faifh
-
Posts
263 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by faifh
-
-
No he wasn't trying to simply kill the Dragonborn. The Headsman could have done that for him.
He was trying to devour his soul. The Dragonborn has the soul of a Aedra, as you could probably guess, this makes his soul really powerful.
Ergo Alduin goes to Helgen to devour Dragonborn's soul, gaining more power in the process.
No, doesn't make sense, since Alduin ignores you after Helgen (until you get the dragonrend), if that would been true, he'd just waited at the exist of the dungeon before you go down to Riversteed. Or would have attacked you the countless times he flies over you in the wilderness.
-
This has been discussed in great length:
http://www.thenexusforums.com/index.php?/topic/522524-so-why-did-alduin-decide-to-attack-helgen/
To sum it up, somewhere in between:
* After coming out of the time whirl just been mad and attacked the next townat the throat of the world (its pretty close to helgen)
* After coming out of the time whirl confused and realized only after the attack he is in a completely different timezone.
* He senses the dovakin (He says "(dragon bla bla) dovakin" somewhere at helgen!) and is just nosy what you are capable of.
* He plays with you like a cat that plays with a mouse before it eats it, just you escape.
* After the encounter he considers you puny and not worth his further attention.
* Its his idea of a welcome party (his welcome back to the world, or your welcoming).
To explain it out-of-universe: of course, just Beth wanted to start the game with a bang and never bothered to come with an explanation ex-post.
He is certainly not:
* There to kill you - otherwise he would just await you again you when you exit the dungeon, to finish his job. He also shouts unrelenting force upon you when you are at the block, a firebreath instead would have finished you off. (He tests how you react)
* There to rescue you - he kills you without any sorry if you are in his way. Nor does he ever help you again, thats why I refute these "mystic binding and helping arguments"
* There to rescue Ulfric Stormcloak - he has no idea who that guy is, since he doesn't dialogue with human affairs.
-
i dont know, two handed weapon heavy attacks ALWAYS stagger the opponent, thats pretty usefull. The benefit of one handed is only the fact that you can use a shield, but a two handed warrior is always the best damage dealer.
dual wielding beats damage output anytime. Not that it matters much in high levels.
-
If you're in town and about to sell some stuff, find a beggar and give them a coin gold, to make some more profit on what you sell. c:
Yeh, noticed that, it makes benefaction so paradox to be all just egoism again :(
-
all's fair in love and war after all!
Just because it is a stupid saying, doesn't make it true.
-
I was disappointed by the Sven-Faendal-Camilla triangle, it felt like options were missing... Camilla would've been better of without either of those morons :D
Bethesda always hypes up games with great promises that end up being cut from the final product, fortunately we have modders!
FYI, you can merry her.
-
Guys, seriously, Shield Charge could be one of the best of ANY perks, it is the ultimate CC, especially for a warrior, nothing like knocking bandits off cliffs and towers and watching them plummet to death!
I do unrelenting force shout for that.
I tested a few and came out with dual wielding, taking the other out as quick as possible seemed to be the dominant strategy, since blocking didn't do that much effect for me. Either the foe didn't hurt much -> doesn't matter. Or the foe does hurt much, and for me it did it with blocking and without, so again, rather get him out of the way as quickly as possible.
Double damage output would needed a much larger damage input decrease than there is to vote for a shield. For me at least.
-
Thirdly there is no such thing as tone in text unless someone specifies it through some way such as /sarcasm.
Eh, no. This boils down well to the very issue you seem to have. Incapability to recognize or express nuances like politeness. Well its more average than normal for gamers to be nerds and to be socially inept. For some the handicap just seems to be larger than for others.
-
[bla
You get an issue with everyone it seems. Maybe its your tone and difficulty with communicating respectfully thats wrong?
-
Well you get two nice shouts for finishing the MQ. Summon dragon and summon Sovngaard hero. These shouts make at least some sense, than some weapon/armor you end up just stashing because you crafted better a while ago.
-
What I mean is that my Enchanting skill is 100 and I have all the correct perks in the tree to enchant Armor (also Smithing) but at the bottom of the tree it says Enchanter 1/5, do I have to use my level up skill perks on that to get it to 5? If so I didn't realise you could add more than 1 level up per perk.
For some perks, you invest several times into the same perk.
-
Nope, not an option for me.
Because you lose what again? Instead of 1000000 gold you do not know what to spent it on you only have 500000 with no good use? When greed gets in your own ways ... :armscrossed: You can make endless amount of money, by buying any soul gem and weapon (doesnt matter even puny do), enchant both and sell em back with 1000 gold profit each. So why crybaby if someone gives you only 700, if you have an endless supply?
-
So because master teachers only train you up to level 90 on any ability I can't get to 5/5 on master level? That's a bit of a bummer :sad:
You got something wrong. What has the one do with the other? You get skill ups by enchanting. So from 90 to 100 you have just to enchant stuff. You get perks every few levels. So?
-
And standing stones to improve skillgain would mean you would be gimping yourself if you used a skill you didnt have "stoned".
Its not gimping, like making wrong decissions that come up with a weak character. Its just progressing slower. I suppose in Skyrim its not possible to gimp a char, its just depending on your perk choices: super-overpowered, vs. overpowered vs. very strong (with very poor perk choices).
-
I don't think its slow, you get onto top levels in no time. Other than that, while the current Perk system is waaaay better than the default Oblivion had, which was just broken, I would still prefer when perks relate to the stuff you do.
In classic D&D I always complained, so why does killing 100 Rats improve my Lockpicking? But unlocking 100 Locks does nothing? (Since there only XP matters).
While Skyrim is tons better, I still wonder, why does gaining 10 Skillups in Two-Hand-Fighting give me a new Lockpicking perk? (If I chose so).
-
Faifh, did you forget?
There is a mod that allows you to get your levels up to 300 known as Elys Uncapper (click here for it)
My bad. Should have said:
Just spent more perks on enchanting as you gain levels. If you are level 81 already, then no there is no way other than console or modding to give you more perks.
-
Faifh, did you forget?
There is a mod that allows you to get your levels up to 300 known as Elys Uncapper (click here for it)
My bad. Should have said:
Just spent more perks on enchanting as you gain levels. If you are level 81 already, then no there is no way other than console or modding to give you more perks.
-
And while I agree with you on the above, I don't agree with you on the part of synthetic speech effectively replacing actors; can't be done. Just like there is something called "bad acting", and by the way, someone on this thread pointed out how bad the voice acting was in Oblivion (I know some people don't agree, but I fully agree...Skyrim is like a huuuuge improvement over Oblivion in terms of good voice acting and emotional involvement...I can even see that Bethesda used some of the voice actors that BioWare used! Have you noticed?!), so yeah, synthetic speech even at its best is always going to sound like "bad or monotone voice acting". You simply can't replace human emotion; no substitute for it. Just like you also need today actors for your motion capture to produce the most natural looking animations for your game characters, the need for actors is never going to die no matter how technology advances. We'll need humans to show perfect, realistic animation for game characters, and we'll need actors to have emotional, engaging storytelling. But yes, synthetic speech can very much be suitable in the future for non-important characters in the game. Important characters, on the other hand, simply must be voiced with professional actors, and that need will never die.
Never is such a long time :) I give you not in the next 10 years. But 20? Think about it, how did games look 20 years ago? Tetris was the wonder hit! There is a lot of research going into voice recognition, synthesis, spectrum analysis, etc. I suppose we will just have time make its decision. I'd be happy with Oblivion-quality voice as well, if it came to a complex quantity. Yes, I think for this open world games with dialogue options, quantity rules quality (in terms of voice acting). If it will be still in our live time. I'd rather have Secret-Fire tell me in medicore acting quality, "So you know became the archmage? That was fast", rather in top acting quality "you know, if you got the aptitude, you should join the mages college in winterhold". When at the moment its just a plain stupid thing to say.
-
Hi guys, My Enchanting is at 100 but I only have 1/5 master. I have gone to Hamal but because I'm at 100 she can't teach me, is there any way I can get 5/5 so I can enchant Armor to 25%?
Just spent more perks on enchanting as you gain levels. If you are level 81 already, then no there is no way other than console to give you more perks.
-
Secondly
"lets set back all of gaming 10 years for nostalgia reasons" does not anywhere imply that ES is all of gaming.
It never implies or directly states ANYTHING is all of gaming, it was a broad and general statement. Were you are pulling this ES is all of gaming thing is beyond me but it is not in my sentence.
Dude seriously you DID.
argument: This kind of games would be better of with text only.
troll: lets set back all of gaming 10 years for nostalgia reasons
Get it? So keep your cynicism to yourself please.
-
1. You did.
2. What works for other games doesn't work for all games.
So you don't want to read a couple lines of dialogue, poor baby. WoW is a terrible example. It's a game I have no desire to play and has very little to do with any lack of voice actors it may have.
1. No I didn't, I said going back to text would make gaming go back 10 years, that does not imply that ES is all of gaming. Please learn to read.
2. It doesn't work for this game either, the simple FACT that larger more expansive games can have deep speech based conversations shows text is not needed.
3. I care not about reading text, I got use to it from every RPG from Baldur's Gate to Morrowind, however MOST PEOPLE probably don't want to read text and Bethesda as a company has to target most people with their games.
1. You did. So a) learn to know what you said, b) work on your attitude, dude. Seriously. There is hardly one you posted with that you didn't piss off.
Ignoring that sajuukkhar troll, If having to choose, because of budgetary constraints, I'd rather have text and a deep world with all kind of interaction than voice and for example stupid secret-fire still telling me to join the college, albeit I'm the archmage. I just suppose as the market works today, non-through voice acting will get bad reviews, will hurt sales :(
Its still behind the horizon, but I believe that one day, speech synthesis will that good, that it won't just even sound natural, but also non-monotonous. Already today you have a variety of different speakers available, albeit yet they all sound like robots. Who knows when it will be common place. On the other hand, remember how games looked 10 years ago? 20 years ago? So it's not too far fetched to assume such things in 10 or 20 years in future.
-
So is every living creature in Skyrim immortal if it has a soul? It can only be killed in one sense but not the other, except for dragons maybe who can be destroyed by the dragonborn? But there's no nordborn who destroys the souls of Nords, right? Wouldn't that make dragons more mortal than mortals? Else, maybe the dragonborn only absorbs and banishes dragon souls. Still, what makes Alduin any more immortal than any Nord with an immortal soul?
Sorry, been drinking the mead tonight.
Two thoughts: first it says, the dragonborn "aborbs" souls, not he destroys them. Its as far as I know left unclear what happens when the dragonborn dies. Have they become one soul? (and the dragon as seperate entity is gone), or are the dragon soals free again when the dragonborn breathed is last breath?
Secondly, in TES-soul mechanics a soul can be destroyed as well, just not as easiyl, for example Alduin who devours them.
-
Charming is also a safe way to go. Charm a bandit, then pickpocket em, if they go hostile charm em again.
-
If you enchanted the axe yourself, just sell it to him for 1400, you can always make more where that came from.
So uh... When did this happen?
in Skyrim LE
Posted
Yeh, gamers. When real freedom and privacy is at stake they just continue to whine about the CK.