Why I love Skyrim

[CerberusGate]

even shallower than skyrim.

Tell me you're joking.

I understand the gameplay being boring comment but Planescape: Torment being shallower than Skyrim? What bootleg were you playing to get that idea?

Yeah, a much better approach for a game like Skyrim would be if the damage of your weapon was at least somewhat tied to your skills. So the higher your skill was with a certain weapon, the more damage you could dish out. I am not saying that would fix the problem completely, but at least it would help somewhat in making items that you grow fond of usefull even in the later parts of the game.

Basically, Skyrim should have implemented RPG mechanics in their walking simulator that they dub as an RPG?

 

[joevonzombie]

I mean I dont blame someone for liking Skyrim more than PT, PT is really well written but its really boring to play and even shallower than skyrim.

Yeah no, PT is easily one of the best written and most reactive games ever made.

 

[Supreme Shah Ismail]

Yeah no, PT is easily one of the best written and most reactive games ever made.

I never said it wasnt. Its reactive and well written. Its gameplay is really sub par tho. Combat is atrocious and there is only one proper way to experience the game. The combat and rpg mechanics lack depth of fallout or baldurs gate. But I would take the witcher 3 another well written and reactive games but with a lot more engaging gameplay and rpg mechanics.

This is purely personal preference but I will take a game that is fun with poor story vs a well written game with bad game play any day.

 

[Supreme Shah Ismail]

Tell me you're joking.

I understand the gameplay being boring comment but Planescape: Torment being shallower than Skyrim? What bootleg were you playing to get that idea?


Basically, Skyrim should have implemented RPG mechanics in their walking simulator that they dub as an RPG?

I meant its gameplay? Im not talking about its story or choices/reactivity. Im also not stating "I love skyrim" either I think its kinda boring. I mean an RPG has also got to have half decent mechanics right? Terrible combat that has to be avoided, a singular "best way" to experience it, and etc. I mean honestly at least Fallout had some exploration and half decent combat going for it as well well written/reactive. Vs what exactly in Planescape torment?

 

[Supreme Shah Ismail]

Boring is just subjective, and SHALLOWER? What? Skyrim, a game with the vastness of an ocean but the depth of the puddle, somehow managed to be deeper than THE Best Written RPG of All Time™?

Care to elaborate?

Sorry for the triple post guys. Had to respond to three people at once. I am in no way saying in terms of WRITING, CHOICE OR REACTIVITY IS IT BETTER. NOR AM I SAYING THAT SKYRIM HAS MORE CREATIVE/WELL WRITTEN QUESTS. Nor am I saying I like skyrim more (I think they are both fairly boring games). I personally feel gameplay is king. Thus I value it SLIGHTLY more than I do narrative. I feel in terms of ways to play it in terms of classes, weapons, skills and etc it has more depth. Because honestly playing PT is sub par in every way without focusing on wisdom/intil and avoiding combat at all costs (a mechanic mind you that has often forced encounters)

I feel a game needs to have some value as a game too. Yes the last of us may have a moving story but its gameplay is still every third person cover action stealth game in the past few years. I like games to be engaging on both fronts.

 

[a721402]

I meant its gameplay? Im not talking about its story or choices/reactivity. Im also not stating "I love skyrim" either I think its kinda boring. I mean an RPG has also got to have half decent mechanics right? Terrible combat that has to be avoided, a singular "best way" to experience it, and etc. I mean honestly at least Fallout had some exploration and half decent combat going for it as well well written/reactive. Vs what exactly in Planescape torment?

Excpet choices and consequences in RPG also is part of game play, that's why a RPG call RPG, Role Playing Game is all about what kind of character you want to be in the world, and what kind of choice the character will make, and what consequence he/she will suffer.

And triple post against the rule.

 

[Supreme Shah Ismail]

Excpet choices and consequences in RPG also is part of game play, that's why a RPG call RPG, Role Playing Game is all about what kind of character you want to be in the world, and what kind of choice the character will make, and what consequence he/she will suffer.

What about Dark Souls or System shock 2? Are they not RPG's despite the lack of conversations or traditional choices? Defining an RPG is rather hard and while I do agree that is a major and important aspect to RPG's if there was a game (Im not saying PT is like this just an example) that involved minutes upon minutes of endless dull combat and backtracking but with good choice/writing is it a great RPG? Its simply a personal opinion and I don't think PT is a bad game..But as great as the story is I dont think the gameplay is any good. This is why im more interested in the new Torment as it for goes random combat encounters for deep multi option encounters and a greater focus on adventuring/narrative.

Also note to any mods out there so sorry about triple post. :/

 

[Crni Vuk]

Well, this has been discussed a thousand times already and when it comes to RPGs, it really is helpfull to look at the 'history' of the compute RPGs and what the designers tried to achieve. You will find a lot of 'old' RPGs that had no choices&consequences with quests or even much of a story but what they had was a complex stat based mechanic. And that is what defined RPGs in the past at least. Numbers. Lots and lots of numbers. So I would say, if you really want to be anal, the big difference is the use of skills to define your character. It doesn't have to be necessarily a part of the story like with choices and consquences, albeit it is a huge bonus if it does.

However, to many games today give you like fake-choices or a little bit of dialog and call them self RPGs, while totally ignoring what 'Role Playing' really means from a gameplay perspective, where the only difference today is that a Wizard is throwing fireballs, a thief arrows and a paladin is using a big giant sword and all of them ... kill something. But from a very crude point of view, a Wizard was supposed to be like Gandalf, a warrior like Aragorn and a thief more or less like the Hobbits. If you take a game like Skyrim or Mass Effect, your choice here, doesn't have really much of an impact on the game, as every character can pretty much do everything.

I think people to often confuse choices and consequences with freedom today, where they simply want a sandbox to fullfill some powerfantasy. And this is reflected by the narrative as well, where you're never really 'excluded' from anything based on your class or choices with the stats. I think Dragonage really did a decent job with the different beginings, depending on your 'class' but sadly, it didn't really played much of a role in the later part of the game.

 

[Risewild]

Sorry for the triple post guys. Had to respond to three people at once. I am in no way saying in terms of WRITING, CHOICE OR REACTIVITY IS IT BETTER. NOR AM I SAYING THAT SKYRIM HAS MORE CREATIVE/WELL WRITTEN QUESTS. Nor am I saying I like skyrim more (I think they are both fairly boring games). I personally feel gameplay is king. Thus I value it SLIGHTLY more than I do narrative. I feel in terms of ways to play it in terms of classes, weapons, skills and etc it has more depth. Because honestly playing PT is sub par in every way without focusing on wisdom/intil and avoiding combat at all costs (a mechanic mind you that has often forced encounters)

I feel a game needs to have some value as a game too. Yes the last of us may have a moving story but its gameplay is still every third person cover action stealth game in the past few years. I like games to be engaging on both fronts.

You can reply to one post/person, then after you reply to that post/person just use the reply button on the bottom right while still writing your post to reply to the second person in the same post and so on.
I don't think I ever said post so many times in such short text.

 

[Black Angel]

Sorry for the triple post guys. Had to respond to three people at once. I am in no way saying in terms of WRITING, CHOICE OR REACTIVITY IS IT BETTER. NOR AM I SAYING THAT SKYRIM HAS MORE CREATIVE/WELL WRITTEN QUESTS. Nor am I saying I like skyrim more (I think they are both fairly boring games). I personally feel gameplay is king. Thus I value it SLIGHTLY more than I do narrative. I feel in terms of ways to play it in terms of classes, weapons, skills and etc it has more depth. Because honestly playing PT is sub par in every way without focusing on wisdom/intil and avoiding combat at all costs (a mechanic mind you that has often forced encounters)

I feel a game needs to have some value as a game too. Yes the last of us may have a moving story but its gameplay is still every third person cover action stealth game in the past few years. I like games to be engaging on both fronts.

But what does gameplay you meant, here? Combat? Because combat is just an aspect of the gameplay in RPGs. Unless you're a combatfag, combat doesn't necessarily constitute the entirety of gameplay.

Yes, PS:T had crap combat mechanics, but the other aspect of gameplay such as skill checks and reactivity were absolutely top-notch, so it has good overall gameplay. You can still play PS:T for the combat and still get skill checks and reactivity, but the experience would probably felt sub-par in comparison to when you play PS:T purely for the story. But again, that doesn't necessarily means it's a game with bad gameplay, but rather it's a game with bad combat mechanics.

Saying PS:T had bad gameplay because of bad combat mechanic, is similar to saying New Vegas had bad gameplay because of its shooting mechanics is inferior to that of Fallout 4's.

What about Dark Souls or System shock 2? Are they not RPG's despite the lack of conversations or traditional choices? Defining an RPG is rather hard and while I do agree that is a major and important aspect to RPG's if there was a game (Im not saying PT is like this just an example) that involved minutes upon minutes of endless dull combat and backtracking but with good choice/writing is it a great RPG? Its simply a personal opinion and I don't think PT is a bad game..But as great as the story is I dont think the gameplay is any good. This is why im more interested in the new Torment as it for goes random combat encounters for deep multi option encounters and a greater focus on adventuring/narrative.

Also note to any mods out there so sorry about triple post. :/

Dark Souls is an Action-RPG (ARPG), since the game is action first, role-playing second. Especially since the combat mechanic of Dark Souls required ~99% of player's input (with 1% being the character's stats input, like Strength/Dexterity/Intelligence/Faith requirement for weapons/spells/miracles), so its RPG aspect is not even comparable to that of any cRPGs ever. Haven't played System Shock 2 past the tutorial, but I imagine there won't be any skill checks found in other cRPGs, so I'm going to assume it's a shooter game first, role-playing second (correct me if I'm wrong).

Honestly, I can never understand why anyone would want to play Skyrim for its vanilla combat. It's an absolute slugfest, doesn't even require any slight bits of thinking, just click-click-click if your target has no shield, or spam power-attacks against shield, or just exploit the shit AI by sitting there sneaking and shoot arrows once in a while. The first time I played Skyrim I played by exploiting back-stabs and sneak arrows, since the melee is atrocious. Now, though, having been baptized by the Fire that is Dark Souls, I can never, ever go back to Skyrim, even if I would exploit back-stabs and sneak arrows like I did once.

 

[Walpknut]

A better solution would be to not fucking level scale damage on weapons. Because it's retarded.

 

[CerberusGate]

I mean honestly at least Fallout had some exploration and half decent combat going for it as well well written/reactive. Vs what exactly in Planescape torment?

Planescape had some amazing writing and plenty of reactive c&c. Planescape had exploration due to requiring actual thought processes from players to resolve quests.

The combat was boring and barely passable yes, but the role-playing value of Planescape was present since players can pick so many dialogue options (even choosing whether what you are saying is a lie/truth or whether you are making a legit vow) and make plenty of decisions based on the role you play. Plus, the stats do have an effect in game (especially Wisdom which affects how much the TNO can recall of his old memories and what dialogue options are there).

So, I have to disagree . Planescape had a lot going for it as well and to me, it was, and still is, my all-time favorite game. It's just that combat was not the main focus and it really shows.

Let's simply agree to disagree.

 

[eissa]

i'm always thinking torment is just another way for MCA to experimenting in writing that sadly ending with him paying lack attention to combat development.

the new torment offer interesting setting, being set in in far future with extreme time-skip like W40k. It also appear to have decent combat which could be good or bad depending on how you view wasteland 2 as it is

 

[Crni Vuk]

Has technology progressed as well? Would seem a bit strange if nothing changed at all, particularly after 40 000 years have passed. But, I really don't know much about the new Torment anyway, to be honest.

But speaking about it, and I think someone mentioned it about Skyrim as well and now that I am thinking about it, it really bothers me somewhat. I mean a lot of time has passed between the first Elderscrolls game and Skyrim. And yet ... it really seems like everything is in stagnation, magic got even ... worse (But that's Beth simplyfing everything with each new game ...). I mean for fucks sake, did no one bothered to develope some technolgy out there? Steam engines? New Materials? Muskets or Flintstocks maybe? New inventions and materials leading to better and more advanced architecture. No clue. At least they introduced crossbows with their Vampire DLC ... took them long enough. But just look at what happend in our world alone between 1100 and 1600.

 

[Deleted member 93956]

But what does gameplay you meant, here? Combat? Because combat is just an aspect of the gameplay in RPGs. Unless you're a combatfag, combat doesn't necessarily constitute the entirety of gameplay.

Yes, PS:T had crap combat mechanics, but the other aspect of gameplay such as skill checks and reactivity were absolutely top-notch, so it has good overall gameplay. You can still play PS:T for the combat and still get skill checks and reactivity, but the experience would probably felt sub-par in comparison to when you play PS:T purely for the story. But again, that doesn't necessarily means it's a game with bad gameplay, but rather it's a game with bad combat mechanics.

Saying PS:T had bad gameplay because of bad combat mechanic, is similar to saying New Vegas had bad gameplay because of its shooting mechanics is inferior to that of Fallout 4's.


Dark Souls is an Action-RPG (ARPG), since the game is action first, role-playing second. Especially since the combat mechanic of Dark Souls required ~99% of player's input (with 1% being the character's stats input, like Strength/Dexterity/Intelligence/Faith requirement for weapons/spells/miracles), so its RPG aspect is not even comparable to that of any cRPGs ever. Haven't played System Shock 2 past the tutorial, but I imagine there won't be any skill checks found in other cRPGs, so I'm going to assume it's a shooter game first, role-playing second (correct me if I'm wrong).

Honestly, I can never understand why anyone would want to play Skyrim for its vanilla combat. It's an absolute slugfest, doesn't even require any slight bits of thinking, just click-click-click if your target has no shield, or spam power-attacks against shield, or just exploit the shit AI by sitting there sneaking and shoot arrows once in a while. The first time I played Skyrim I played by exploiting back-stabs and sneak arrows, since the melee is atrocious. Now, though, having been baptized by the Fire that is Dark Souls, I can never, ever go back to Skyrim, even if I would exploit back-stabs and sneak arrows like I did once.

Dark Souls can be called too a Hack n'Slash (if a slug paced one).
It would be pretty fuckin' Nito if there was one with some extra "Skill Checks" like the ones you get to use sorcery merchants and join certain covenants. Probably that's require a separate point in level up to sink into non-combat stats.

 

[joevonzombie]

I never said it wasnt. Its reactive and well written. Its gameplay is really sub par tho. Combat is atrocious and there is only one proper way to experience the game. The combat and rpg mechanics lack depth of fallout or baldurs gate. But I would take the witcher 3 another well written and reactive games but with a lot more engaging gameplay and rpg mechanics.

This is purely personal preference but I will take a game that is fun with poor story vs a well written game with bad game play any day.

The combat in Planescape is at least inoffensive and doesn't get in the way of the experience the same way that it does in both Skyrim and The Witcher 3. Both games' combat is a button mashing spam fest. Also The Witcher 3 is not a mechanically deep game on any real level. The majority of Role Playing comes directly from dialogue that you can't really manipulate. There's no real role playing system under the hood. You can bribe folks and use the ONE skill you get from Axii which doesn't ever fail. Also I do not personally consider System Shock 2 or The Souls games RPGs. They are action games with heavy RPG elements.

 

[Risewild]

But speaking about it, and I think someone mentioned it about Skyrim as well and now that I am thinking about it, it really bothers me somewhat. I mean a lot of time has passed between the first Elderscrolls game and Skyrim. And yet ... it really seems like everything is in stagnation, magic got even ... worse (But that's Beth simplyfing everything with each new game ...)

I can say that magic did indeed got worst, the levitation spells disappeared from the face of Nirn.

 

[Hassknecht]

I can say that magic did indeed got worst, the levitation spells disappeared from the face of Nirn.

Man, so much just disappeared, not just in magic... The distinction between chameleon and invisibility spells, Mark & Recall as well as Divine Intervention, Silence, Sound, Waterwalking, Fortify Acrobatics/Slowfall, Open/Lock, the entire section of Mysticism, different damage numbers for attack directions for weapons (hack, slash, stab), staves, distinction between blades, axes, and blunt weapons, medium and unarmoured skills, hand-to-hand, athletics...

 

[Deleted member 93956]

Man, so much just disappeared, not just in magic... The distinction between chameleon and invisibility spells, Mark & Recall as well as Divine Intervention, Silence, Sound, Waterwalking, Fortify Acrobatics/Slowfall, Open/Lock, the entire section of Mysticism, different damage numbers for attack directions for weapons (hack, slash, stab), staves, distinction between blades, axes, and blunt weapons, medium and unarmoured skills, hand-to-hand, athletics...

- charisma and originality...

 

[Risewild]

Man, so much just disappeared, not just in magic... The distinction between chameleon and invisibility spells, Mark & Recall as well as Divine Intervention, Silence, Sound, Waterwalking, Fortify Acrobatics/Slowfall, Open/Lock, the entire section of Mysticism, different damage numbers for attack directions for weapons (hack, slash, stab), staves, distinction between blades, axes, and blunt weapons, medium and unarmoured skills, hand-to-hand, athletics...

I remember in Morrowind I would start punching Kwama Foragers right away to increase my hand-to-hand, in Skyrim I always play with a Khajiit and since there is no more hand-to-hand skill I beat up every Nord muscle head on the punching fights (that we can have with some NPCs n some settlements)... All becasue Khajiits have a bonus to unarmed damage... The NPCs can't increase their unarmed damage in any way (because there is no more skill for that, while in Morrowind we could have each NPC with a different value for that skill and have some being easier and others harder) so I win easily.