CalibanX
-
Posts
349 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by CalibanX
-
-
Very cool! Thanks for sharing this. And keep up the good work! :)
-
I think you can still Block while using one 1H weapon. Just not while you're using two 1H weapons. I know, it's not intuitive why you wouldn't be able to block with two weapons, but, from a balance stand point, I can see why they did it. They had to make the dynamics of it different from two handed weapons.
-
So, I was feeling all baize about dragons, but damn, whenever I hear that Skyrim Theme song again I find myself getting all pumped up and feel like running outside with my wooden sword screaming taunts at them: "Hear I am! Come on! Come and get me mother f***er!!!" Dear Odin, what a dork I've become. Ha ha!
-
I imagine I'll be interested in the Dragon fights with my first character who will be a fighter and while the novelty of them will still be fresh. But, yeah, once I decide to play a stealth based character, I can't imagine having much interest in Dragon slaying.
-
Changing combat AI in mods worked great for Oblivion. I guess we'll just have to see how all the mechanics play out in Skyrim.
But, like Adrius2 said, I want to feel challenged by opponents, but not have to hit them 40 times to kill them. Unless, it's a Dragon of some kind or a super boss opponent. Basically, I want to feel like most encounters in the the game will still provide some degree of actual threat and that their presence in the game isn't superfluous. I get that Bandits are pretty low on the threat-level hierarchy in the game, but if I'm going to be encountering them throughout the game I still want to be able to be killed by one no matter what my level. Even if, at super high levels, my character only needs to get in one or two hits to take them out. Their ability to damage me should still be a concern.
-
I like the idea of enemies dealing more damage, but I don't think I've seen it yet. When I was watching that Argonian video on the other thread, the bandits just seemed to die pretty quick without putting up much of a fuss. I'm not super worried about it or anything. It's just been something I notice with each video I've seen.
-
Is it just me, or in the footage we've seen so far, does it look like opponents die after two or three swings with a weapon? In my heavily modded version of Oblivion blocking was pretty important. If my character didn't do it, my character would get pretty beat up. I'm not seeing much of character's getting beat up in the footage or reviews unless they attack something way above they're level. Anyway, are my observations off-base, or is there something I'm missing?
-
Well that sucks.
Oh well.
It's not like werewolves was conditional upon my buying the game. I'm sure I'll play it way too much even without werewolves.
If they do appear in DLC though, I was pondering how I would want them to be. I know I wouldn't want to have werewolf bitten characters simply transform into a werewolf "war form" and fight in just a different skin with a few amped up stats. I think it might actually be interesting if, when characters transformed into full werewolves; they could only partially control their transformed character. Say, you could run around in the woods or whatever, but as soon as your character detected prey, you would loose control and it would run off to hunt that prey and then give you control again for the inevitable fights that would ensue. Just something that would create an experience of "losing control to the beast" with repercussions in some novel way.
-
According to the reviews I've read, this will probably be the most immersive game ever made. It may not have the graphics of Cysis 3, but the level of detail given to the world is what's probably going to be the biggest draw for this game. And then there shall be mods to make it even better. Sigh.... 22 more days....
-
I hope these snarly computer issues get hammered out when the Skyrim specs are revealed. I too, was wondering about this Patch and if I'll need it. It's hard to know what to do when you have to parse through conflicting opinions about it.
-
I laughed at that one too.
Here is another one that I thought was pretty funny:
http://www.destructoid.com/hands-on-three-hours-with-the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-213857.phtml
-
-
I agree that "stamina and strength work together to give a multi-faceted approach to gameplay that can't be found by having only strength or stamina." That's why I think the Skyrim model more accurately reflects the dynamics of physical conditioning required to be proficient in a physical Skill. The ability to fight with battle axes would require a simultaneous improvement of strength, dexterity, stamina and even intelligence. The older Attribute system doesn't reflect this. The new one does because there is no one single Attribute that governs damage output the way the Strength Attribute traditionally did.
And, in a way, a lot of our feelings about the old Attribute system vs the new Skyrim model is kinda premature as we haven't had a chance to use the new system. Perhaps Bethesda will completely ruin the game due to this singular change. I happen to doubt that, but it's possible. In any event, we won't really know how well or not the new system functions until we actually play the game. I'm just not fixated on weather or not my character has X Attributes when a Skill system could presumably represent the same things. Or, Odin forbid, represent them better. :)
-
One could also make the argument that, based on those two examples, that Strength is not the key factor when determining overall (DPS) damage output from a Melee Weapon. If the strong character can only swing the battle axe once before becoming fatigued, then I'd put my money on the dude that can swing it multiple times over the guy who can only swing it once. The Skills in Skyrim represent the level of Mastery someone has in a given ability. Like fighting with battle axes. Which presumes an overall conditioning of the body to perform the Skill. Including strength, stamina, agility, etc.
I don't think it's necessary to be overly literal with the Stamina Attribute. It's primarily an energy source for performing melee attacks, just as magicka is an energy source for performing magical attacks.
-
I agree with those saying that the Fallout Attribute system was much improved over Oblivion. And unlike Oblivion, at character creation, you had the option to lower your Attributes in order to bump others up higher, which was totally cool. And for those who really lament the loss of the Attribute system I can see where you're coming from. If there was any feature in a game series that I really liked and it was done away with I would be disappointed to see it go too.
For me, in the case of Attributes, I don't have the feeling that they were central to my gaming experience. I like the newer, streamlined approach. I find it to be aesthetically appealing in the sense of stripping things down to their base essence and removing clutter. It's like E=mc2. A simple, elegant formula that works is cleaner and stronger because of it's simplicity. Einstein didn't dumb-down physics because he was able to express a lot of complicated phenomena down to a few, iconic formulas.That's how I'm looking at Skyrim. I'm imagining the developers looking at the Attributes and weighing what affects they actually have in the game world that aren't already expressed with skills and came to the conclusion that they weren't necessary.
Also, when making a character, you have a concept in your head but I don't find that the interesting parts of those concepts are reducible to things as blunt as Strength and Intelligence. A gymnast is physically strong, but in a totally different way than a weight-lifter is. A Hunter who can reliably track and hunt animals can be very intelligent in that skill set, and social intelligence is completely different from someone whose reads a lot of books. They are all different aspects of Intelligence that cannot be represented in a single, blunt Intelligence stat.
The conception I have for my first Skyrim character is a female Orc who has a complicated relationship with other races. I never played Orcs in Oblivion cuz I thought they looked awful. Now they look fantastic, so I'm playing an Orc who will be prone to be friendly toward the Beast Races, indifferent to human races and hostile toward the Elven races. Playing this kind of a character doesn't require that I have some numerical rating system of race relations. It's unnecessary. My character concept will express her self through her actions in the game. I don't need numbers to define her personality.
-
I guess I don't consider Attributes to be the defining characteristic of an RPG. In Oblivion, the mechanics of the Attribute system are clumsy. So, I cast my +10 to Strength Restoration spell in Oblivion and it doesn't even increase my damage. Instead, it just lets me carry more stuff. Then there's all this useless clutter of scrolls and potion affects and spells that either increases or lowers yours or your enemies Attributes and they're almost completely worthless.
I agree it's fun to pick Attributes at character creation and leveling, but the actual affects of those Attribute choices still revolve around making you physically tougher, better at magic, better at stealth, or better at social skills. None of this is lost with the new system. In the new system, instead of picking a few Attributes to be higher at character generation & leveling, you must roleplay your character to achieve those results in actual gameplay. Which is awesome. Nor do I see this as a dumbing down scenario either since the Attribute system doesn't have the kind of tactical depth that one finds in a strategy game. The traditional Attribute system, while having an intuitive appeal, is not exactly a complex system of anything. It's just choosing to bump up a few numbers that will predictably correspond with the kind of character you want to play: Mages bump up INT, fighters STR, rogues AGL. The very act of "choosing" these Attributes isn't really a choice at all. It's an obligatory gesture. I very much prefer the Skyrim approach of becoming the character you want to play through your actions rather than fiddling with a few numbers on a character sheet.
-
I hear ya Fatal. The only two games I'm currently looking forward to is Skyrim and the WoD MMO. I love the WoD franchise too, but, man there are so many ways for an MMO to go wrong with it. I'm not yet confident that the Eve people will make good with it.
-
Yeah, those videos are from the company hired to do work for the upcoming World of Darkness MMO. I think the awesome hair & cloth physics is great, but we'll have to wait & see how applicable they are in actual game environments when everyone's hair & clothes are blowing around like that. Will it adversely affect frame rates?
-
I also find that in first person I have difficulty judging the depth of field distance between me & my enemies. Since each swing consumes Stamina, I don't like to just swing wildly, but when I'm equipped with shorter weapons (knives, short swords) I found that I couldn't always tell if I was in striking distance of my opponent in first person. In third person, I know the attack range of various weapon's reach from my character's body and can more easily judge if I'm within striking distance or not. This also applies to the somewhat odd power attack animations that one would unlock (in Oblivion) as well.
That being said, it is fun to then play a bow or mage character and then play primarily in first person shooting at things. What tended to become tedious for me was play styles that ended up having to repetitiously switch from first to third person in combat (Start with a bow attack, then switch to sword or a touch spell for instance). I'm curious to see how such things pan out in Skyrim. I'm enthusiastically hopeful about just about everything with Skyrim.
-
I've been reading the reviews and it seems that a lot of the reviewers comment about how playing Skyrim in third person is much improved over Oblivion but they personally can't imagine playing the game that way. This feels odd to me. I guess I always assumed that the point of being in first person is the mandatory mode of all FPS games. But in games where your not shooting at things but doing combat moves, it always feels natural for me to be in third person for that.
In Oblivion, I preferred to be in third person as much as possible. I switch to first person when my character shoots a bow or a spell, but otherwise, I feel like my field of vision is too constrained in first person, I'm third person all the way and probably will be for Skyrim too. Different strokes for different folks I know, but I'd like to hear some comments from folks who play in first or third person and their reasons for their style of play.
-
I like the big spaces. I like exploring and not being able to find all of the dungeons with my first character. New Vegas didn't have the replayability for me that F3 and Oblivion did. I think you also need big spaces for skills like Alchemy and Smithing. If your ingredients are clustered together that's no good. I like how in Oblivion the different counties had different flora. I travel to these large, different spaces just for harvesting specific plants and enjoying the scenery.
-
Dark0ne: Do you have a link showing how one would "create a RAM-drive out your existing memory specifically for Skyrim"? I have 9GB of RAM on my computer and Oblivion still stutters sometimes. Thanks.
-
Argonians are hardy folk.
-
...are really beginning to show.
Ha! Thank Sheogorath!
Soon we shall have our sweet release and the long night of Skyrim shall fall upon us all!
Until then, I kinda have a little bit of insomnia over it. I'm assuming that's not a good mental health indicator... At least I'm not alone. :)
What's with the dragon hype?
in Skyrim LE
Posted