The Elder Scrolls Megathread XVII: Paid Mods? Not in My Community. - Games

[QUOTE=ClarkWasHere;48267721][I][B]I[/B][/I] find it better that games are more accessible. Why are you assuming that what I'm saying is all objective? [/QUOTE] Because you bring up the fact that him liking Morrowind is [i]just[/i] his personal opinion, as if that somehow makes it less valid. Meanwhile you bring up your own opinion that the later games are more accessible as if it's somehow objective fact, and somehow makes your opinion that they are better superior to his.

[QUOTE=elowin;48268040]Because you bring up the fact that him liking Morrowind is [i]just[/i] his personal opinion, as if that somehow makes it less valid. Meanwhile you bring up your own opinion that the later games are more accessible as if it's somehow objective fact, and somehow makes your opinion that they are better superior to his.[/QUOTE] Ah I understand. I understand that opinion isn't any more valid than his, and visa versa. Sorry if it came off in a way that made it look like I was saying my opinion is more valid than coyote. It's just the things coyote listed had barely anything to do with playability, and were more about a different topic, and cdr has a proper post on the points he brought up.

I've been playing ESO all day with a friend and god, I'm having so much fun. I haven't enjoyed an MMO this much in a very long time. The story is quite interesting, scenery is beautiful and there's so much to do... Loving it.

[QUOTE=Flumbooze;48261806]Yeah but now it (obviously) isn't new anymore and for many people it'll feel very outdated. I don't know why anyone should play Morrowind again, it was a very good game when it released but now you're better off playing the latest in the series and wait for the mod that ports Morrowind to Skyrim.[/QUOTE] I think Morrowind is the only one that can hold up even a little bit when just vanilla though. Yeah the combat is iffy for a lot of people, but the setting, quests and writing are great. There's still a ton of new stuff in it that I find every time I play it, and that's the mark of a great game to me. Skyrim is so bland I can't touch it without 50+ mods, Oblivion is similar, with slightly less mods required.

Is anyone disappointed that we won't get another TES for probably 4 years? Because BGS is one studio, and they seem to be altering games now after acquiring FO. After FO4 is done we can only assume they'll start working on another TES. Where do you think it should take place?

morrowind? more like bore-owind amirite?

[QUOTE=Ghost101;48268355]I think Morrowind is the only one that can hold up even a little bit when just vanilla though. Yeah the combat is iffy for a lot of people, but the setting, quests and writing are great. There's still a ton of new stuff in it that I find every time I play it, and that's the mark of a great game to me. Skyrim is so bland I can't touch it without 50+ mods, Oblivion is similar, with slightly less mods required.[/QUOTE] But the graphics are really outdated and models look unconvincing. And no, graphics aren't everything, but they are a pretty big deal for my immersion. There is no voice acting, which is a really weird thing to return to and most quests are rather boring. Morrowind is a good game, but hardly one that every gamer should have played. The variety in landscapes is definitely something that I miss though, Morrowind had an extraordinary world that was very fun to explore. Not to shit on the game you love, but I'm speaking as someone who tried playing Morrowind after he had played (and loved to death) Oblivion.

i'm playing oblivion atm, the first time I played it I was young and only really did the main quest so it's nice to experience everything else it would be nice if someone could help me with a few things, firstly the combat is really squishy and unsatisfying and i'm wondering if there's any mods that help out with that? also it seems like when you make contact from a sword swing that there isn't any sound being played, like the sword hitting skin or chinking against armour. is that a bug or is there just not any sound for that by default? i think that's contributing to the fighting feeling strange because without an audio cue it feels like you're just swinging a sword and hitting nothing

[QUOTE=TheRealRudy;48261569]:words:[/QUOTE] Honestly, after playing Skyrim, which imo is way better than Oblivion in a ton of ways, I can't go back to Oblivion because I'm used to shit being done and looking better. It really fucking annoys me, too, because I never got to play Shivering Isles (I was an eight year old when I played it and didn't have any cash money or cards to buy DLC from PSN) I'm really worried the same thing is going to happen when FO4 comes out, so I'm glad I managed to finally get all the way through New Vegas and most of the DLCs. [QUOTE=zerosix;48268686]i'm playing oblivion atm, the first time I played it I was young and only really did the main quest so it's nice to experience everything else it would be nice if someone could help me with a few things, firstly the combat is really squishy and unsatisfying and i'm wondering if there's any mods that help out with that? also it seems like when you make contact from a sword swing that there isn't any sound being played, like the sword hitting skin or chinking against armour. is that a bug or is there just not any sound for that by default? i think that's contributing to the fighting feeling strange because without an audio cue it feels like you're just swinging a sword and hitting nothing[/QUOTE] I'm like 90% sure it plays a noise when you hit things. I'll re-install real quick and check. I know for a fact there's one for punching shit. [editline]a[/editline] Yeah, there's sounds for hitting things. Dunno what's up with your game.

[QUOTE=zerosix;48268686]i'm playing oblivion atm, the first time I played it I was young and only really did the main quest so it's nice to experience everything else it would be nice if someone could help me with a few things, firstly the combat is really squishy and unsatisfying and i'm wondering if there's any mods that help out with that? also it seems like when you make contact from a sword swing that there isn't any sound being played, like the sword hitting skin or chinking against armour. is that a bug or is there just not any sound for that by default? i think that's contributing to the fighting feeling strange because without an audio cue it feels like you're just swinging a sword and hitting nothing[/QUOTE] Ehh, as far as I remember there was sound when you hit something.

[QUOTE=Ghost101;48268355]I think Morrowind is the only one that can hold up even a little bit when just vanilla though. Yeah the combat is iffy for a lot of people, but the setting, quests and writing are great. There's still a ton of new stuff in it that I find every time I play it, and that's the mark of a great game to me. Skyrim is so bland I can't touch it without 50+ mods, Oblivion is similar, with slightly less mods required.[/QUOTE] The combat isn't "iffy," they straight up give you the ability to completely fuck yourself and die from a rat because of RNG. It's bad. Combat really should never be based off of RNG in a realtime game that involves you actually having to hit them in the first place. FO3 did this for the guns (at a much lesser scale and there wasn't a notification for a RNG miss) and the gunplay is excessively shitty because of it. Thankfully, they reduced it for New Vegas, but even then, it's still not great.

I don't think "missing" is RNG in Fallout 3 and NV, the guns just have shit accuracy and don't shoot in straight lines. I noticed this while using the dynamic crosshair from Project Nevada - aiming my gun still left a gap in the center unless I crouched with a rifle. This is opposed to Morrowind, where landing a direct hit on someone actually did have a chance to whiff. Also, Morrowind has voice acting, just not for every single line.

[QUOTE=rinoaff33;48268839]I don't think "missing" is RNG in Fallout 3 and NV, the guns just have shit accuracy and don't shoot in straight lines. I noticed this while using the dynamic crosshair from Project Nevada - aiming my gun still left a gap in the center unless I crouched with a rifle. This is opposed to Morrowind, where landing a direct hit on someone actually did have a chance to whiff. Also, Morrowind has voice acting, just not for every single line.[/QUOTE] IIRC there's the shitty cone of fire, then even if you're supposed to hit someone, the game can go "fuck you that's a miss" based on your stats. Someone explained it really well in the Fallout thread but it was pages and pages ago so I have no plans to go find it.

[QUOTE=cdr248;48267136]I am probably one of the biggest morrowind apologists/skyrim haters on this forum but I'm going to have to nitpick this list of nitpicks: [/QUOTE] Okay so what I am getting from your arguments towards his list is that if something isn't game breaking it's a style of choice and doesn't make the game worse. I could also go through your arguments and counter almost all of them, but no one can be bothered to read that so I'll keep it short. What you are mostly arguing against are things that would make an RPG stand out being removed, doesn't make the game any worse of an RPG, I disagree with this. For example, being unable to join a guild is so much different than saying your character won't join a guild. The point of having RPGs is so that you don't have to imagine stuff, your brain doesn't set the rules, the game does. If everything worked like this and you'd take it to the extreme you could start gm_flatgrass and call it a great RPG. It doesn't work like that. The point with RPGs isn't to experience everything in one go, the basic point of an RPG is to have it feel like a believable world. If you want to experience everything in one go your best bet would be a linear adventure game. I will make another example with the three attributes allowing more control because some of the previous skills were "useless". First, I'd just like to say having less options to choose from allows more control to your character? It does the opposite, you are forced in a more general direction and can't specialize in anything like you could if you had 8 options. But this is also what I would call the core of an RPG. Having the game itself contain useless shit because the whole point of the game is to have you believe it's a real world. Of course to some extent. Your argument that you only choose three (or four) of the attributes because they were the only one that really improved your character doesn't apply for all people. That is the beautiful thing with having useless options. You realise they are useless on the first go and on the second go you know what to prioritize. Then once you are done with only being strong in the sense of killing things you can create more interesting characters. Ones that can't kill anything but are really good at talking and see how well they fair through Morrowind. Suddenly the skills aren't useless but only different and it add more depth to the game. Call me a pretentious "my immersion" nerd. But I think most of your arguments are quite invalid seen from an RPG perspective.

[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;48267286]Just what I was looking for. Thanks boyo. Getting sick and tired of having an important conversation for a quest and then some little shit like Nazeem comes along and goes "DO YOU GET TO THE CLOUD DISTRICT VERY OFTEN?"[/QUOTE] This is why you kill him while he sleeps so you don't A.) waste your thane status usage or B.) have to deal with him ever again.

[QUOTE=gk99;48268763]The combat isn't "iffy," they straight up give you the ability to completely fuck yourself and die from a rat because of RNG. It's bad. Combat really should never be based off of RNG in a realtime game that involves you actually having to hit them in the first place. FO3 did this for the guns (at a much lesser scale and there wasn't a notification for a RNG miss) and the gunplay is excessively shitty because of it. Thankfully, they reduced it for New Vegas, but even then, it's still not great.[/QUOTE] Yes, if you play like a moron in Morrowind, you will die. That's an rpg, if you make a rogue in third edition dnd, you are completely allowed to make a rogue with NO STEALTH BASED SKILLS, and you will fucking die because you're goddamn useless. meanwhile no matter what I do in skyrim I have an equal chance of being killed by a rat, zero percent. the rat is no longer even a monster in an rpg, but a fucking time wasting nuicence. Yeah morrowind is first person, but you have to realize that it's basically a full 3D game in the vein of ultima underworld, a hardcore tabletop rpg with stats you have to plan and manage to survive, but in first person. does it feel weird and clunky if you think of it as an action game? Absolutely. but if you play smartly, you won't be dying constantly. Nord, major skill in axe, win. high elf, mage, win. etc. if you want to play an orc thief go ahead the game won't stop you but that should obviously be harder, right? A game that doesn't pander to the crowd of people who want to do everything with no thought isn't bad, it's in fact better designed, skyrim just gives up on balancing the races for different roles so you can be a jack of all trades. If your complaint is "I can't hit people in a dice based rpg so it sucks" at least say "I don't like dice based combat, subjectively." I personally think morrowind combat is better than oblivion and skyrim's, oblivion's is dreadful without mods and skyrim's is a bad dark messiah. at least when I build a good character In morrowind I feel somewhat rewarded for my efforts.

I think the argument of liking one Elder Scrolls over another boils down to liking old school vs modern game design. Old school is clunky, mysterious, and sometimes counter-intuitive. The gameplay and world alike are something to discover. There can be hundreds of mechanics, likely poorly balanced and not widely implemented. Skills tend to be highly specific, and there's no way to know what is useful without extensive play time. You might see an icon in your inventory or an ominous pop-up message and not know what it means until much later, if at all. Some of this is a holdover from tabletop games, where real-time combat had to be abstracted via stats and dice rolls. Another contributing element was the Internet not being prevalent, so players would have to figure things out on their own (or via a strategy guide). Basically, obscurity was considered a positive factor in older games, much like a puzzle/adventure game (which was incidentally a genre popular at the time). Immersion and the ability to get lots of hours out of a single game are selling points. Also, in this design, stats are highly important for RPGs. The player's skill is invested less in being good at the gameplay and more at being good with getting the right stats and/or knowing the game's secrets. Modern is streamlined and simplified. An attempt is made to balance all choices so that they are all viable, even if this sacrifices variety, depth, and realism. If a mechanic cannot be implemented to a certain degree of quality, it is simply cut from the game. If a scenario in the main part of the game is too difficult for the majority of players, it is made easier so that more people can see the content. With the prevalence of real-time combat, dice rolls and stats are marginalized and often seen as negative aspects. The cost of making a modern game reduces the total amount of content that can be added, as well. The goal of this design is to make a solid game that is accessible and will sell well to compensate for high cost. If a skill or play style encouraged by the game itself (combat, magic, stealth, guns, melee, whatever) is considered to not be fun or useful compared to others, then this design has failed. I'd say most action-RPGs fall somewhere in between the two extremes. Arena and Daggerfall are very old school, Morrowind is mostly old school, Oblivion leans toward modern, and Skyrim is very modern. This progression can be seen in other series as well, such as the Souls games - Bloodbourne is quite a bit more streamlined than the previous games in its series. Another example is the differences between Baldur's Gate (very old-school) and Dragon Age (hybrid), or even between Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2.

As someone who played Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim, to me it seems like the progression from each game to the next is pretty simple. The gameplay improved every time, but the majority of the writing got worse. World feeling remained about the same with Oblivion maybe as a low point only because of an overreliance on somewhat generic fantasy, and morrowind at a high because it's fucking morrowind giant mushroom houses holy shit. Ironically I might put shivering isles at the top, because that shit was magical. Character writing seems more subtle and unique in morrowind, and then skyrim is 2nd best, with "BY AZURA BY AZURA BY AZURA" in third. But oblivion did have some really good characters in support roles, where alot of the main quest characters for skyrim were boring as fuck. Combat in Morrowind felt like trying to hit angry bees with a whiffle bat, and oblivion is just a slower less satisfying version of Skyrim's combat, which almost approaches good. (that tier is reserved for other games like chivalry and dark souls). IT depends totally on what you want like what rinoaff said, whether you want the better writing and worldbuilding of the older games, or the better combat of the newer ones.

Sorry to come back here for modding help again so soon, but I was wondering if anyone could help me get distant land working in morrowind. I've done a fresh install of Morrowind Graphics and Sound Overhaul 3 times now. No matter how much I fiddle with the MGE settings, it simply doesn't work. [t]http://i.imgur.com/gP1MHUM.jpg[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/RnZ4NqW.jpg[/t] It's clear that MGE is working, as the other settings make a difference and are clearly visible. I also tried disabling exponential fog, since apparently sometimes that helps, but it made no difference. My GPU is a Radeon HD 7970, if that matters. [URL="http://imgur.com/EdpJaPN&TbPrSB0#0"]These are my current settings for distant land, as shown in the MGSO options.[/URL] Thanks in advance. [B]EDIT:[/B] Fixed it. Apparently my GPU doesn't support vertex fog, so I had to switch it to pixel fog in the MGE gui.

I fixed my combat making no sounds in Oblivion, it was caused by Oblivion Stutter Remover, turning it off or downgrading to version 4.1.0 fixed it

So I was fucking around in Whiterun for whatever reason and I went into Jorrvaskr. This happened. [t]http://i.imgur.com/QX0uHP7.png[/t] Don't worry its SFW, the nips and crotch are erased!

you guys need to calm down about video gaems

[QUOTE=IQ-Guldfisk;48269702]Okay so what I am getting from your arguments towards his list is that if something isn't game breaking it's a style of choice and doesn't make the game worse. I could also go through your arguments and counter almost all of them, but no one can be bothered to read that so I'll keep it short. What you are mostly arguing against are things that would make an RPG stand out being removed, doesn't make the game any worse of an RPG, I disagree with this. For example, being unable to join a guild is so much different than saying your character won't join a guild. [B]The point of having RPGs is so that you don't have to imagine stuff[/B], your brain doesn't set the rules, the game does. If everything worked like this and you'd take it to the extreme you could start gm_flatgrass and call it a great RPG. It doesn't work like that. The point with RPGs isn't to experience everything in one go, the basic point of an RPG is to have it feel like a believable world. If you want to experience everything in one go your best bet would be a linear adventure game. I will make another example with the three attributes allowing more control because some of the previous skills were "useless". First, I'd just like to say having less options to choose from allows more control to your character? It does the opposite, you are forced in a more general direction and can't specialize in anything like you could if you had 8 options. But this is also what I would call the core of an RPG. Having the game itself contain useless shit because the whole point of the game is to have you believe it's a real world. Of course to some extent. Your argument that you only choose three (or four) of the attributes because they were the only one that really improved your character doesn't apply for all people. That is the beautiful thing with having useless options. You realise they are useless on the first go and on the second go you know what to prioritize. Then once you are done with only being strong in the sense of killing things you can create more interesting characters. Ones that can't kill anything but are really good at talking and see how well they fair through Morrowind. Suddenly the skills aren't useless but only different and it add more depth to the game. Call me a pretentious "my immersion" nerd. But I think most of your arguments are quite invalid seen from an RPG perspective.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry but if you want to roleplay in a video game you're going to have to do some self-limiting and have some imagination. If you cannot do those things then you probably wouldn't like RPGs outside of DnD or Pathfinder aka Stats: The RPG I specifically stated that the guilds in which had consequences for joining were all political organizations that were all literally opposed to one another and by joining one you public announced that you associated with them, meaning you can't join the other one. The 3 Houses are the only factions that have conflicts tied to them. I am aware of the one between the fighters guild and the thieves guild however that does not stop you from joining both of them and playing them fully. And unlike Morrowind, the other games don't have politically charged factions so really there isn't much of a reason as to why you shouldn't be able to join every guild. None of them really hate each other and no one is ever aware of you being in the Thieves' Guild or the DB for obvious reasons. The only thing that really applies to guild consequences is the Civil War. Both quests lines operate like optional guilds except they are obviously opposing and thus it makes sense why you can't work for both sides of the conflict. Wanted your guild consequences, it's all there. Also: This is a game. Mechanics come first and if they do nothing but bog up the game then they should be removed. Useless skills are useless skills, do I believe that they should be reworked? Yes. Am I bitter about the loss of some of them? Only a few. But if the skills serve little or no purpose then they should be taken out and have that time put into other things. Sure a few skills and attributes were removed, but perks allow for much for customization over your character as opposed to just looking at near meaningless numbers go up. Also about that comment of having a suave talking character in Morrowind: Good fucking luck with that. The TES games have always been ARPGs from the get-go and are not focused on dialogue. Especially with Morrowind where there is no kind of direct speech system or multiple routes to allow low combat characters to solve quests. This has been a problem with the series since the beginning, and as much as I would like to see more branching paths and speech checks I know that it just isn't Bethesda's design philosophy (because they blow like that). Bethesda's philosophy is about exploring and wacking shit (so of course any skills that do not support the player in combat endeavors or help the player with exploring shit are pretty much just a waste of development time and money), so obviously they are going to take the route of making the player wack as much shit as possible and will almost never lock them out of any content. This is a good thing and a bad thing. When you have the freedom to access any content you want, that means you can tailor what quests your character (hopefully multiple since you're a self-proclaimed rp freak like me) should or shouldn't do during that playthrough. The wacking shit is kind of a problem but then again most RPGs are combat heavy and TES never set out to be a very deep game. and i kinda just typed that shit straight from the heart so excuse grammar and spelling issues 'cuz man this text box is really small and i can't be arsed to go through and edit this whole thing [editline]22nd July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=rinoaff33;48270103]I think the argument of liking one Elder Scrolls over another boils down to liking old school vs modern game design. Old school is clunky, mysterious, and sometimes counter-intuitive. The gameplay and world alike are something to discover. There can be hundreds of mechanics, likely poorly balanced and not widely implemented. Skills tend to be highly specific, and there's no way to know what is useful without extensive play time. You might see an icon in your inventory or an ominous pop-up message and not know what it means until much later, if at all. Some of this is a holdover from tabletop games, where real-time combat had to be abstracted via stats and dice rolls. Another contributing element was the Internet not being prevalent, so players would have to figure things out on their own (or via a strategy guide). Basically, obscurity was considered a positive factor in older games, much like a puzzle/adventure game (which was incidentally a genre popular at the time). Immersion and the ability to get lots of hours out of a single game are selling points. Also, in this design, stats are highly important for RPGs. The player's skill is invested less in being good at the gameplay and more at being good with getting the right stats and/or knowing the game's secrets. Modern is streamlined and simplified. An attempt is made to balance all choices so that they are all viable, even if this sacrifices variety, depth, and realism. If a mechanic cannot be implemented to a certain degree of quality, it is simply cut from the game. If a scenario in the main part of the game is too difficult for the majority of players, it is made easier so that more people can see the content. With the prevalence of real-time combat, dice rolls and stats are marginalized and often seen as negative aspects. The cost of making a modern game reduces the total amount of content that can be added, as well. The goal of this design is to make a solid game that is accessible and will sell well to compensate for high cost. If a skill or play style encouraged by the game itself (combat, magic, stealth, guns, melee, whatever) is considered to not be fun or useful compared to others, then this design has failed. I'd say most action-RPGs fall somewhere in between the two extremes. Arena and Daggerfall are very old school, Morrowind is mostly old school, Oblivion leans toward modern, and Skyrim is very modern. This progression can be seen in other series as well, such as the Souls games - Bloodbourne is quite a bit more streamlined than the previous games in its series. Another example is the differences between Baldur's Gate (very old-school) and Dragon Age (hybrid), or even between Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2.[/QUOTE] after i finished my mega post i was going to say something along the lines of "Skyrim being objectively better as a game but it just doesn't have the heart that morrowind has" but this has definitely put that statement in better words (albeit more) I'm definitely gonna write it down on a txt to quote it whenever the arguement comes up again (because it will) because it's just a beautiful fucking post and a great summary of the strengths and weaknesses of both games. [editline]22nd July 2015[/editline] did i whoof some vidya game weed or something or were those painkillers estrogen pills because i'm feeling mighty emotional

[QUOTE=Kurahk;48271586]So I was fucking around in Whiterun for whatever reason and I went into Jorrvaskr. This happened. [t]http://i.imgur.com/QX0uHP7.png[/t] Don't worry its SFW, the nips and crotch are erased![/QUOTE] I think you're out of RAM usage for Skyrim.

FYI there actually are conflicts between some of the other guilds as well. The Fighter's Guild has some shady stuff with the Camona Tong/Thieves Guild going on, the Mages Guild might have something going on with the vampire clans, can't remember. I think at the least they'll actually talk to you as a vampire since they view you as a potential source of research. Being a part of the Temple was actively encouraged for some of the Great Houses, even if you were just a lay member. Being in different guilds also affected how people would treat you, especially if you were in an opposing one. At the least they'd like you less and be less willing to give you info, their services might have cost more as well. There were a little of subtle things that went along with guilds in Morrowind, which is better than just being able to join them all with no problems, in my opinion.

The guilds in the Elder Scrolls are side quest hubs more than anything. In reality, they should be character-defining decisions, much like picking your class or your deity in older RPGs. However, because the Elder Scrolls is about running around the world as an adventurer instead of building up a faction, a better guild system than Morrowind will probably not happen. This may seem like a tangent, but I think the biggest problem is that the main quest gets in the way - the guild quests tend to lead up to some major event, but it always seems a little silly in light of whatever important task you're [I]supposed[/I] to be doing for the main quest. I'm hoping that the main quest for the next Elder Scrolls (if it exists) is a little more natural. Morrowind attempted this to the point of some parts of the main quest having level requirements, so you [I]had[/I] to go do some side content. Perhaps the new "main quest" could be highly variable and branching like the one in Fallout: New Vegas. If TESVI is about the war against the Thalmor, there could be multiple possible solutions to the war that the player could influence. Now, I know that it's far beyond Bethesda's ability to implement, but having a system where battles can occur around the playable world based on controlled territory and cities can be captured would be an interesting way to implement another "Civil War" type event. Perhaps if the player does nothing but explore the world as a vagabond, the war will come to an end on its own. The player may suddenly find that there's a lot more racist High Elves around than before if they ignore the trouble around them, but this will not heavily affect the player's ability to roam freely. There could be some kind of alternative solution, like killing Vivec in Morrowind, that allows you to finish the "main quest" even if the world is screwed. This could be as simple as the player declaring himself/herself to be a god or emperor and personally killing everything in the way. The thing is that some people would prefer an Elder Scrolls game that is a total sandbox with no main quest, so these same people probably prefer a main quest that they can totally ignore. However, I think that integrating the main quest with the faction quests would be an interesting change. You don't need to play as a "chosen one" or such, just a guy/gal who either picks a side or stays out of the fight. Want to be a thief? Join a shady guild and play both sides of the war for profit, or convince your fellow members to aid one side to get in its good graces. The same could apply for other guilds. Alternatively, you can not be tied to a guild and instead to one of the factions directly at war, working with the various guilds to get resources in between battles. Even irrelevant side quests could play a part, since aiding townsfolk could gain influence among them for your chosen faction, and clearing dungeons could uncover mines and artifacts for use. And there would be the option to pick no sides, or perhaps your own side as another party in the war. Want to be a roaming adventurer or traveling merchant? That can work similarly to Skyrim, but with more dynamic events around you. Ultimately, I hope that the next Elder Scrolls has a more fully realized "Civil War" setup, instead of making it a sideshow to dragons. I also hope that the guilds and factions play a bigger part in TESVI. Your decisions on who to help, who to conquer, and who to ignore should influence the world and the result of the main story. I don't think that the main quest or the guild quests should be linear quests, but instead be triggered by certain conditions based on your actions and who controls what. This is obviously assuming that TESVI involves a war at all - it could be about Sheogorath's and Sanguine's collaborative funhouse of horror, for all we know. This is also assuming that Bethesda is competent and doesn't consider the civil war in Skyrim to be the pinnacle of their skill.

Oh, Skyrim forever, Noble she is, and fair, Down with the dragon, and up with the bear, oh we'll rally round the bloody flag, we'll rally oft again, Shout, shout the Battle Cry of Freedom. [editline]23rd July 2015[/editline] Oh yeah I forgot I'm trying to make a mod.

[QUOTE=cdr248;48272153]I'm sorry but if you want to roleplay in a video game you're going to have to do some self-limiting and have some imagination. If you cannot do those things then you probably wouldn't like RPGs outside of DnD or Pathfinder aka Stats: The RPG I specifically stated that the guilds in which had consequences for joining were all political organizations that were all literally opposed to one another and by joining one you public announced that you associated with them, meaning you can't join the other one. The 3 Houses are the only factions that have conflicts tied to them. I am aware of the one between the fighters guild and the thieves guild however that does not stop you from joining both of them and playing them fully. And unlike Morrowind, the other games don't have politically charged factions so really there isn't much of a reason as to why you shouldn't be able to join every guild. None of them really hate each other and no one is ever aware of you being in the Thieves' Guild or the DB for obvious reasons. The only thing that really applies to guild consequences is the Civil War. Both quests lines operate like optional guilds except they are obviously opposing and thus it makes sense why you can't work for both sides of the conflict. Wanted your guild consequences, it's all there. Also: This is a game. Mechanics come first and if they do nothing but bog up the game then they should be removed. Useless skills are useless skills, do I believe that they should be reworked? Yes. Am I bitter about the loss of some of them? Only a few. But if the skills serve little or no purpose then they should be taken out and have that time put into other things. Sure a few skills and attributes were removed, but perks allow for much for customization over your character as opposed to just looking at near meaningless numbers go up. Also about that comment of having a suave talking character in Morrowind: Good fucking luck with that. The TES games have always been ARPGs from the get-go and are not focused on dialogue. Especially with Morrowind where there is no kind of direct speech system or multiple routes to allow low combat characters to solve quests. This has been a problem with the series since the beginning, and as much as I would like to see more branching paths and speech checks I know that it just isn't Bethesda's design philosophy (because they blow like that). Bethesda's philosophy is about exploring and wacking shit (so of course any skills that do not support the player in combat endeavors or help the player with exploring shit are pretty much just a waste of development time and money), so obviously they are going to take the route of making the player wack as much shit as possible and will almost never lock them out of any content. This is a good thing and a bad thing. When you have the freedom to access any content you want, that means you can tailor what quests your character (hopefully multiple since you're a self-proclaimed rp freak like me) should or shouldn't do during that playthrough. The wacking shit is kind of a problem but then again most RPGs are combat heavy and TES never set out to be a very deep game. and i kinda just typed that shit straight from the heart so excuse grammar and spelling issues 'cuz man this text box is really small and i can't be arsed to go through and edit this whole thing [/QUOTE] Well of course you have to use your imagination. The game obviously isn't real. But why should that stop games from trying to have a realistic approach to what you can and cannot do by naturally limiting some stuff instead of openly allowing everything? And besides, your previous point was that an open game is a better game, what exactly makes an open game a better game? Being able to do everything? You can just do that by joining guilds through the console (I'm almost sure) and then there would be no need to have everything opened up to you. I think that if a game has more limits that makes sense and are more well written than nothing, it enriches the game. Of course it's all opinions but I have yet to see your reason to why allowing you to do everything in one go and then having people limit themselves would be the better outcome of the two. Why should so called "useless" attributes be removed? There are plenty of useless books in all elder scrolls games. Should they also be removed? They also aren't useless because they actually do something. Even if there is no point in increasing them when you level up having so called superpotions in ex. luck gives a noticeable effect to the game. As well as speed. And endurance. In my opinion they should add more "useless" attributes so that when you have a character only do certain things they truly become good in only those skills. Lastly, of course you can't have a character that can talk it's way through the game. But you can try and that is the important thing. It will of course be more straight forward to play the game by killing everything or stealth. But that doesn't mean that you should be able to try the other since it's actually viable sometimes, and that is enough to try to play a character like that. Not everything have to be black and white, that's what I am trying to tell you here. The games don't have to be either incredibly hardcore like DnD, or, in my opinion, too casual like skyrim. What I want is a middle ground that mix both things with good writing that limit you and makes the world feel alive and a lot of options so you can play it casually like skryim if you want, but you can also make unconventional characters that might not work out. In my opinion Morrowind hits pretty close to this. You can do a big Umbra wannabe and slay everything. But you can also make more versatile characters that have a decent mix with that could potentially be completely useless.

Pop quiz: What game is this from? [t]http://u.cubeupload.com/amiavamp/enb2015072403344898.jpg[/t] [sp]Answer: Skyrim[/sp]

[QUOTE=Excalibuurr;48282227][video=youtube;H5mxVzvvxQo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5mxVzvvxQo[/video][/QUOTE] "Oh, it's just some silly weeaboo mod, it can't be anything too ba-" [t]http://u.cubeupload.com/amiavamp/enb2015072405124011.jpg[/t] Ok, seriously, did Michael Kirkbride have a hand in this? [t]http://u.cubeupload.com/amiavamp/enb2015072405432909.jpg[/t]