Skyrim - On DLC @ Eurogamer

Eurogamer has a short grab from Todd Howard on DLC, speaking with him at the Spike Video Game Awards after Skyrim won Game of the Year:

Howard couldn't yet share plans for DLC, but he says it will be focused on "ways to make the game better, not just have more, because the game is so big. So we're going through ideas right now, and processing everything people are doing in the game, and trying to think of ways that we can improve it." There will be multiple releases (as with Bethesda's past games), but Howard says they "don't have a timetable. They won't be quick, and they'll have a lot of meat on them."

More information.

I read it as "patience please till we address at least half of reported 500+ bugs, more precisely those that are not rare ones".
Which is a positive thing.

Originally Posted by joxer
I read it as "patience please till we address at least half of reported 500+ bugs, more precisely those that are not rare ones".
Which is a positive thing.

If a game of this size had 500 known bugs total, it would be very small amount.

I would be a bit surprised if they actually did some decent DLC. Even though the concept of being able to add new stuff is good it's been abused so much that I hardly care for it anymore. Some of the best attempts as I recall are from FO:NV are most of those are pretty average.

Originally Posted by Thaurin
If a game of this size had 500 known bugs total, it would be very small amount.

500+. Means more than 500. They've stopped counting new ones at 523, hehe

Yes, I am getting annoyed by not getting rewards for quests, and having to use the console command to fix quests, and redoing quests/dungeons with followers dismissed because of bugs.

Fix them (WITHOUT forcing us to start over - i.e. include savegame data updates), BEFORE even THINKING about adding new content/DLC. I know the profit/greed temptation is strong, but resist it Bethesda.

"They won't be quick, and they'll have a lot of meat on them." I like what I'm hearing.

DLC isn't really about fixing bugs though. That's what patches are for no?

You're missing the point.

Yes, I am getting annoyed by not getting rewards for quests

Same here. Sometimes I think that completing quests in Skyrim is just pointless. In some cases quests reward me with good stories and access to secret places, but most of the time when I complete a quest, I get gold or useless junk. Completing quests in Skyrim is less rewarding than exploration, both in-game (I mean by getting loot) and outside of the game (the sense of accomplishing something).
They should do something about it.

For me, quests are just a good excuse to wander around in that amazing world.

How about a combat dlc. Improved ai, a dodge button, a coup de grace button so my thief doesn't slash wildly and yell as loud as he can while making a stealth kill and a lock on feature so while fighting a dragon a horse doesn't run in front of my arrow die and the whole town attacks me. Last but not least more monsters. I've killed 164 people, 106 animals, 45 undead but only 25 creatures and i'm assuming that would be spiders and dragons. In such a big world it would be nice to run in to some really gruesome creatures.

I wouldn't mind if they'd raise the trainers prices, and balanced that with more NPC who offered free training for completing their quests - I've only encountered two of those, but I'm just level 12 though.

Or perhaps someone will do just such a mod, but I'm usually a bit wary of game balancing mods, as people who make them tend to be overly generous. But I digress…

As for DLC, they said in more than one interviews I think that they'd make them as adding consequent content, and explicitly promise they'd be NOT à la infamous "Horse Armor".

I've proudly removed this game from my PC without finishing it, level 30 i think.
its junk, after a bunch of broken quests, I finally say, LETS finish this game, so get to the last town I haven't been to, SOlitude.
What do I find here, the eye opener, that anything you do, is predetermined, you have absolutely no control over the progression of the game, you have 0 choice . (execution)

so after many hours of exploring, that were fun, I got bored, checked out the ending on youtube (which is awful) and remembered why I hate Bethesda

So DLC, thanks but I'll pass

Sounds good to me. QA monkeys can do the quest fixing while the artists and story designers can get on with new content. I never understand why anyone would want the latter to sit around twiddling their thumbs because they perceive that creating DLC would have any negative impact on fixing bugs.

I really like what I'm hearing about making it better, rather than just bigger. Of course, it can be interpreted every which way - but I'm hoping it's about mechanics and gameplay features more than anything else.

It's rather sad that they're postponing the Creation Kit release, especially because it's obviously about tailoring it for the Steam platform. I don't mind the idea of having Steam as a validation process for some content - but I don't see why they can't just release the Creation Kit - and tune the Steam process meanwhile.

But, exciting times are ahead. I'm just going to have to wait a few months to delve back into it.

Originally Posted by blackcanopus
Same here. Sometimes I think that completing quests in Skyrim is just pointless. In some cases quests reward me with good stories and access to secret places, but most of the time when I complete a quest, I get gold or useless junk. Completing quests in Skyrim is less rewarding than exploration, both in-game (I mean by getting loot) and outside of the game (the sense of accomplishing something).
They should do something about it.

I personally miss getting xp for quests, just makes them feel more worthwhile.

Daniel.

Originally Posted by borcanu
SOlitude.
What do I find here, the eye opener, that anything you do, is predetermined, you have absolutely no control over the progression of the game, you have 0 choice . (execution)

This is not true you can interfere should you wish to, and can even save him.

http://gaming.stackexchange.com/ques…i-save-roggvir

Daniel.

I think he means they haven't designed for the case where you do save him. Given the number of choices in Skyrim I think that's a reasonable course of action - I'd rather have the openness and use my imagination than feel like I was playing a choose your own adventure movie (bioware).

I guess I'm more easily entertained than some. I keep wandering around and picking up interesting quests that way. I ran into a lady who wanted to kill her own mother and I thought that was pretty cool. Unless you explore or read a cheat guide, you will never come across this quest. It's not just off a road either, so you've got to hike a bit to get there. I'm probably about 80-90 hours on this character and have only done the mage's quest line. I'm just exploring everything looking for Shouts.

Originally Posted by darklord
This is not true you can interfere should you wish to, and can even save him.

http://gaming.stackexchange.com/ques…i-save-roggvir

Daniel.

I read somewhere (probably in Skyrim Wiki) that if you save him, he will die of a heart attack anyway.