me tell about the flaws you mentioned. when you talk about balance you should realize that the amount of exploitation possible has decreased since every elder scrolls game. I remember in Morrowind you could very quickly become some dude with a super-spell that wipes out entire cities while in the games before that it became very difficult to overcome the problems in the leveling systems.

as for the story, it's undeniable that the story has become easier to follow and more enjoyable due to the production values. now i'm a huge fan of books, but the lack of voice acting in previous games was a huge drag to the point that i cared little about the main quest. i think that's why bethesda limited its impact on the game in whole.

of course that's utterly different in Skyrim where the main quest runs throughout the other quests as well.

but your final point is completely on the ball but it's not something that could be helped. it would be a giant nightmare to make and the production team would probably grind to a halt figuring out the bugs that would undoubtedly be present in every single play-through.

[rinoaff33]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34068374]bullshit. every single elder scrolls game has a huge list of flaws.

let me tell about the flaws you mentioned. when you talk about balance you should realize that the amount of exploitation possible has decreased since every elder scrolls game. [B]I remember in Morrowind you could very quickly become some dude with a super-spell that wipes out entire cities while in the games before that it became very difficult to overcome the problems in the leveling systems.[/B]

as for the story, it's undeniable that the story has become easier to follow and more enjoyable due to the production values. now i'm a huge fan of books, but the lack of voice acting in previous games was a huge drag to the point that i cared little about the main quest. i think that's why bethesda limited its impact on the game in whole.

of course that's utterly different in Skyrim where the main quest runs throughout the other quests as well.

but your final point is completely on the ball but it's not something that could be helped. it would be a giant nightmare to make and the production team would probably grind to a halt figuring out the bugs that would undoubtedly be present in every single play-through.[/QUOTE]

I like how they still had the exploitable spell system in Oblivion, too, although not quite as much. Then they took out spellmaking in Skyrim and re-added the overpowered alchemy of Morrowind.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;34068284]The combat has very much to do with DnD. The chance-based, stats-based combat system often used in RPGs originates from tabletop, dice-driven games like DnD. On the other hand, Skyrim and Oblivion use solid numbers and little chance-based stuff.[/QUOTE]

The difference between Morrowind's combat and Oblivion's combat is entirely aesthetics. the numbers are calculation are the same, but instead of showing a miss and hit when you strike something, you just do less damage.

skyrim is the bigger change in that it moves the control on to the player which i think is much better.

[rinoaff33]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34068444]The difference between Morrowind's combat and Oblivion's combat is entirely aesthetics. the numbers are calculation are the same, but instead of showing a miss and hit when you strike something, you just do less damage.

skyrim is the bigger change in that it moves the control on to the player which i think is much better.[/QUOTE]

What? How is switching from RPG-style "chance to hit" to FPS-style "hit based on your aim and position" not different? Not to mention the greatly increased movement speed of combat and the new regenerating magicka? And [I]manual blocking[/I]? May as well call Fallout 3 Morrowind: More Brown Edition if changes to combat is just aesthetics.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;34068409]I like how they still had the exploitable spell system in Oblivion, too, although not quite as much.[/QUOTE]

magic in Oblivion was actually rightfully nerfed. playing a stealth character in morrowind was torture.

[Yadda]

I want to edit the appearance for Derkeethus, because he always has his mouth half-open due to his mandated expression settings, his eyes are embedded too deep inside his skull. His skills should get a good buff as well. Problem is when I use the Skyrim NPC Editor v 0_52 to edit his appearance, the .esp file crashes the game.

Also
[img]http://yourimg.in/m/bi1966j.jpg[/img]

Derpeethus

[stepat201]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34068374]bullshit. every single elder scrolls game has a huge list of flaws.

let me tell about the flaws you mentioned. when you talk about balance you should realize that the amount of exploitation possible has decreased since every elder scrolls game. I remember in Morrowind you could very quickly become some dude with a super-spell that wipes out entire cities while in the games before that it became very difficult to overcome the problems in the leveling systems.

as for the story, it's undeniable that the story has become easier to follow and more enjoyable due to the production values. now i'm a huge fan of books, but the lack of voice acting in previous games was a huge drag to the point that i cared little about the main quest. i think that's why bethesda limited its impact on the game in whole.

of course that's utterly different in Skyrim where the main quest runs throughout the other quests as well.

but your final point is completely on the ball but it's not something that could be helped. it would be a giant nightmare to make and the production team would probably grind to a halt figuring out the bugs that would undoubtedly be present in every single play-through.[/QUOTE]

I don't truly mean balance in terms of being able to break the game. While that is still possible in Skyrim (grinding smithing and enchanting to 100) I'm referring more to the poorly executed perk trees and the erratic way that enemies level, combined with the fact that instead of giving enemies better armor or tactics, they just fill them with health points to make them harder to kill.

And Morrowind's story definitely had awful presentation, but there's no doubt that it's a much more interesting and involving premise than Skyrim's, with much more political intricacy. Skyrim actually had it right on paper; impending demonic disaster mixed with political turmoil. It may not be the most original plot, but as Game of Thrones proved it can executed amazingly.

The problem is the execution though. Both Oblivion and Skyrim manage to turn demonic invasions into minor annoyances that seem to affect no one but the player when he encounters a random oblivion gate or dragon in the wilderness. The only way Bethesda could pull their stories off really well would be if they designed the whole game around them, which would be a huge mistake.

I think the real solution is to hire writers who can do a good story that isn't about a demonic invasion. Despite what some may think, there's actually no rule that says all fantasy games need to have such run of the mill, predictable and recycled plots and premises. It's just that no one has stepped up to do any differently yet. Bethesda has the means to do this, and a huge amazing world with tons of narrative potential, but Skyrim's main quest being pretty much a carbon copy of Oblivion's with dragons replacing daedra shows they have little interest in doing anything about it.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;34068478]What? How is switching from RPG-style "chance to hit" to FPS-style "hit based on your aim and position" not different? [/QUOTE]

like i said, only the visuals on what you see are different. in Oblivion the illusion is that you always hit when you think you hit but the numbers don't change. the change is that skill instead of determined misses and hits determines damage. you should understand that Morrowind's combat system is incredibly simplistic.

[Boba_Fett]

[img]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/648750222814340476/EF45215E316189B55DDF35A6C367581ABBD85C3E/[/img]
Orcish helmet is the best looking helmet in the game. I don't care if it's weaker than ebony, I'm still using it.

[rinoaff33]

[QUOTE=stepat201;34068549]I don't truly mean balance in terms of being able to break the game. While that is still possible in Skyrim (grinding smithing and enchanting to 100) I'm referring more to the poorly executed perk trees and the erratic way that enemies level, combined with the fact that instead of giving enemies better armor or tactics, they just fill them with health points to make them harder to kill.

And Morrowind's story definitely had awful presentation, but there's no doubt that it's a much more interesting and involving premise than Skyrim's, with much more political intricacy. Skyrim actually had it right on paper; [B]impending demonic disaster mixed with political turmoil[/B]. It may not be the most original plot, but as Game of Thrones proved it can executed amazingly.

The problem is the execution though. Both Oblivion and Skyrim manage to turn demonic invasions into minor annoyances that seem to affect no one but the player when he encounters a random oblivion gate or dragon in the wilderness. The only way Bethesda could pull their stories off really well would be if they designed the whole game around them, which would be a huge mistake.

I think the real solution is to hire writers who can do a good story that isn't about a demonic invasion. Despite what some may think, there's actually no rule that says all fantasy games need to have such run of the mill, predictable and recycled plots and premises. It's just that no one has stepped up to do any differently yet. Bethesda has the means to do this, and a huge amazing world with tons of narrative potential, but Skyrim's main quest being pretty much a carbon copy of Oblivion's with dragons replacing daedra shows they have little interest in doing anything about it.[/QUOTE]

Somewhat off-topic, but where have I heard this one before? Oh, right...

Lord of the Rings
Starcraft (replace demons with Zerg)
Warcraft (demons AND undead, and more...)
Dragon Age
Baldur's Gate
Final Fantasy (all of them) (many replacements for demons)
Mass Effect (replace demons with Reapers)
Assassin's Creed (replace demons with impending unknown disaster)

Can we have something different please?

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=stepat201;34068549]
And Morrowind's story definitely had awful presentation, but there's no doubt that it's a much more interesting and involving premise than Skyrim's, with much more political intricacy.[/QUOTE]

i think you might have played a different game then. Morrowind's main quest was notorious for not being that interesting.

[rinoaff33]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34068567]like i said, only the visuals on what you see are different. in Oblivion the illusion is that you always hit when you think you hit but the numbers don't change. the change is that skill instead of determined misses and hits determines damage. you should understand that Morrowind's combat system is incredibly simplistic.[/QUOTE]

I don't think you understand what a "visual change" is. Changing a system from being chance-based to being skill-based is not "visual" - it's a complete change in style, control, gameplay, and pacing.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;34068605]

Can we have something different please?[/QUOTE]

lol arena was about the emperor being stuck in oblivion by an evil wizard.

[Philly c]

Neither morrowind or skyrim's combat actually simulates combat, apart from position everything else is entirely irrelevant, so I find it quite hard to defend either. Ignoring that, it's not really engaging or interesting anyway.

[rinoaff33]

[QUOTE=Philly c;34068661]Neither morrowind or skyrim's combat actually simulates combat, apart from position everything else is entirely irrelevant, so I find it quite hard to defend either. Ignoring that, it's not really engaging or interesting anyway.[/QUOTE]

Being able to control when you hit the enemy and when you block is still a large step up from "swing/cast repeatedly until you hit". And regenerating magicka is way better than having to abuse alchemy and potions to be viable with magic at all.

[Philly c]

I didn't mean to say Skyrim's isn't better, I just don't think it's significantly better.

[markfu]

[QUOTE=stepat201;34068549]I don't truly mean balance in terms of being able to break the game. While that is still possible in Skyrim (grinding smithing and enchanting to 100) I'm referring more to the poorly executed perk trees and the erratic way that enemies level, combined with the fact that instead of giving enemies better armor or tactics, they just fill them with health points to make them harder to kill.

And Morrowind's story definitely had awful presentation, but there's no doubt that it's a much more interesting and involving premise than Skyrim's, with much more political intricacy. Skyrim actually had it right on paper; impending demonic disaster mixed with political turmoil. It may not be the most original plot, but as Game of Thrones proved it can executed amazingly.

The problem is the execution though. Both Oblivion and Skyrim manage to turn demonic invasions into minor annoyances that seem to affect no one but the player when he encounters a random oblivion gate or dragon in the wilderness. The only way Bethesda could pull their stories off really well would be if they designed the whole game around them, which would be a huge mistake.

I think the real solution is to hire writers who can do a good story that isn't about a demonic invasion. Despite what some may think, there's actually no rule that says all fantasy games need to have such run of the mill, predictable and recycled plots and premises. It's just that no one has stepped up to do any differently yet. Bethesda has the means to do this, and a huge amazing world with tons of narrative potential, but Skyrim's main quest being pretty much a carbon copy of Oblivion's with dragons replacing daedra shows they have little interest in doing anything about it.[/QUOTE]

The whole thing about the storyline is that its part of The Elder Scrolls series. All the stories start with some unnamed dude in jail, who gets out and becomes swept up in events where he/she finds that the world is in trouble and he/she is the only one who can save it. Even Arena, which is arguably based on political intrigue, ends up being just "save the empire".

The only fantasy game series that I can think of off the top of my head that is based more on politics is the Witcher, and that's mainly because of how Sapkowski wrote his books.

[stepat201]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34068610]i think you might have played a different game then. Morrowind's main quest was notorious for not being that interesting.[/QUOTE]

Well okay I think I worded that poorly again. What I meant was that Morrowind's premise was, on paper, a lot more interesting (cultist leader living inside a volcano becomes a demi-god and tries to purge the land of all Imperial reign) than ancient dragons returning to destroy the world (for what reason anyway?).

The story was presented very passively though which made it less than involving, but I don't think Skyrim's cinematic approach is any better, because if the story lacks depth, it lacks depth.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;34068623]I don't think you understand what a "visual change" is. Changing a system from being chance-based to being skill-based is not "visual" - it's a complete change in style, control, gameplay, and pacing.[/QUOTE]

Morrowind's system wasn't chance-based in any way really.
[quote]Chance to hit = Attacker's weapon skill * 1.25 + Attacker's Attack (e.g. Warrior = 10) - Defender's Sanctuary (e.g. Thief = 10) + (Attacker's Agility - Defender's Agility) * 0.25 + (Attacker's Luck - Defender's Luck) * 0.125[/quote]

there's no random nature in Morrowind's combat system. the weapons also do not do random damage, they always do the same damage.

allow me to illustrate it because it's fun:

Attacker has an Axe that does 12 damage with a skill of 70 in axe. Attackers agility is 60 and has a luck of 50.

Defender is born under the sign of thief. The defender has 50 agility and 40 luck.

now the formula becomes = (70 * 1.25) + (12-10) + ((60-50) * 0.25)) + ((50-40) * 0.125))

as you can see Morrowind is also extremely based on skill and abilities just like Oblivion. The only thing that's different is how it appears you are playing. it's more fun i would say but the math isn't that different.

[stepat201]

[QUOTE=markfu;34068716]The whole thing about the storyline is that its part of The Elder Scrolls series. All the stories start with some unnamed dude in jail, who gets out and becomes swept up in events where he/she finds that the world is in trouble and he/she is the only one who can save it. Even Arena, which is arguably based on political intrigue, ends up being just "save the empire".

The only fantasy game series that I can think of off the top of my head that is based more on politics is the Witcher, and that's mainly because of how Sapkowski wrote his books.[/QUOTE]

But why do we need this? It's what I was saying in my above post, why are these faults accepted as part of the series? There's no Elder Scrolls Bible, with one of the commandments being "every game has this plot structure", it's just poor storytelling in every way and they can get away with it because the rest of the games are, for the most part, excellent. But why not try and fix what isn't working while retaining everything that does work?

[rinoaff33]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34068785]Morrowind's system wasn't chance-based in any way really.

there's no random nature in Morrowind's combat system. the weapons also do not do random damage, they always do the same damage.

allow me to illustrate it because it's fun:

Attacker has an Axe that does 12 damage with a skill of 70 in axe. Attackers agility is 60 and has a luck of 50.

Defender is born under the sign of thief. The defender has 50 agility and 40 luck.

now the formula becomes = (70 * 1.25) + (12-10) + ((60-50) * 0.25)) + ((50-40) * 0.125))

as you can see Morrowind is also extremely based on skill and abilities just like Oblivion. The only thing that's different is how it appears you are playing. it's more fun i would say but the math isn't that different.[/QUOTE]

There is a large difference between "70% chance to hit for 70 damage per swing" and "100% chance [for everyone] to do 70 damage per swing". Luck still plays a part in the former. Unless we're talking about ideal averages with very large sample sizes.

This is the same reason that people don't regard WoW (or most RPGs and MMOs in general...and TF2) to be fair and competitive PvP because your victories are based on whether you managed to land that random crit.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=stepat201;34068759](for what reason anyway?). [/QUOTE]

gah, read the books in Skyrim!

[editline]5th January 2012[/editline]

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;34068796]There is a large difference between "70% chance to hit for 70 damage per swing" and "100% chance [for everyone] to do 70 damage per swing". Luck still plays a part in the former. Unless we're talking about ideal averages with very large sample sizes.[/QUOTE]

well there's no average or anything like that. Anytime you strike the same character the formula is exactly the same, the luck doesn't change it's completely static.

i would say the difference is that instead of appearing to be a binary hit or miss, it appears that you are slowly whittling away people's health. Oblivion is the one where you don't always do 70 damage per swing.