Elder Scrolls Blades - What it Tells us about Elder Scrolls VI

TechRaptor writes about what we can infer about The Elder Scrolls VI from The Elder Scrolls Blades.

Blades Gives Hints at Elder Scrolls 6 Combat Changes

It would also appear as though Bethesda is aware of the simplistic nature of combat in modern Elder Scrolls games. For the most part, you can make it through Skyrim by mindlessly stabbing people. By and large, spells were fire and forget. Combat in Blades is more involved by comparison. Spells have a wind-up period that leaves players vulnerable to attack. Enemies can block and it actually reduces your damage by a noticeable amount. It basically ends up being less of a button masher and more of a game of timing. Obviously, Blades' combat would translate poorly to a normal game, but the concept is sound. That being said, it would be hard to say if Bethesda will shift away from their simpler combat mechanics due to how friendly it is to casual players. Ironically, Skyrim's mechanics would've probably suited Blades better, but that's neither here nor there.



[…]

Thanks Farflame!

More information.

The casual gamer, again.

Maybe Skyrim has a combat system that is meant not to distract from what is supposed to be its core.

Another guy who can not take that a product is not meant for him.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Maybe Skyrim has a combat system that is meant not to distract from what is supposed to be its core.

Skyrim's "core" ( and of Bethesda's games, in general) is literally "Go kill at location x".
You don't solve interesting puzzles ( like in Zelda). Or encounter unique stories and characters. Or use different skills to solve situations in variety of different(non) violent ways. Post Dagerfall/Todd Howard's direction, primary focus is on combat ( as main activity in the world…go to dungeon, kill everything inside, loot, go back and sell, rinse/repeat )

For this, they'll probably dial building and "Sims" aspect to 11, instead of adding more/any unique/interesting content.

If anything could dampen my enthusiasm for Beth games it would be horrible twitch like combat requirements. I find combat in Skyrim and FO4 to be almost perfect to my own combat requirements … although I know many find them very simple. Luckily there are plenty of other games out with very hard core combat requirements so folks can get some variety.

Skyrim's core is it's great freedom in role playing, being able to be whomever you want, to explore, to quest, to enjoy the story, and have some combat as well. It all comes together in a great mix. I never saw its core as combat. It is all the other things in the game that make it great and so much fun. I find it to be a pretty good blend of sandbox gaming, story and quests, combat, exploration, and, of course, a well supported moddable game that lets the user customize it closer to what they way.

Its companions are lacking but there are still some great characters in the game I have a lot of fond memories of and enjoyed interacting with. Some added character depth would be nice, closer to what I saw in FO4. Enjoyed the stories overall and especially liked the scale of the game.

I just hope we see more of that in TES6.

I don't forsee any changes happening to TES combat. Or TES enemy AI. Or TES writing. Or TES quest design.

All these articles that get glossy-eyed on their list of things that should or could change with the next iteration of "Todd & Emil's Pretty Sandbox of Nothing" should really come to terms with Bethesda's absolute complacency.

Originally Posted by Drithius
I don't forsee any changes happening to TES combat. Or TES enemy AI. Or TES writing. Or TES quest design.

All these articles that get glossy-eyed on their list of things that should or could change with the next iteration of "Todd & Emil's Pretty Sandbox of Nothing" should really come to terms with Bethesda's absolute complacency.

Damn straight all these article are is wishful thinking.

Todd has his usual check list and edits features in/out every new game.

All his talk about innovation is bullshit.

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
Damn straight all these article are is wishful thinking.

Todd has his usual check list and edits features in/out every new game.

All his talk about innovation is bullshit.

I think you and @Drithus are too harsh. Each Bethesda game has featured a number of innovations. In fact, that is exactly why people here sing praises for Daggerfall or Morrowind. Some of the younger members even reminisce blurry-eyed about Oblivion, where your character still possessed actual attributes. As someone who actually enjoys Bethesda games, I would also like it if there were more alternatives to combat, but most changes in the game are aimed toward making the game more accesible, which means apparently slaughtering your opponents more thoughtlessly and being able to change the makeup on your companion/sex interest.

Maybe I am to harsh but my criticisms and things I would like to see added, or changed are valid reasons why. Fifteen years later the formula is the same with some changes.

Yet the the problems I and many others mention never get changed or improved.

Ps: No I wont post my list of what I like to see again for the twentieth time.

Wonder if we'll ever see a turn-based Elder Scrolls game?

I'd have to read some stellar reviews about any future Bethesda products to consider purchasing anything new from them. As much as I'd love to see a turn-based game set in the Elder Scroll universe, I find that highly unlikely.

Originally Posted by BoboTheMighty
Skyrim's "core" ( and of Bethesda's games, in general) is literally "Go kill at location x".

I dunno. I think the core of these games is even simpler. It's more just "Go to location X" with the "and kill Y" part being almost an afterthought.

Which is fine -- I like tactical games with interesting combat systems as well, but that never was ES. The fondly remembered Morrowind also had simplistic combat.

The ES games are about exploring a beautiful world and defining your persona in it, and they do that well.

The fighting-game-lite system the article describes for Blades (which I had never heard of before this) wouldn't suddenly turn ES into an exciting action game. It would just slightly extend and complicate the perfunctory and dull fight sequences that interrupt the more enjoyable just-walking-around.

People called Skyrim a "walking simulator" as a joke, but I think that was its strength -- and ES6 would be better off playing to that strength than trying to shoehorn in a combat system that isn't really ever going to be the best part of the game.

The silliest part of TES games is the ability to pause and eat 12 apples, or down six potions in the middle of battles.

Originally Posted by Hexprone
I dunno. I think the core of these games is even simpler. It's more just "Go to location X" with the "and kill Y" part being almost an afterthought.

Which is fine -- I like tactical games with interesting combat systems as well, but that never was ES. The fondly remembered Morrowind also had simplistic combat.

The ES games are about exploring a beautiful world and defining your persona in it, and they do that well.

The fighting-game-lite system the article describes for Blades (which I had never heard of before this) wouldn't suddenly turn ES into an exciting action game. It would just slightly extend and complicate the perfunctory and dull fight sequences that interrupt the more enjoyable just-walking-around.

People called Skyrim a "walking simulator" as a joke, but I think that was its strength -- and ES6 would be better off playing to that strength than trying to shoehorn in a combat system that isn't really ever going to be the best part of the game.

I don't see why two are exclusive…you are spending most of the time killing things.
AC Odyssey ( I finished recently) is a much better sandbox and walking sim, in comparison.
Make interior levels more open, more vertical with gameplay mechanics that can interact with environment ( like setting grass on fire, etc).
Freedom with consequences, separate reputation system for each game zone/faction, so what you do matters and affects quests/npc interaction/different activities.
Actual discovery of lore/worldbuilding instead of pointless "bandit notes".
This would hugely enhance experience, without trying to turn it into something different ( like Requiem).
As it is, their games are at this point, too shallow, outdated and surpassed in every way by other open world titles ( except for running around imagining things/"pretend roleplaying")
After Embarrassment 76, I doubt even "mainstream" will hold back criticism on their design.

I'd like my cake and eat it with the next ES:

A fully-voiced PC Breton "peasant whom becomes the High King of High Rock" story. (think Fable). In it I'll unite the kingdoms of Daggerfall, Sentinel and Wayrest.

I'll do it with my charismatic band of brothers (think Mount & Blade), each of whom I'll woo to my cause (lots of companions, each with their own story, friends and family). I'll do it by buying/selling lands and estates, by persuasions, by political intrigues. When life gets boring, I can soul-shift into any of my closest companions to do "walking simulator" quests to my hearts content. No need for character creation when I can actually role-play the diverse assortment of companions I'll gradually acquire. Of course I'm only allowed this intimacy when I find a way to become their BFF.

In other words, I'll be very happy if the next ES has a main quest with some staying power.

I thought there were quite a lot of interesting quests in Oblivion and Skyrim. Oh well.

Originally Posted by ToddMcF2002
I thought there were quite a lot of interesting quests in Oblivion and Skyrim. Oh well.

I did like the thief guild quests in Oblivion. That and the painting quest.

I thought the Dark Brotherhood questlines in both Skyrim and Oblivion were pretty good, unfortunately the other guild questlines were far less memorable for me, though I'll agree with the Oblivion thief questline as well.