|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
Skyrim - Skyrim Missing Twenty Things @ OXM
July 12th, 2011, 17:58
Originally Posted by DArtagnanThat's a big problem with all games now. They're built around the assumption that you'll play it once for a month or two right after it comes out, and maybe briefly again when the new DLC that adds in fluffy bunny slippers comes out, and then move on to the next game. No one ever replays games, right?
One of the big issues I have with certain TES games is that there's little or no reason to replay them - because you can do everything with one character. It sort of cheapens the experience of choosing factions and developing a character according to playstyle preferences.

Oblivion was awful about this, and actually lead you into doing as much as possible. Want to make a magic sword? You have to do the Mages Guild quests. Stole a silver fork? Sorry, the only way to get rid of it is join the Thieves Guild. Train your blade skill? Fighters Guild only.
I really hope Skyrim drops this approach and lets you play the way you want to again.
July 12th, 2011, 17:59
Agreed on TES and the jack of all trades thing. The classes don't much matter anyway and only really make a difference in the early portions of the game. By the end, everyone pretty much has the same character, the uber master of everything.
The guilds are like this too. You can join and become grandmaster in all of them, even the ones that are bitter enemies to each other.
I guess for me my problem with Bethesda is the simply don't every force you to make a choice or dole out any consequences whether it be the in the story, the guilds or the character you choose. The most choice you will be making is what kind of character you want to muddle through the early stages of the game with.
They should really take a closer look at New Vegas and see how giving the player C&C (imho) makes them feel more involved with the world the are in. I don't think it has to be especially limiting either plus it adds some re-play value to go back and zig where you previously zagged.
The guilds are like this too. You can join and become grandmaster in all of them, even the ones that are bitter enemies to each other.
I guess for me my problem with Bethesda is the simply don't every force you to make a choice or dole out any consequences whether it be the in the story, the guilds or the character you choose. The most choice you will be making is what kind of character you want to muddle through the early stages of the game with.
They should really take a closer look at New Vegas and see how giving the player C&C (imho) makes them feel more involved with the world the are in. I don't think it has to be especially limiting either plus it adds some re-play value to go back and zig where you previously zagged.
Keeper of the Watch
July 12th, 2011, 22:11
Funny how he didn't miss birthsigns. Yeah that engenders a lot of confidence in the writer.
July 13th, 2011, 03:50
You could also say they are missing a European developer which would grant them sub forums on some sites
--
If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
If you don't stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front.
SasqWatch
Original Sin 2 Donor
July 13th, 2011, 09:00
I post what i posted in beth's forums : Much of the replay value had to do about classes , i loved level a bard as a bard , finish the game as a bard and then go play a battlemage ; now with everyone starting blank i don't think i will have the motivation to try different builds.
July 13th, 2011, 09:12
It was nice that there were several classes to choose out from.
Gave people the choice to try different things out.
I always played a warrior though, stuck to one char the whole game.
Now it doesn't matter all that much anymore I guess, it'll be the same for everyone with few differences here and there.
Gave people the choice to try different things out.
I always played a warrior though, stuck to one char the whole game.
Now it doesn't matter all that much anymore I guess, it'll be the same for everyone with few differences here and there.
July 13th, 2011, 09:49
Originally Posted by kalniel'Most of us' surely prefer pretending to play a RPG when they do not play one, crafting all kinds of insane thesis to pretend they do what they do not.
You mean, like a hot line you ring to ask how to role play?
Most of us don't need it thanks, just give us a sandbox world like skyrim and we've got all the tools we need![]()
Please feel free to back up your own point with listing the tools to role play in sandbox worlds like Skyrim.
This said, I've just recalled that 'many of us' blamed Oblivion scaling up system because as they play their character out of its class progression, they falled behind the world and got killed easily.
Indeed, for those 'many of us', a hot line to learn them the very basics of RP would have been welcomed.
Last edited by ChienAboyeur; July 13th, 2011 at 10:01.
Reason: Remembrance of a funny anecdota
SasqWatch
July 13th, 2011, 09:58
Jack of all trades? Shouldnt it be King of all trades? A polymath?
Games like Oblivion allows the player to grow characters that can be master in all their skills and attributes (save the racial/species specific skills)
Cant blame Bethesda much. Probably the only major still trying to deliver an environment proper to RP. As a major, they have to cater to the maximum audience, including powergamers. And powergamers want the capacity to grow terrifying characters.
But Skyrim might be a disappointment to them in that it might not possible to plus/plus your characters, acquiring all perks and pushing all attributes to max.
Games like Oblivion allows the player to grow characters that can be master in all their skills and attributes (save the racial/species specific skills)
Cant blame Bethesda much. Probably the only major still trying to deliver an environment proper to RP. As a major, they have to cater to the maximum audience, including powergamers. And powergamers want the capacity to grow terrifying characters.
But Skyrim might be a disappointment to them in that it might not possible to plus/plus your characters, acquiring all perks and pushing all attributes to max.
SasqWatch
July 13th, 2011, 11:19
Originally Posted by ChienAboyeurI lack the cranial capacity to comprehend this comment. If you're saying 'we use our imagination' then I agree
'Most of us' surely prefer pretending to play a RPG when they do not play one, crafting all kinds of insane thesis to pretend they do what they do not.

Please feel free to back up your own point with listing the tools to role play in sandbox worlds like Skyrim.The 'tools' are precisely the things which make a sandbox world 'sandbox' - freedom, largely. Lack of constraints in the game world, or character actions, or character builds/purpose etc. I prefer my imagination to provide the constraints as and when they are needed for my role play, rather than the game, because a games constraint for one character role might not fit another character I chose to play.
SasqWatch
Guest
July 13th, 2011, 11:23
Originally Posted by DArtagnanSometimes I don't
Then why even play a game? Your mind is less constrained without it.

Sometimes I want to play a game which forces me to experience a particular story or experience. Sometimes I want to play a game which has a moderate range of constraints. And sometimes I want to play a game which is more sandbox. There are loads of games that cover the more constrained styles, I enjoy TES for providing the sandbox RPG style, and would be glad if it didn't jump into areas already well covered by other games.
SasqWatch
July 13th, 2011, 11:37
Originally Posted by kalnielI don't see how giving the player meaningful choices removes the sandbox element. Unless, of course, you get fanatical and extreme about the concept.
Sometimes I don't
Sometimes I want to play a game which forces me to experience a particular story or experience. Sometimes I want to play a game which has a moderate range of constraints. And sometimes I want to play a game which is more sandbox. There are loads of games that cover the more constrained styles, I enjoy TES for providing the sandbox RPG style, and would be glad if it didn't jump into areas already well covered by other games.
Then I guess having a selection of perks that are not all available to you would constitute a constrained sandbox environment?
I don't think any fan of TES wants the game to go from sandbox to something else - but I personally don't think they're doing "sandbox" in the ideal way.
That said, they're doing many things right - and I also think they're the best at doing a free and open gaming environment. But there are certain established design paradigms that they could stand to use, which wouldn't in any significant way constrain the sandbox element. At least, not as I understand the concept.
Guest
July 13th, 2011, 13:49
Originally Posted by DArtagnanThis is one of the great riddles of "higher" animals (including us) :
Then why even play a game? Your mind is less constrained without it.
Why do they play ?
--
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction." (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction." (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
July 13th, 2011, 15:14
Because, "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy."
--
c-computer, r-role, p-playing, g-game, nut-extreme fan
=crpgnut or just
'nut @crpgnut
aka survivalnut
c-computer, r-role, p-playing, g-game, nut-extreme fan
=crpgnut or just
'nut @crpgnut
aka survivalnut
July 13th, 2011, 15:45
Originally Posted by kalnielFreedom? Freedom is the answer to everything, it seems.
The 'tools' are precisely the things which make a sandbox world 'sandbox' - freedom, largely. Lack of constraints in the game world, or character actions, or character builds/purpose etc. I prefer my imagination to provide the constraints as and when they are needed for my role play, rather than the game, because a games constraint for one character role might not fit another character I chose to play.
I am keeping this answer close at hand as it is the poorest answer I have ever come accross. Will use it in the future as it is really a good one.
As to imagination, it has value but it is by no way a substitute to ingame mechanics. Constraints provided by imagination are by definition imagined and are not virtual.
A valuable piece of news for developpers though as they do not have to bother about implementing ingame mechanics to support RP, gamers can still imagine them.
Now, hat down to Bethesda, in their game, they are still implemented a system of combat, a system of life and death. If they had known, they could have let that part and so many others to the imagination of players who could have put imagination constraint on their combat prowesses, their mortality and stuff…
A waste of resources.
SasqWatch
|
|
All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:45.
