The Official Skyrim Thread

[D-Lyrium]

Find me a source, not VGCharts, that says that.

 

VG Charts only counts sales that are in stores. Which is why TF2 can be the most played game on Steam (well... 3rd most, now) and shows exactly 0 sales.

 

 

 

VGChartz, which I would guess is your source, showed 4,368,055 million units sold across all platforms in the first week. Of those, 1,606,641 were on PS3, 2,274,233 were on Xbox 360, and 487,181 were on PC. (36.8% PS3, 52.1% 360, 11.1% PC)

 

Here's the thing... Battlefield 3 sold more than 5 million units in the first week. Since MOST PC players use digital distribution methods, where FEW if any console players use digital distribution, I'm gonna use slightly optimistic numbers and throw that lot in for PC. Which puts their sales at 1,119,126 units sold if we stand hard on the 5 million number.

 

Which brings the sum out to a much more even 33% PS3, 22% PC, 45% 360. Keeping in mind, of course, that PC sales tend to be pretty stable, while PS3 and 360 sales both tend to level off very quickly after the first 6-10 weeks, aside from Christmas buys which tend to be a quick sales boost for any title that is even remotely popular.

 

QFT.

 

The reason PC "sales figures" are so "rubbish" is that the majority don't count services like Steam and GamersGate. Most brick-and-mortar stores these days have a really small PC games section, often only the top ten charting games and a shelf for left over copies of said games when they drop out of the chart. Gamestation doesn't even sell PC games, at all. At least in my local store.

 

The notion that the PC isn't a popular platform for gaming is completely untrue, and largely perpetuated by companies like Gamestop and Gamestation, who would really like that to be true. Because they're making an absolute killing from second hand console game sales (which the games companies don't see a penny of), and would really quite like it if people bought more stuff from them.

 

PC gaming will never die out. Why do you think games like Starcraft 2, TF2 and in the olden days Counterstrike, have such huge online communities and competitive e-sports scenes? What about League of Legends, HON, DOTA? Hell, World of Warcraft? Two reasons: PC games are far more moddable, customisable and community-driven than console games. Consoles are fantastic for picking up and playing games to waste a few hours. But there are two things a console can't really ever expect to compete in: Truly competitive FPS games (even the same game on console and PC is different. You just can't have a competitive FPS on a console. The control method is not capable of it, scientific fact0), and real-time strategies (ahhhh, Command and Conquer on the PSOne. How hard ye tried, much ye failed). PC will always win in those genres. And lets face it, even games like Skyrim, which work perfectly well on a console as a game, are more of an experience on the PC, with the modding and the enhanced graphics. It's kinda like watching a DVD vs. going to the cinema...

 

Why do you think they're starting to do deals with developers to offer 'awesome' pre-order deals and extra pre-order content? Because they don't want Steam taking their money away. Because they know most people will much prefer to sit at home and download their game from Steam or GG, rather than going into a store, waiting in a queue, being snarled at by the ugly bastard student behind the counter, and then returning home with their game (which has cost them more, for the two page leaflet that passes for a manual these days).

 

Hell, they basically forced Volition to not put Saint's Row the Third on Steam at all, because of the agreements they'd come to for pre-order deals.

 

I'm not quite sure where this rant started? What topic am I in?

 

Yeah, in short... physical game stores are all evil and should be ripped apart by dragons.

[bigtplaystew]

Just making a comment about my earlier point that the quests were generic. I'm starting to strongly disagree with my initial assessment. The early game is blah whatever. But now that I'm into it, the quests have been really interesting and deep. I'm only playing the game on days off when I have several hours at a time to play it, and you know what? That's the way to play.

 

I'm a working adult and a college student so like many of you I'm sure, time isn't always a luxury I can afford to have. So when I game, I'm generally burning through the story mode and what not. Skyrim isn't made for that. It's made for those who can sink their teeth into the lore (at least a little bit) and take the time to really travel from place to place. To discover little chunks of the world and uncover it's secrets.

 

Luckily, my schedule lightened up a bit the last week or so. Once I forced myself to care about the world of Skyrim, I found myself deeply immersed. Honestly, it's one of the best games I have ever played. Almost 20 hours in and loving every second of it.

[lazorbeak]

Started playing yesterday and it looks great. My only silly complaint is I didn't like that I was able to pick up a hunter's bow with my breton mage character and still do reasonable damage. I kind of miss the specialization aspect of Morrowind and to a lesser extent Oblivion where if you were the wrong race and class, a skill would be completely useless to you.

[D-Lyrium]

Man, the more I play of this, the more I love it. I love how every dungeon is unique, instead of generic and pseudo-randomly-generated like in Oblivion. Some of the traps are really cool. Easy enough to spot if you're not paying attention, but concealed enough to not be obvious if you're not.

 

Some of them are clearly designed to catch you out if you've got an NPC in tow, too (especially the pressure plate spikes, which send spikes jutting out from the wall a few paces in front of the pressure plate. I wondered what the point was, then Lydia made several attempts on my life and I soon woke up to that particular threat...).

 

Just about to go up to High Hrothgar now, having just fought a random dragon in the forest. That was a bit nervy... (apparently the dragon wasn't so random, but I didn't get the quest from the innkeeper so I had no idea. Strange, because I got his other quest).

 

I'm loving the Beowulf feel to the early part of the game too. Especially if you played the abysmal Beowulf game on 360. Skyrim is how that was supposed to look.

 

Started playing yesterday and it looks great. My only silly complaint is I didn't like that I was able to pick up a hunter's bow with my breton mage character and still do reasonable damage. I kind of miss the specialization aspect of Morrowind and to a lesser extent Oblivion where if you were the wrong race and class, a skill would be completely useless to you.

 

Don't agree, at all. To be honest.

 

There's nothing to say during character creation "I am a mage". Sure, being a Breton gives you a higher affinity for magic, but it doesn't force you to be a mage. High Rock has warriors and thieves and bards too (hell, there's a Breton shopkeeper in Whiterun. He's not very magical... he's got the Breton attitude and personality down pat, though ).

 

I love the fact that you can use whatever you like, weapon wise. If Skyrim were real, there'd be nothing stopping me picking up a bow and firing it. Sure, I'd probably miss (I do in the game. >.

 

The fact that you do "reasonable damage" is because you do bugger all damage with any other weapon at this point, because your skills start off pretty level (with the exception of race bonuses). If you haven't levelled up your other skills much, you should expect to do about the same damage with a sword as with a bow, and slightly more with spells (because you're Breton).

 

When you're high level, if you haven't touched a bow all game your damage with it will be relatively pathetic. That's not because you're doing less damage with the bow "because you're a mage" it's just that you're doing a lot MORE damage with whatever your chosen methods of killinating things happen to be.

 

I'm only level 7 (playing as a Nord specialising in dual-wielding axes), but already there's a noticeable difference between hitting something with a one-handed axe (35 skill) and hitting something with a bow (18 skill because I only really use it for slowing down deer, foxes, etc. I also use it for shooting down lanterns into puddles of oil, but I don't think that counts towards my skill because I'm not actually doing any damage directly).

 

I think the fact that the game doesn't force you into specific classes (but does make you significantly stronger if you stick to one instead of mix-and-matching). is great. Reminds me of Dungeon Siege in that respect (very good thing). You can be whatever you want to be, react to situations as they arise, etc.

 

I mean, if I was to face a really hard-hitting enemy right now, I might want to use a shield. My block skill isn't great at all, but shield > no shield. It'd be a bit sucky if I wasn't allowed to equip a shield because I didn't have enough Block skill. I've never picked up a shield in reality, but I'm fairly confident I'd be able to do so if the need and opportunity arose. Would I be able to effectively defend myself with it? No. But if my last encounter with a Restless Draugr is anything to go by, neither can my character. ¬_¬

[lazorbeak]

Did you miss the part where I called it a "silly little complaint"? I totally understand why it's there and how it works and it's fine. It's just something I miss from the old Elder Scrolls games- that you had to really focus with certain skills or have a natural affinity to get anything out of them at all.

[D-Lyrium]

I know you weren't making a big deal of it, I just thought I'd put my two cents in, because it's not something I miss at all. That's what forums are for, right?

[Linsolv]

I will say this: I agree with your concept, D-Lyrium, but I do feel like you don't really get any advantage for specializing, especially past level 15 or so.

[jesterx7769]

I will say this: I agree with your concept, D-Lyrium, but I do feel like you don't really get any advantage for specializing, especially past level 15 or so.

 

You get a HUGE advantage for specializing, have you looked at the skill tree? If you are doing one handed swords for example, get all 5 one handed bonuses (equaling 100% more, get the three sword critical hit bonus so you have 20% chance of critcial hit, thats going to really really increase the damage you do with a one handed sword.

 

Same thing with armor. If you go the heavy armor route, Juggernaut gives you a 100% bonus, well fitted gives you 25%, then matching set gives you 25% for a total of a 150% bonus.

 

Specializing in a weapon/armor basically doubles its standard stats for a simple rule.

[D-Lyrium]

Not to mention the cool things you can get from the weapon-specific trees (axes making opponents bleed for longer, dual-wielding increasing attack speed, etc) and spells (Conjuration spells lasting longer (Raise Dead, for example), spells in your chosen school can be cast at HALF their magika value. Freakin' HALF).

 

Hell, a Thief who doesn't bother to specialise will be pretty useless as a thief, since his sneak attacks will do normal damage. As opposed to FIFTEEN TIMES normal damage (with a dagger. 6x with a larger one handed weapon). Not to mention the fact that he can make himself completely silent, able to move (and even run) without being detected, and even disappear in the middle of combat momentarily.

 

That's not even mentioning the 'little' perks that on the surface don't seem like much, but end up mounting up to quite a big advantage (moving at normal speed with your bow drawn, for instance. Or even just the ability to zoom with your bow).

 

Late-game (and even mid-game), specialisation makes a huuuuuuge difference.

 

Admittedly, I'm not sure there's any benefit to restricting yourself to perks from the same 'class' (other than the obvious bonus that you get more of them because you're not spending points elsewhere). For instance, I wear light armour and not heavy armour, but I use one-handed weapons. So that's technically taking perks from two different 'classes' (Thief and Warrior). Later on I'll almost certainly grab a few of the low-level perks from Enchanting (namely the fire enchant bonuses, because let's face it, flaming axes are badass enough, but they're even more badass when they actually do ridiculous amounts of damage).

 

I'm pretty sure that's expected of you though, since otherwise a truly dedicated Thief would have no weapon bonuses at all (other than the 15/6x multiplier from the Sneak tree, but realistically he only gets that once per fight, most of the time). Which would hamstring him quite a lot, I'd imagine, at higher levels. And when was the last time you saw a ranger wearing heavy armour?

 

The Mage is actually probably the only class that's actually viable to select perks purely from his own perk trees, since pure mages rarely do anything other than cast spells. You can get armour from spells, you can do damage with spells, you can make yourself invisible and move silently with spells, if you're not powerful enough to kill an enemy, you can make his friends kill him for you.. you can even summon physical weapons from spells.

 

I'm not sure if there's a lockpicking spell any more, but that's about the only thing a mage can't do (and let's face it, it's pretty easy anyway without perks).

 

So yeah... there's plenty of specialisation available, all of it useful, without once being told you can't do something just because the game has decided it's outside the remit of your 'class'. I love this system. I think it's awesome. The D&D system is also a good one (where skills that lie outside of your class cost double points).

 

In other news, I just got to meet the Greybeards. The guys as Bethesda have been reading Eragon, haven't they? ¬_¬ I like it though, it's a pretty cool idea. Hopefully we can learn the fire breathing shout (although sadly I know it's not "Brisingr!" because the dragons keep using it on me. Can't remember what it is though).

[Nedew]

The AI is pretty smart too. I found a giant's camp with a little pond in it, and the giant and his mammoths were too big to get in, so i just sat in the middle and arrowed them. While the mammoths were stupid enough to fall for this, the giant ran off and hid behind a rock! It's little things like that that i love.

[MrCanada]

I havnt played in 3-4 days...

 

I do very much enjoy the game, but I have one quip about it.

 

I feel like the game is almost TOO large. There is nothing I hate more then the feeling of missing something, and the fact there is so many missions in each major city, then some small stuff in between. I feel I'm nto going in every house and getting every mission and that I will inevidibly miss something. And it tears me up.

 

I was in Ivangard and got taken to some other city (cant remember the name ATM) that was on the far west of the map. I have 30 missions racked up that are all spread to every corner of the map and I know once I go to them, and on the way, I will get MORE missions and more. Its almost too much.

 

Maybe I just played too much too quick. Thank god CBH came along to give me a break.

[Nathers7]

I havnt played in 3-4 days...

 

I do very much enjoy the game, but I have one quip about it.

 

I feel like the game is almost TOO large. There is nothing I hate more then the feeling of missing something, and the fact there is so many missions in each major city, then some small stuff in between. I feel I'm nto going in every house and getting every mission and that I will inevidibly miss something. And it tears me up.

 

I was in Ivangard and got taken to some other city (cant remember the name ATM) that was on the far west of the map. I have 30 missions racked up that are all spread to every corner of the map and I know once I go to them, and on the way, I will get MORE missions and more. Its almost too much.

 

Maybe I just played too much too quick. Thank god CBH came along to give me a break.

 

You don't need to do everything in one playthrough, that's the beauty of the Elder Scrolls, playing a completely different game second time round with a different race.

[Linsolv]

You get a HUGE advantage for specializing, have you looked at the skill tree? If you are doing one handed swords for example, get all 5 one handed bonuses (equaling 100% more, get the three sword critical hit bonus so you have 20% chance of critcial hit, thats going to really really increase the damage you do with a one handed sword.

 

Same thing with armor. If you go the heavy armor route, Juggernaut gives you a 100% bonus, well fitted gives you 25%, then matching set gives you 25% for a total of a 150% bonus.

 

Specializing in a weapon/armor basically doubles its standard stats for a simple rule.

 

You say that, but you get the first 2 points essentially free, and if I'm not using one handed swords then I don't get any bonus for using them. Conversely, if I AM using one-handed swords, albeit rarely--as on my archer--I get those points. Because there's no reason not to, there's nowhere else for me to put my points.

 

OBVIOUSLY putting points in will give you advantages (I think you and D-Lyrium might've misunderstood?) I meant that in real life, I can realistically choose to spend, say, a year working on my tennis abilities and come out better. But I can choose to just work on my entire game as a whole by playing matches and drilling in a very general way, or I can choose to work on my serve at the expense of a more general program, and my serve will come out that much better. There's no time when working on my serve will STOP being effective... though there might come a time when the rest of my game is poor enough compared to my competition that my serve can't win me all the points any more. In Skyrim, there's only a very limited amount of time that I can put all my points into Archery and Sneak. And when I run out of points I can put in those two trees, even if only temporarily, that means I don't get to specialize in those things any more, which leaves me looking for other things. Fine, lockpick. I don't pickpocket at all, so that's a waste of points. I don't use magic, so that's 4 trees (I use Enchanting because I want to actually have useful equipment) that would be wasted points. Don't do alchemy. I don't use heavy armor; While I do wear Light Armor, archers generally are supposed to be far away. If I'm getting hit, I'm doin it rong. Points spent on a crutch I don't want and don't need.

 

Anyways, my point is, as I level my character, I constantly find that if I made the list of the 5 trees I want to use for ONE CHARACTER, because I do want to tell a specific story for this one character, those trees are as full as I can currently make them and so I'm sitting there trying to decide if levelling should be completely meaningless (okay, a heal and adds some health/magicka/stam) or if I should waste a point so that I theoretically gain some new ability.

[D-Lyrium]

You say that, but you get the first 2 points essentially free, and if I'm not using one handed swords then I don't get any bonus for using them. Conversely, if I AM using one-handed swords, albeit rarely--as on my archer--I get those points. Because there's no reason not to, there's nowhere else for me to put my points.

 

Why not just save the perk point until such a time as you can spend it on what you want? You don't HAVE to spend those points on one-handed weapons. You get a bow fairly early on anyway (and at least one spell). So it's not like you're forced to use the one-handed weapon for very long. Just save your perk points and spend them on things you want your character to have.

 

In Skyrim, there's only a very limited amount of time that I can put all my points into Archery and Sneak. And when I run out of points I can put in those two trees, even if only temporarily, that means I don't get to specialize in those things any more, which leaves me looking for other things.

 

Eh... Technically, of course, there is a limit: 50. Of which complete Archery and Sneak trees will be 29, leaving you with 21pts. Enchanting is 13, leaving 8pts that you're forced to spend on 'things you don't want'. Sorry if you feel this is bad. . Light Armour is always worth it though, even archers have to deal with mages and other archers. FWIW, you can spend 7pts in Light Armour on things directly affecting the amount of protection you receive, without getting any additional benefits.

 

You're also forgetting Speech. Surely that's universally useful to every character? Even if you don't want Persuasion and Intimidation, the better prices from merchants are always handy if you have a few points spare, no?

 

I do get your point. The trees are a little shorter than most of us are used to from other games, and you can't sink all your points into the same tree (or even two/three trees) even if for some bizarre reason you decide you want to, like most of us are used to being able to do in other games. Still, I don't think that's inherently a BAD thing. It'd be no fun if you were able to become such a powerful archer that you could one-shot Daedric Princes. To go back to your tennis analogy, no matter how much you work on your serve, there is a point where it doesn't get any better. Or, more pertinently, there's a point where it getting better stops making much of a difference to your overall game.

 

Anyways, my point is, as I level my character, I constantly find that if I made the list of the 5 trees I want to use for ONE CHARACTER, because I do want to tell a specific story for this one character, those trees are as full as I can currently make them and so I'm sitting there trying to decide if levelling should be completely meaningless (okay, a heal and adds some health/magicka/stam) or if I should waste a point so that I theoretically gain some new ability.

 

It's not 'completely meaningless' though, is it? It's given you a perk point. Sure, maybe you don't want to use it yet, but you still have it. Over-specialising in one skill can be a bit of an issue, especially if you don't actually use that skill as much as you thought you would (you're pretty safe with Archery, but Light Armour doesn't go up that fast for me), I certainly see where you're coming from. But it's no real hardship to wait.

 

Also don't forget to use the trainers in towns. I'm not the kind of guy that will go and let a low-level enemy hit him for hours on end to improve Light Armour, that's cheap as all hell. But buying training from the trainers is a good way to do it. Especially Archery, since two of the three trainers are in towns you'll naturally visit VERY early on, and the third isn't far away. Plus there are books.

 

Like I said, I get your point, but the only real solution is to make the trees excessively long, and either make the higher tiers ridiculously powerful and unbalanced, or make the increases a lot less potent; giving every perk multiple levels and making you pay a point for each level (like the first perk in the weapon trees, for instance). But then you'd be in World of Warcraft territory, where you need loads of perk points spend in a tree to even notice the difference...

[Linsolv]

Why not just save the perk point until such a time as you can spend it on what you want? You don't HAVE to spend those points on one-handed weapons. You get a bow fairly early on anyway (and at least one spell). So it's not like you're forced to use the one-handed weapon for very long. Just save your perk points and spend them on things you want your character to have.

 

 

 

Eh... Technically, of course, there is a limit: 50. Of which complete Archery and Sneak trees will be 29, leaving you with 21pts. Enchanting is 13, leaving 8pts that you're forced to spend on 'things you don't want'. Sorry if you feel this is bad. . Light Armour is always worth it though, even archers have to deal with mages and other archers. FWIW, you can spend 7pts in Light Armour on things directly affecting the amount of protection you receive, without getting any additional benefits.

 

You're also forgetting Speech. Surely that's universally useful to every character? Even if you don't want Persuasion and Intimidation, the better prices from merchants are always handy if you have a few points spare, no?

I do get your point. The trees are a little shorter than most of us are used to from other games, and you can't sink all your points into the same tree (or even two/three trees) even if for some bizarre reason you decide you want to, like most of us are used to being able to do in other games. Still, I don't think that's inherently a BAD thing. It'd be no fun if you were able to become such a powerful archer that you could one-shot Daedric Princes. To go back to your tennis analogy, no matter how much you work on your serve, there is a point where it doesn't get any better. Or, more pertinently, there's a point where it getting better stops making much of a difference to your overall game.

 

 

 

It's not 'completely meaningless' though, is it? It's given you a perk point. Sure, maybe you don't want to use it yet, but you still have it. Over-specialising in one skill can be a bit of an issue, especially if you don't actually use that skill as much as you thought you would (you're pretty safe with Archery, but Light Armour doesn't go up that fast for me), I certainly see where you're coming from. But it's no real hardship to wait.

 

Also don't forget to use the trainers in towns. I'm not the kind of guy that will go and let a low-level enemy hit him for hours on end to improve Light Armour, that's cheap as all hell. But buying training from the trainers is a good way to do it. Especially Archery, since two of the three trainers are in towns you'll naturally visit VERY early on, and the third isn't far away. Plus there are books.

 

Like I said, I get your point, but the only real solution is to make the trees excessively long, and either make the higher tiers ridiculously powerful and unbalanced, or make the increases a lot less potent; giving every perk multiple levels and making you pay a point for each level (like the first perk in the weapon trees, for instance). But then you'd be in World of Warcraft territory, where you need loads of perk points spend in a tree to even notice the difference...

 

Consider that I don't need every talent from every tree. For instance, I don't use fire/ice/shock enchants unless there's really nothing better. Health absorption is just a better option to me. Therefor, the perk that adds elemental damage is again useless.

 

I would say that firstly you can easily increase the "width" rather than the "depth." In general, I think there should be more perks per tree (unreasonable, I know) than there are possible points, with multiple mutually exclusive end-point talents if you want to specialize fully. For instance, you might have the archery tree have the "root" of the tree be accuracy. If you don't spec into archery, you're going to be able to hit the broad side of a barn, but a man at 50 paces you might have trouble with consistency. Then you have, say, 3 branches; one of them, you get extra damage, and then at the end, you have a 2% chance to insta-kill. But only if you put every point you get for the entire game into that tree. For another branch, you get more of your arrows back, and at the end of the tree you... I dunno, learn to make Daedric arrows or equivalent. For the third, you can slow time, and eventually it lets you stop time while you aim, with time restarting when you fire your arrow.

 

That said, is it overpowered? Yes and no. It is pretty OP for a low-level character to be doing these things. On the other hand, when you've killed more dragons than you can count on both hands, and you're fighting guys like Krosis, not really. (For that matter, it's also unbalanced to have the last perk of the Heavy Armor tier to be "there is no disadvantage to wearing heavy armor.")

 

Edit: I should've clarified from the beginning that these are just my opinions. I'm having a ton of fun with Skyrim as it is, and even though I'm sitting here criticizing, as a PC player who is very picky about these things, it's as much about making my own desires clearer (so I can make a mod and be done with it) as it is about any trying to find all the problems with the game. I find it really easy to criticize not only when I'm not having fun and misery loves company, but also when I am having fun, because I want the game to be the absolute best it can be. And that's what is happening here. I see a game with a really nice world and a great opportunity for being almost perfect, and I want to fix the few problems I see.

 

I'd just like to touch again on the "unbalanced" nature of really being able to specialize very deeply: let's bring up the archery example again. If I put my 50 points into my theoretical Archery trees, and I'm just Archer Archingface, shooter of arrows, what do I give up there? Well, let's see. If anyone gets a hit on me I'm probably dead because let's face it, I have no points in armor. I'm not rolling with the blows and so on, I'm just letting them crit me in the face. I can't heal, I can't improve my weapons through enchanting, I can't switch to another weapon at close range (without losing effectiveness, of course). My options become VERY limited (self-limited, of course) and while I do have this really cool power of being able to sometimes kill a dragon with one well-placed arrow, I'm screwed if a group of bandits gets me surrounded.

[sanityisforbidden]

And that Linsolv is what makes the world of Skyrim go round. The ability to play as you want. Sure you can level up to 75 (it is possible it just takes a long as time), but you don't have to use those perks. Now lets go back to your full class Archer idea.

 

You have become this elite archer by filling the tree. What's the next best thing for an Archer... Stealth. So the next tree you would want to put perks in is to lower the enemies chance of seeing you. Stealth is full whats next, well now that you have stealth, it seems the Thief would be a great aspect to be.

 

It's all about that choice of how I want to play my character, not how the game wants my character to evolve.

[jesterx7769]

I'd just like to touch again on the "unbalanced" nature of really being able to specialize very deeply: let's bring up the archery example again. If I put my 50 points into my theoretical Archery trees, and I'm just Archer Archingface, shooter of arrows, what do I give up there? Well, let's see. If anyone gets a hit on me I'm probably dead because let's face it, I have no points in armor. I'm not rolling with the blows and so on, I'm just letting them crit me in the face. I can't heal, I can't improve my weapons through enchanting, I can't switch to another weapon at close range (without losing effectiveness, of course). My options become VERY limited (self-limited, of course) and while I do have this really cool power of being able to sometimes kill a dragon with one well-placed arrow, I'm screwed if a group of bandits gets me surrounded.

 

I would give you opinion up until this last part. Since when does specializing in being an archer mean you have to put no points in armor? Youre not playing as the naked archer are you?

 

You're original opinion was that there was no advantage to specializing past level 15, which clearly by even your last argument is false. There are 16 points (not 50 as you overexagerated) that can go into archery that you "specialized in" making you an amazing specialized archer. Then you can put those other points in light armor vastly increasing your defense. AND with your remaining points put points in one handed weapons for when you have to switch, which in your example is a problem. You clearly gain bonuses for focusing on a few skill trees instead of trying to create a balanced character.

 

Your opinion if you don't like something, but you saying the game/gameplay is lacking in a place it most clearly does not.

 

Archery: 16

Light Armor: 10 (for complaining of getting hit)

One Handed: 21 (for when you have to switch for close up, but clearly you wouldn't have to put all 21 in since its for seperate weapons, heck I would only put the initial 5 in)

 

Thats 47 points giving you 3 (19 if you only 5 into one handed) extras, so specializing does CLEARLY benefit you and goes against your complaint. Just enjoy the game and actually play it before saying it can't do something.

[Linsolv]

I would give you opinion up until this last part. Since when does specializing in being an archer mean you have to put no points in armor? Youre not playing as the naked archer are you?

 

You're original opinion was that there was no advantage to specializing past level 15, which clearly by even your last argument is false. There are 16 points (not 50 as you overexagerated) that can go into archery that you "specialized in" making you an amazing specialized archer. Then you can put those other points in light armor vastly increasing your defense. AND with your remaining points put points in one handed weapons for when you have to switch, which in your example is a problem. You clearly gain bonuses for focusing on a few skill trees instead of trying to create a balanced character.

 

Your opinion if you don't like something, but you saying the game/gameplay is lacking in a place it most clearly does not.

 

Archery: 16

Light Armor: 10 (for complaining of getting hit)

One Handed: 21 (for when you have to switch for close up, but clearly you wouldn't have to put all 21 in since its for seperate weapons, heck I would only put the initial 5 in)

 

Thats 47 points giving you 3 (19 if you only 5 into one handed) extras, so specializing does CLEARLY benefit you and goes against your complaint. Just enjoy the game and actually play it before saying it can't do something.

 

1) I was addressing with most of my post the suggestion I made that a tree have much more than the available number of points (for my example it would be 150 per tree). D-Lyrium said that the only ways you could expand the trees depth-wise would be to either make the perks very minor and almost irrelevant, or you could make the end-tier perks imbalanced. So I presented an example of what I would like to see (though, again, it's not Bethesda's job to give me everything I want, especially when they are providing mod tools) and explained my case there. Of course there aren't 50 points to spend on Archery now, that's actually somewhat my point.

 

2) The "specialization past 15" point was actually where I exaggerated, haha. I'm level... 23? now and I'm starting to hit the point where I'm running out of Archery perks, and now I'm basically throwing them at things that are useful but don't fit the character (enchating/blacksmithing).

 

3) As for being "naked" if you failed to spend any points on an armor talent, of course you're not. But because of the setup I've suggested, you could be SO much more effective with them if you spent just a few points (essentially, IRL you would have the ABILITY to pick up any weapon, but you wouldn't necessarily be any good with it. I'm trying to reflect that.) on the early perks that you would be getting only a fraction of the effectiveness of the armor you're wearing. Again, my examples in that post were all addressing a theoretical situation where my criteria for "advantage to specialize" was met, where you could choose between having an "imbalanced" perk (chance to instantly kill) or having some ability to defend yourself (the first few points in armor).

 

tl;dr: My arguments were addressing a theoretical situation which is not currently present in the game. Of course, you're right that my argument does not apply to the game as it currently stands.

 

And that Linsolv is what makes the world of Skyrim go round. The ability to play as you want. Sure you can level up to 75 (it is possible it just takes a long as time), but you don't have to use those perks. Now lets go back to your full class Archer idea.

 

You have become this elite archer by filling the tree. What's the next best thing for an Archer... Stealth. So the next tree you would want to put perks in is to lower the enemies chance of seeing you. Stealth is full whats next, well now that you have stealth, it seems the Thief would be a great aspect to be.

 

It's all about that choice of how I want to play my character, not how the game wants my character to evolve.

 

Let's address this, since it seems like a good point.

 

What you're basically saying is that there are a few ways you can play an archer: You can play a thief- or stealth-archer, such as your Legolas type character, or you can play a well-rounded Warrior. Which is fine. It gives me the ability to play most of the important archers in mythology (Herakles would be an example of a warrior who uses a bow, where Robin Hood would be an example of an archer who is a thief). But can I be Artemis or Apollo or Agilaz? Zhou Tong? Yi the Archer? Your point is exactly my point: There is no such thing as a non-hybrid.

 

We would say that Einstein was a man who did great things. But what did he do? He did physics. Was he a baseball player? No. Was he a chemist? No. Was he an archer or a healer or an illusionist, no. He did one thing, and he did it better than anyone else in the world. I shouldn't have to be a hybrid. I should be able to just be the best in the world at the one thing I want to do.

 

(NB: You should also be able to have equal effectiveness, if not BETTER effectiveness overall, if you do hybridize at least somewhat. It's about options. I'm not suggesting we remove options, just add them.)

[Bippodrop]

Let's address this, since it seems like a good point.

 

What you're basically saying is that there are a few ways you can play an archer: You can play a thief- or stealth-archer, such as your Legolas type character, or you can play a well-rounded Warrior. Which is fine. It gives me the ability to play most of the important archers in mythology (Herakles would be an example of a warrior who uses a bow, where Robin Hood would be an example of an archer who is a thief). But can I be Artemis or Apollo or Agilaz? Zhou Tong? Yi the Archer? Your point is exactly my point: There is no such thing as a non-hybrid.

 

We would say that Einstein was a man who did great things. But what did he do? He did physics. Was he a baseball player? No. Was he a chemist? No. Was he an archer or a healer or an illusionist, no. He did one thing, and he did it better than anyone else in the world. I shouldn't have to be a hybrid. I should be able to just be the best in the world at the one thing I want to do.

 

Googling Einstein's hobbies revealed he enjoyed sailing and playing the violin. I would say he was more than "he did physics". He EXCELLED at physics, but that's not the extent of his talents and abilities. Probably not the BEST sailor in the world, but competent enough to be considered somewhat skilled at it. Same with the violin....

[denzil85]

Googling Einstein's hobbies revealed he enjoyed sailing and playing the violin. I would say he was more than "he did physics". He EXCELLED at physics, but that's not the extent of his talents and abilities. Probably not the BEST sailor in the world, but competent enough to be considered somewhat skilled at it. Same with the violin....

 

Likewise, Adam Ryland does wrestling games...

[D-Lyrium]

Sure you can level up to 75 (it is possible it just takes a long as time)

 

I thought it was hard-capped at 50? Pretty sure I remember reading that the theoretical maximum was 75 (pretty sure I read 70, but whatever), but you didn't level up once you hit 50.

 

Maybe they changed it. I don't know when in the development process that quote came from.

[ubernoob]

It's not hard-capped... leveling past 50 is just extremeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeely slow.

[Linsolv]

Googling Einstein's hobbies revealed he enjoyed sailing and playing the violin. I would say he was more than "he did physics". He EXCELLED at physics, but that's not the extent of his talents and abilities. Probably not the BEST sailor in the world, but competent enough to be considered somewhat skilled at it. Same with the violin....

 

Luckily, he did neither on a professional level, and Skyrim assumes a level of competence that the average layperson would achieve (before talents are applied). Perks are special talents above and beyond what the normal person could generally achieve. Even a single point means you're not just improving (skill level would represent an improvement) but you're also gaining new insight and understanding into the field above and beyond the expected.

[mjdgoldeneye]

Ok, so, wait...

 

Are we arguing about whether Bethesda should make it so we can be ludicrously min-maxy because we may want our characters to be like that?

 

i.e. If I wanted to be Captain McSwingamace, I should be able to just take points in one-handed, totally neglecting everything else forever simply because "Options FTW"?

 

If so, I don't agree with that. You're basically asking Bethesda to devote time into finding a way to make one-dimensional, hyper-flawed characters fun when the logical solution is to just shore up those weaknesses. Once you max out most of the trees in Skyrim, you're already pretty badass at the given skill you maxed.

 

I mean, adding some perks here or there would always be appreciated, but not with the purpose of intentionally allowing characters to be the best damn smith of all time and not much else. The theme of the game is that you're this legendary figure known as the "Dragonborn" and that sort of implies stuff aside from Aquaman caliber specialization.

 

But, have no fear. If you can get on the PC version, I expect some pretty awesome mods to come out over the coming months and certainly new and expanded perk trees will be in there for people who just want to know more about leather than I'm comfortable discussing.

[Linsolv]

Ok, so, wait...

 

Are we arguing about whether Bethesda should make it so we can be ludicrously min-maxy because we may want our characters to be like that?

 

i.e. If I wanted to be Captain McSwingamace, I should be able to just take points in one-handed, totally neglecting everything else forever simply because "Options FTW"?

 

If so, I don't agree with that. You're basically asking Bethesda to devote time into finding a way to make one-dimensional, hyper-flawed characters fun when the logical solution is to just shore up those weaknesses. Once you max out most of the trees in Skyrim, you're already pretty badass at the given skill you maxed.

 

I mean, adding some perks here or there would always be appreciated, but not with the purpose of intentionally allowing characters to be the best damn smith of all time and not much else. The theme of the game is that you're this legendary figure known as the "Dragonborn" and that sort of implies stuff aside from Aquaman caliber specialization.

 

But, have no fear. If you can get on the PC version, I expect some pretty awesome mods to come out over the coming months and certainly new and expanded perk trees will be in there for people who just want to know more about leather than I'm comfortable discussing.

 

Technically, I'm arguing that I'd like to see a mod that does that. Not really sure where the argument is coming from. It might be that the concept itself is flawed, which is what I've been arguing against. I honestly don't think that Bethesda should do that for me. That would be an absurd thing to expect them to do for me.

 

Also, wouldn't all points in one-handed (albeit swords, not maces) just be Zorro? No armor, no shield... maybe a few points in speech, I guess.

 

EDIT: Oh, okay. I see where the confusion comes from.

 

One of the things I love about Elder Scrolls/Fallout is that I can have my own preferences (and then find/make mods to suit those preferences). I made a statement about my preferences as if I thought it were a fact, which I never really clarified was what I meant. So this one's on me.