Game News Todd Howard talks about his plans to dumb down Oblivion

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I registered an account here specifically to reply to this discussion.

In MW I play an assassin type character, and although I agree the games as of late are cutting down on one ability to roleplay, I feel that it is precisely that potential to imagine and truly make the game experience personal that is one of the most important things that can be included in any rpg.

In my mind, imagining personal experiences is pants when it comes to a CRPG if they can't be played or are irrelevant to the game. Imagination is pretty important when it comes to playing an RPG, but mostly on its pen and paper medium. In an electronic medium, simply imagining things won't cut it. I could sit all day imagining something or other about my character, but the electronic CRPG will never recognize it. It can only work with what it has. I can pretend I'm playing a farway adventurer, a dastardly thief, a suave gunslinger, or a techie that's been removed from his timeline and placed in another one - but so what? The game is never going to recognize it, unless it gives me the chance to play those roles. I could just as well imagine all these things myself without playing the game, and the end result will end up being the same - it won't matter. It won't have an application.

If anything, one of the most important things that can be included in an RPG is not the potential for us to imagine as is, it's the potential for us to imagine characters and situations directly relating to the game itself. If I'm imagining a character which cannot fit into that gameworld then that means the game is making a pretty poor job of captivating me. If on the other hand I'm imagining characters and sitiuations which have immediate inspiration and application in it, I'd say the game is doing a great job as an RPG.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

If anything, one of the most important things that can be included in an RPG is not the potential for us to imagine as is, it's the potential for us to imagine characters and situations directly relating to the game itself. If I'm imagining a character which cannot fit into that gameworld then that means the game is making a pretty poor job of captivating me. If on the other hand I'm imagining characters and sitiuations which have immediate inspiration and application in it, I'd say the game is doing a great job as an RPG.

Hence my deep affection for Daggerfall. Okay, so it had bugs, but all the skills in the game did serve a purpose (although some were very minor and barely noticeable) and it allowed the player to pretty much conjure up any fantasy setting type character they could imagine.

I have delved into the deepest machinations of that game and can tell you from years of experience with it's engine that just about any character imaginable is possible and playable to the extent that character should be.

Say you would like to play a Bard for instance. Okay, so the game doesn't allow for singing, BUT you could take language skills for basically the same purpose. In case some of you didn't know, the higher your skill in a language, the less chance a creature of that type would attack you in the wilderness or in a dungeon. Hence, you could pump up your Dwemer language and now your bard is good at charming dwemer into thinking he's a pretty cool guy and they won't attack.

Things like that are what make the game immersive for me, despite all it's flaws. For the most part, they were not game killing with the exception of the void bug which never got fixed. A workaround did get put in however in the form of the F11 cheat.

Anyways, I agree with RP on that entire subject. If I have to pretend I'm so and so, but the game doesn't really allow for that, then it's just no fun.

 

[taks]

Argument from hyperbole really sucks, VD. Since when did they ever say anything about getting rid of every weapon besides the sword?

It's called analogy, Rex. It's absolutely the same logic. Most people don't use (allegedly) weapon B, so let's get rid of it and focus on weapon A.

no, it's called the "slippery slope" argument and constitutes a logical fallacy. it's not an analogy at all.

taks

 

[kornostar]

my balls are inhumanly gargantuan. i have weasles in my pantaloons. Inform the queen, so that he might shoo them away.

 

[whitemithrandir]

Now why can't you folks just make the bow more difficult to use than crossbows (make it arc more dramatically so it's nigh-near impossible to snipe far away targets)? Or make up a charging time for slings? Or give thrown weapons greatly reduced range? This would put the ranged weapons in their respective places. As many have said, reducing the amount of options to make a few better isn't captalizing on an RPG's greatest asset: Options.

Your main reason for getting rid of other weapons is one of balance, that can easily solved by making each ranged weapons unique. In Morrowind, all projectiles followed a straight path with near the same reload times. Now, if you gave the arrow an arc and slower flying time while making the bolt fast and accurate, it would give the player a tactical choice based on the battle situation. There's a pack of nix-hounds below the hill. Should I find high ground and use the bow, so the arc follows easier, or charge down the hill while striking it accurately with bolts? Conversely, I could use a sling and charge it up (animation of sling spinning as you twirl it) and wait for the hound to charge me before releasing the trigger?

All it takes to make the weapons unique aren't fancy animations or graphical improvements, but minor tweaks such as reloading time vs damage, range vs. accuracy, and versatility vs. effectiveness.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Argument from hyperbole really sucks, VD. Since when did they ever say anything about getting rid of every weapon besides the sword?

It's called analogy, Rex. It's absolutely the same logic. Most people don't use (allegedly) weapon B, so let's get rid of it and focus on weapon A.

no, it's called the "slippery slope" argument and constitutes a logical fallacy. it's not an analogy at all.

taks

Really? Care to explain why? Btw, nice of you to join the discussion and quote stuff that's weeks old. Now I have to take a break from playing Gothic II (highly recommend to anyone) and listen to your foolishness.

 

[Nutcracker]

<b>Todd Howard</b> has addressed the fans of <a href=http://www.elderscrolls.com/home/home.htm>The Elder Scrolls</a> game in this <a href=http://www.elderscrolls.com/codex/team_rpgnextgen.htm>letter/message</a> where he explores a popular topic <i>How do we create the definitive RPG for the Next Generation?</i>

<blockquote>What!!?? No thrown items and crossbows? Hear me out here, because it will let you into our thought process. When we look at characters that like to do ranged combat, they mostly want to use bows and arrows. So instead of doing many types of ranged combat, we decided to stick with bows and arrows -- but -- it's a grand implementation of bows and arrows. You feel the string draw, arrows arc properly, bounce realistically, and stick deep into the right materials. You can see the quiver on your back and type of arrows you have and there are tons of different bows and arrow types. So we trade having several types of ranged combat done in an average way, and get bows done in a grand way.</blockquote>
How about making several types of ranged combat in a grand way and letting people choose? What happened to that "we are all crazy about choices" line? It's like if they said: "Since most people like to use swords, we've decided to throw out everything else, but make swords really cool". Sounds stupid, Todd? Well, there you go.

In terms of dumbing down, i think ranged weapons should be the least of your worries.

 

[aweigh]

Holy thread revival, Batman.

As if we didn't have enough Oblivion threads, now we gotta start gravedigging 2 year old threads?

 

[Thrawn05]

Holy thread revival, Batman.

As if we didn't have enough Oblivion threads, now we gotta start gravedigging 2 year old threads?

Must be a slow week already.

 

[Astromarine]

no, nutcracker is just a slow motherfucker.

 

[Twinfalls]

So instead of doing many types of ranged combat, we decided to stick with bows and arrows -- but -- it's a grand implementation of bows and arrows. You feel the string draw, arrows arc properly, bounce realistically, and stick deep into the right materials. You can see the quiver on your back and type of arrows you have and there are tons of different bows and arrow types. So we trade having several types of ranged combat done in an average way, and get bows done in a grand way.

AHAAAhahahahaaaa!

Thief 1 had better bow animation.

Thankyou nutcracker the thread necro monster

 

[whitemithrandir]

Now why can't you folks just make the bow more difficult to use than crossbows (make it arc more dramatically so it's nigh-near impossible to snipe far away targets)? Or make up a charging time for slings? Or give thrown weapons greatly reduced range? This would put the ranged weapons in their respective places. As many have said, reducing the amount of options to make a few better isn't captalizing on an RPG's greatest asset: Options.

Your main reason for getting rid of other weapons is one of balance, that can easily solved by making each ranged weapons unique. In Morrowind, all projectiles followed a straight path with near the same reload times. Now, if you gave the arrow an arc and slower flying time while making the bolt fast and accurate, it would give the player a tactical choice based on the battle situation. There's a pack of nix-hounds below the hill. Should I find high ground and use the bow, so the arc follows easier, or charge down the hill while striking it accurately with bolts? Conversely, I could use a sling and charge it up (animation of sling spinning as you twirl it) and wait for the hound to charge me before releasing the trigger?

All it takes to make the weapons unique aren't fancy animations or graphical improvements, but minor tweaks such as reloading time vs damage, range vs. accuracy, and versatility vs. effectiveness.

Holy shit. This was posted back in the days when I actually cared about stuff.

 

[Lumpy]

Who the fuck keeps necroing all these threads? And why?

 

[whitemithrandir]

Who the fuck keeps necroing all these threads? And why?

Don't pretend you don't like it.

Thread necromancy turns you on. It makes you hot.

Don't lie.

I know all about your fetishes.

 

[Gambler]

Argument from hyperbole really sucks, VD. Since when did they ever say anything about getting rid of every weapon besides the sword?

It's called analogy, Rex. It's absolutely the same logic. Most people don't use (allegedly) weapon B, so let's get rid of it and focus on weapon A.

no, it's called the "slippery slope" argument and constitutes a logical fallacy. it's not an analogy at all.

You ignore completely valid comparison and justify yourself by labeling opponent's statement as a logical fallacy. Which it is not.

"The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question." It has nothing to do with comparisons.

 

[Thrawn05]

Who the fuck keeps necroing all these threads? And why?

Don't pretend you don't like it.

Thread necromancy turns you on. It makes you hot.

Don't lie.

I know all about your fetishes.

What's the fine for Thread Necrophelia here in the Codex anyway?

 

[aweigh]

Around 500 r00fles.

 

[Thrawn05]

Around 500 r00fles.

Wow, that's a lot less then at the TES forums.