Elder Scrolls V - Wishlist @ Platform Nation

All those comments about skill system are a bit ....

In MW getting into level 40 meant that you could kick anyone's rear despite maxing out stats or not .
In OB stats didn't matter and it was very easy to max everything , even minor magic skills without using the multipliers .

What i want from the next TES game is lots of interesting things to do while not questing like reading books , exploring and getting rewarded for it , talking with people, uncovering small secrets / treasure maps , visiting strange places where your combat skills mean nothing and a couple of puzzles if possible .
 
Joined
Jun 22, 2009
Messages
1,439
Location
Athens (the original one)
Well, it was just my own personal wishlist :)

It's not that I think any of it will actually happen!

A few points:

Cooperative multiplayer?

Actually, I consider TES (the concept) games to be kinda like singleplayer MMOs - but without the grind and WITH meaningful dynamic content - as well as an actual end to the game, if you want it.

I think it's one of the most ideal platforms for a cooperative multiplayer experience.

Just you, and 2-3 friends existing in that world together - exploring at will. You get to share the experience with friends, and that's something I personally think would enhance my personal enjoyment tenfold.

The anti use-based system

The issue with this system is perhaps more about its implementation. One of the PRIMARY carrots - to me - in any RPG, is the sensation of development and reward. The use-based system provides little to none of that.

You basically go from:

Blade 36

to

Blade 37

—-

You know?

You never feel the progress - you just slave away and feel like nothing ever happens.

I know they tried a little bit in Oblivion with a few powers at 25 point increments, but it was far too little in terms of what I'm saying.

Then there's the whole exploit aspect, and yeah, I'm a min-max'er. I can't help that, because that's just what I enjoy. The use-based system is the anti-min/max'er way, and naturally I'm biased against that as well.

Breadth/dungeons

Really think about this.

Would you rather have ~300 generic dungeons or 30 (THIRTY) deep, handcrafted with care dungeons?

Even 20 would do. You have a huge landscape with cities and guilds, and then you have 20 large story-based dungeons, with puzzles and rich background material?

I'm talking 2-4 hour dungeons here.

Do you REALLY need generic semi-handcrafted crap on top?

If you do, then a random generator should suffice - which should be simple enough to implement.

Have to explain that one to me. It's okay as long as it is still possible to have dozens of items on a table. No Gothic/Risen interiors please.

What I mean, is that Bethesda is using a very primitive way of streaming. They divide the world into big cells - and they visible load and "pop-up" around you. The pop-up alone is not all, because the engine stutters like crazy loading content like that.

Look to Risen for an incredibly efficient way of streaming large outdoor environments.

That would have been nice but I doubt they'll be changing engine any time soon.

I don't think it's the engine, actually. Gamebryo is supposed to be really flexible. I think it's just how they're using it.

They did much better in Fallout 3 - so it CAN be done.

Some, but if it fits the setting not just for sake of having it. That's like the obligatory desert part of many RPGs.

Well… Yes, for the sake of having it - because I love underwater content. But obviously, it's a balancing act. You shouldn't eliminate something better to get this.

Deep/C&C quests

Now, I'd never argue that such quests are bad.

They're fantastic and great.

But, this is one area where I think it's unrealistic to a large degree - because it takes HUGE amounts of time to create deep meaningful quest-trees and intricate structure that responds to your individual approach.

I simply don't think it's feasible in a game like TES - because, as you say, it's about breadth and scope.
 
Well actually I think your list is quite reasonable and feasible. Its just not the game
Bethesda wants to make (and why should they when TES:IV sold like crazy)…

Actually, I consider TES (the concept) games to be kinda like singleplayer MMOs - but without the grind and WITH meaningful dynamic content - as well as an actual end to the game, if you want it…
Doesn't sound that bad as you describe it, but I am probably not the target group since
its the singleplayer (somewhat) storydriven aspect that appeals to me (guess that
is why the Gothic's are hands down my favourites ).

Would you rather have ~300 generic dungeons or 30 (THIRTY) deep, handcrafted with care dungeons?
Personally I'd take the 30. But as other have said filler dungeons are a staple of the
series so a good middle ground would be the 30 plus 2 or 3 times that of filler (they
do have the resources I think if they wanted).

I don't think it's the engine, actually. Gamebryo is supposed to be really flexible. I think it's just how they're using it.

They did much better in Fallout 3 - so it CAN be done.

Well one of the basic functions of an engine (and its usually most telling limitation) is
the streaming mechanism/ map size so even though this can be tweaked (i.e a smaller
world might allow fewer/bigger cells making transitions less obvious) it can only be
done within the limits of said engine. I haven't played FO3 to know how much of a
better job they did there but obviously they are improving their tech (btw bear in mind
that Gamebryo is simply the basis middleware that they used to build on top the "full
suite" that is probably going to power their games for quite a while it seems).
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,734
I mostly agree with Dart's list, but I would want to keep fast-travel to locations that already have been visited (which to me was one of very few improvements in Oblivion). It is enough to explore an area once to open up the path there. Trekking through the same wilderness again and again might be realistic but isnt all that much fun IMHO.

The point where I most strongly agree is about "Faction makeover - as in don't let each faction be a completely separate questline. Instead, introduce crossover and consequence, and make titles and status with a faction MEAN something." A sandbox game can extend replayability tremendously by doing this, but it would require Bethsoft to increase the questcount again (Morrowind had enough quests for you to feel that you had played a big game even if you skipped several factions and cities, Oblivion and Fallout 3 didnt really...). Above all, make choices mutually exclusive! Otherwise replaying the game only becomes a matter of killing enemies by fireball instead of axe (not that Oblivion even had that element, as the ruleset allows you to build a jack of all trades).

I dont expect Bethsoft to take any of those steps though:( Even if FO3 was much better than I expected it also continued some of the negative Bethsoft trends.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
2,013
In addition to some of the above, one of the biggest disappointments I had with Oblivion was the following: no flying spell!

It probably sounds unimportant to most, but I always looked forward towards this spell in the earlier M&M and Elderscrolls games, but somehow the more modern games appear to regress not only in terms of complexity, with the understandable goal of streamlining the game to the mass market, but also in terms of engine flexibility. I for one would enjoy it if they could bring back some of the old school magic, literally as well as figuratively ;)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
471
In addition to some of the above, one of the biggest disappointments I had with Oblivion was the following: no flying spell!

It probably sounds unimportant to most, but I always looked forward towards this spell in the earlier M&M and Elderscrolls games, but somehow the more modern games appear to regress not only in terms of complexity, with the understandable goal of streamlining the game to the mass market, but also in terms of engine flexibility. I for one would enjoy it if they could bring back some of the old school magic, literally as well as figuratively ;)

I too missed fly! Or 'air walk' ;-) Of course, they only did that because their engine wasn't up to rendering huge cities from an aerial (unconstrained) viewpoint - still, other games have done it. Risen had levitate and good graphics. Flying/levitating opens up many more ways to solve puzzles as well as providing obvious tactical advantages ;-) (which can still be offset by allowing others to fly too)
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
2,137
Location
Cape Town, South Africa
Well, it was just my own personal wishlist :)
The issue with this system is perhaps more about its implementation. One of the PRIMARY carrots - to me - in any RPG, is the sensation of development and reward. The use-based system provides little to none of that.
I like that system quite a lot, but I also feel it's not well implemented.
But I believe that it's fundamental flaw is that the rewards of raising secondary skills are actually greater than the ones of raising primary skills.

Yet even the most solid of skill systems would be pointless in a game as foolproof as Oblivion… As such I don't really believe it's the skill system itself that is problematic but the fact that there is never any concern that you might find yourself in a situation where a specific skill that you may not have developed enough will be essential.

(Unfortunately I don't expect that Bethesda will soon attempt to make a challenging game again. So I just hope that they'll make the exploration part exciting again)
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
693
As such I don't really believe it's the skill system itself that is problematic but the fact that there is never any concern that you might find yourself in a situation where a specific skill that you may not have developed enough will be essential.

No cRPG should *ever* do that excepting totally optional things. Requiring that you have specific skill X at level Y at place Z would be a sign of extremely poor game design.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,769
Location
Minnesota, USA
No cRPG should *ever* do that excepting totally optional things. Requiring that you have specific skill X at level Y at place Z would be a sign of extremely poor game design.

Yes, if the game could continue without accomplishing the task.

That's one of the core misconceptions of modern game design, evident in most recent CRPGs.

Meaningful choices involve sacrifices - and something like Fallout 3 demonstrated how Bethesda is utterly ignorant of that concept.
 
Yes… I didn't mean it should not let you finish the game…
But, for example, getting to the top of the mages guild without ever feeling that it would be essential to have at least one magic skill developed enough… come on!
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
693
Yes, if the game could continue without accomplishing the task.

That's one of the core misconceptions of modern game design, evident in most recent CRPGs.

Meaningful choices involve sacrifices - and something like Fallout 3 demonstrated how Bethesda is utterly ignorant of that concept.

Then it is not the case where "you might find yourself in a situation where a specific skill that you may not have developed enough will be essential".
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,769
Location
Minnesota, USA
Then it is not the case where "you might find yourself in a situation where a specific skill that you may not have developed enough will be essential".

Example:

If the situation is a quest with a locked chest that can only be opened with lockpicking.

Without lockpicking, you'd have to forego solving the quest - because the quest item is inside.

But the game could continue without the quest being solved.

In that situation, lockpicking would be essential.
 
My only wish is that they dont make it.
Granted.

They're not going to make it, yet. They are busy making Elder Scrolls Online instead.
P.S. I assume they will announce the game in E3.
 
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
328
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,508
Lots of good points here kudos to our 4th musketeer for a very thorough list. And quite a few I disagree with.

Better animation? Streaming vs cell based engine? More sound actors? - Couldn't care less - it doesn't affect my immersion (and it's not what RPG's are about (IMNSHO)). I'd rather be without voice overs, I can make my own images and so on.

I don't mind fast travellling. If it doesn't fit the way I want to roleplay, I don't use it. There are in general in any rpg a number of things I don't do because my character wouldn't do that.

I don't understand the wish that they didn't make TES V either. By all means, critisize the product, but - if you don't like it, if you don't play it, why does it matter if they create it or not? There's quite a few games I don't like, am not intersted in and so on. They don't really mean anything to me, and therefore it dosen't mean anything whether they make them or not. Then again, the "wish they didn't" statement weren't to be taken quite as literally as I originally thought?

I like use-based advancement. It's seems more natural to me than any other way of advancement. It also is very flexible regarding what skills you choose to improve.

Regarding the RP aspects:

- you should not be able to be good at everything. You could specialize in one set of skills, and be mediocre in others, or chose a jack-of-all-trades approach, being fairly good at several skills, but not excel in anything.

- Restrictions on joining factions, you should only be able to join a few.

- You should be short on money, so you have to choose carefully how you spend your money.

- Your choices open or close questlines, should make some tasks easier and some tasks harder, or even impossible to finish.

- All in all, there should be a lot of things you could not do, because of the choices you make. At the same time, there should be different way of doing things. Don't have the skill to lockpick that chest? Maybe you can do it with your magic? Or maybe you can buy a scroll? (Come to think about it: Isn't that how it is in Oblivion)

- No more silly out-of-context minigames.

So: Lots of restrictions - and lots of flexibility.

Now, would someone at Bethsoft please hire me?
 
Last edited:
One request to Bsoft to be certain: the ability to cancel a quest out of your logbook. I can't tell you how frustrating it was to still see that doggoned Nirnroot quest even as I'd cleared out the rest of the list.

I think Pibbur gets the crux of what ES is all about. It's about breadth over depth, about personal roleplay over "gaming", and about options and exploration over story.

I'll disagree about voice acting, but because of the situation. Voice acting isn't going away, so I'd rather hear a third more people speaking than hearing Wonder Woman yelling at me again and again and again.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
520
In a way, I'd call ES the truest kind of sandbox game. Since historically so much of it is procedurally created, you roleplay, making your own fun.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
520
One request to Bsoft to be certain: the ability to cancel a quest out of your logbook. I can't tell you how frustrating it was to still see that doggoned Nirnroot quest even as I'd cleared out the rest of the list.

I think Pibbur gets the crux of what ES is all about. It's about breadth over depth, about personal roleplay over "gaming", and about options and exploration over story.

I'll disagree about voice acting, but because of the situation. Voice acting isn't going away, so I'd rather hear a third more people speaking than hearing Wonder Woman yelling at me again and again and again.

I think you misunderstand what wishes are about.

They're supposed to represent what those making them WANT the game to be "about".

It's fine that you think the past games were "about" this or that, but that's not necessarily what we WANT them to be about.

You might, but I don't exclusively want to keep stuff just because it matches a rigid vision of breadth or scope.

Give me the right combination of elements and I'll show you a better game than one trying to be "about" something - if it's not about fun.
 
Some good ideas in this thread. Oblivion and Fallout 3 are fantastic 'sandbox' worlds complete with a world editor! Adding in some flying abilities, vehicles? would be good. Varied body types easily altered. (fat people, skinny people?) As long as they keep giving us the editor, it's the abilities I'm most anxious to see them add, so that at least the modding community can fill in the holes.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
189
Location
Houston, Tx
Wishes are free. But if your wishes stray too far from "what-is-an-elder-scrolls-game" (whatever that is), the question is if your wishes actually are for the next bethesda game rather than the next ES game. So what the series is about isn't irrelefvant as I see it.

I've not made up my mind, but I am inclined to think that sandboxiness is an essensial property of the ES games, so wishing for something other than that is in reality wishing for something "completely different".

Then again: When asked about what programming language we would use in year 2000 Wossname said: "I don't know what it'll be, but it will be called FORTRAN."
 
Back
Top Bottom