I'm surprised at the amount of people who don't want to see combat change at all. I don't think a complete overhaul is necessary - we don't need to be micro-managing our swing direction and velocity, etc - but I'd like to see different fighting styles within each weapon type/skill (heavy handed saber user vs reflexive duelist, etc). The ability to slash, thrust, and parry would be great.  In response to Ilanisilver, you're correct, unfortunately. That being said, the devs have been pretty good with implementing fan feedback, so something may yet be done. In any case, I haven't had any trouble just fast travelling to a bed and sleeping to save whenever I want to quit abruptly. It can still be a bit convoluted, though. That and floaty horse riding are my only real gripes.  This post was edited by Delidas at February 18, 2018 5:45 PM EST

I can attest to the complexity of combat, and the diversity in questing options. I've been abusing a combat trainer for the past little while, and won my first non-tutorial duel a couple of hours ago. It actually felt like an accomplishment; beating one person. Hacking and slashing is a surefire way to die quick, so it actually takes time and practice to get the rythym down. I usually go for the non-violent option simply because it's less risky. I've leveled speech more than anything, and have been creative so far in talking to the right people to leverage my best interests. It's amazing to be so taken with the other mechanics that you actually don't mind having not drawn a sword in the past hour-or-whatever. In regard to bugs/polish, there are some, but I haven't encountered anything game-breaking. I've had a few cutscenes replay themselves, my horse get stuck (which resulted in my being pulled to the ground and clubbed to death by an angry Cuman), and stuff like that. Nothing that has made me quit in frustration. It plays surprisingly well on my launch-era PS4 - way better than I'd have expected. I'm really impressed at the lack of loading screens when entering towns/buildings, and the general scope of them. If TES VI could make cities actually feel like cities like KC:D does, I'd be a happy gamer.   This post was edited by Delidas at February 17, 2018 2:36 PM EST

I debated posting this in general gaming, but figured that this forum gets more traffic. Also, the post DOES concern TES...  Anyways, I've been surprised at the lack of conversation surrounding KC:D on this site. I figured it would be up everyone's collective alley. I've only been playing for around 3 hours, but I'm alrerady pretty engrossed in the game. The story is refreshingly small-scale, and the main character is likeable and relatable. The depth is amazing, and very much noted after Skyrim's streamlined experience. Of course, this thread isn't meant to just talk of KC:D. While I've been enjoying my time in Bohemia, I can't help but think of what TES might learn from it. With Bethesda showing a greater tendency to cut corners, streamline at the cost of depth, and rely heavily on modders (and attempt to profit from them), I imagine they're squirming right now. KC:D has attracted a devoted group of players who appreciate the deep RPG experience it offers, and in turn it risks to steal away TES' older fanbase (maybe). It was also made on a much smaller budget, has a greater scope in its world, and most importantly, is currently out. If I were Bethesda, I'd be worried about Warhorse turning this into a franchise, and stealing up the market. I wouldn't be as cavalier about TES VI's release date, that's for sure.  I think it's great. Healthy competition can only cause both companies to improve. As gamers, we all stand to benefit. Warhorse is a spirited underdog, and they show a great interest in their fanbase (just check out the reddit page; the devs routinely try to implement fan feedback). Bethesda needs to get into gear. For those of you who have played KC:D, or maybe read about it at most, what would you like to see Bethesda lift from it? How do you think the introduction of a new player in the medeival RPG market will affect their decisions moving forward?  This post was edited by Delidas at February 17, 2018 9:49 AM EST

The whole 'Project Greenheart' thing might suggest otherwise, but I'm still pretty well convinced we're going to be seeing Hammerfell as TES VI's setting. If I had it my way, that's what we'd get.  Bethesda, especially after FO4, faces a bit of a divide in their fanbase. They have a (significantly larger) casual fanbase that enjoys streamlined features and simple mechanics, and then they have a less sizeable (but much more vocal) demographic that favours deeper roleplaying elements. I, along with most of my friends, fall into the second category. At this point, they don't want to piss anyone off. Especially when games like Kingdom Come: Deliverance (get hyped) threaten to steal away the more loyal, 'hardcore' demographic.  Hammerfell allows for the best of both worlds. First things first, it's a human province. Bethesda, in my mind, wouldn't risk an 'alien' province like Morrowind right after Skyrim. They risk casual fans being off put, and hardcore fans being upset at the (inevitably) lacklustre execution. If they get it right, it's fantastic. BUT, it's a gamble of long odds. Hammerfell is marketable in that it's recognizable (think Lawrence of Arabia, Assassin's Creed), but also true to lore. Also, it's a setting that generally evades stereotypical fantasy, which allows it to be novel, but safe. I think Persian and Moorish influences could make for a very exciting setting, myself, and would love to see them in a 'fantastical' form as Skyrim did with old Scandinavia.  The story won't be centered on the Thalmor, but they will have a presence. Morrowind and Oblivion both hinted at the Empire's growing weakness, and it was (sort of) addressed in Skyrim. At least as a footnote. Hammerfell could allow for a plot involving sword-singing or what have you, with a civil-war style subplot between the Crowns and the Forebears still alluding to the Thalmor. Ideally, it'll be a bit more intertwined with the main plot, and so feel more consequential. I'd also like for diplomacy/speech to be a substitute for combat in some quests, but that's more mechanic than setting. Hammerfell also offers a good juxtaposition to Skyrim; trade taiga for desert, but the cultural zeitgeist remains the same (pro-warrior, anti-magic people who inhabit harsh land). It won't feel too far removed from their last title, which most casual fans would be weary of. At the same time, if depth was added, it would be seen as reasonable change by the casual fanbase, and applauded by longtime fans as well. Hammerfell is safe enough that they can experiment with more serious roleplaying, if they want to (I hope so). Ideally, the game would be set maybe twenty years after Skyrim. The second Great War is on the verge of happening, and the MC is arrested for shady reasons as usual. You're imprisoned in the Northwest (I could see Dragonstar being destroyed, and then eligible to be rebuilt by the MC as a settlement feature), and escape with a a small rebel force. After that, I'd like it to play out like Morrowind. You're tasked with, ultimately, choosing a side in the civil conflict (Crowns vs Forebears), and in doing so waging who will best be able to defeat the Thalmor (or maybe you want them to win, I won't judge). Then, along the way, you're told of a prophecy detailing a legendary Ansei; here, you are prompted to go for training. Like in Morrowind, you get to decide whether or not you're special, or merely caught up in the right place at the wrong time. Ideally, I'd like to see cities operate almost like independant states, given the divide in the province. It'd also make sense for Sentinel to be invested in High Rock's politics, etc. Overall, I'd like to see politics be more of a main feature. With GoT's popularity, I can see court intrigue being added in. I'd like for speechcraft to allow for the MC to influence the game by acting diplomatically, and at times allow for violence to be circumvented. It'd also be nice to see guilds be aware of eachother, and of the political situation. Maybe the Thieves Guild likes the Crowns for their stability, but dislikes the Dark Brotherhood. Maybe the Blackcasters and the Mages Guild hate eachother, and each back a seperate faction, etc. Anyways, this became something of a ramble in the end, but I still think Hammerfell is the most likely option. I'll take what I can get, but Hammerfell sounds good to me. Bring on the curved swords!    

Wulfhedinn said: Gollum..... you're kidding. I have no problems with your list, except.....The Revenge of the Sith was abhorrent. The entire purpose of the Prequels was to establish the lore. They did that well, but everything else was terrible. The most therapeutic experience of my life was slaughtering Gungans on Naboo in SWBF2.  In my opinion, it goes as follows.  1. Empire Strikes Back 2. A New Hope 3. Rogue One 4. Return of the Jedi 5. The Force Awakens 6. Revenge of the Sith 7. Attack of the Clones  8. The Phantom Menace Yeah, Mark Hamill is soemtimes a little off, but this saga was so revolutionary, it was the Sci-Fi movie that brought them into the light, like Skyrim was the RPG that brought them to a mainstream western audience. It's just such a revolutionary movie series. Even Disney is handling it alright. In my opinion, I think Hayden Christensen should burn in a special corner of hell, occupied solely by Jar Jar Binks. This right here. Except for maybe wishing eternal damnation upon Hayden Christensen's soul. He has to live with the memory of the films, that should be enough torment.