First-person shooters have been doing that since forever. Moving or shooting makes the next shot less accurate, and staying still and pointing at the target makes the shot more accurate, which is communicated to the player visually with an expanding and contracting targeting reticle. Skyrim doesn't have that, but there's no reason why it couldn't.
The depends on if we're talking about aim sway or arrow deviation. If we're talking aim sway, fine, but for deviation a set up shot under fire is still going to be less accurate than one from the shadows. A miss under those circumstances doesn't prompt me to say "Oh well, I screwed up," it just prompts me to quick load. I've already said I'm ok with aim sway though because that puts targeting under my control.
To clarify, does "aim sway" mean that the reticle (or the whole screen) wobbles around, but arrows still hit exactly where the reticle is pointing? That is, you can't aim a ranged weapon towards a specific point, but do know with absolute certainty where the arrows are going to hit. Yeah, I was talking about arrow deviation. I don't think swaying would really make sense, except for things like actual sniper rifles. It takes
effort to tell where a gun is pointing with the precision of a few arc minutes, and bows are right out.
To tell the truth, I'd probably quick load too, at least some of the time. Just as I might quick load after any other serious risk I took ended in decisive failure, such as failing to pick a pocket, or maybe just flat out dying. You know, quick loading
because I screwed up. I knew in advance that there was a chance I was going to miss the enemy, and I took the shot anyway. I took a risk, and it didn't work out, and now I'm going to pretend that it never happened.
That's not really the point, though. What you seem to be saying is that there
should not be a chance to miss the enemy, and I still don't understand
why. In The Elder Scrolls games, you start the game in prison. Even if you're playing one of the games where you get to assign your own starting skills, you're not going to be a legendary epic marksman from the word go, any more than you are going to be a great sorcerer or a mighty warrior. You might become one or several of those over the course of the game, but you certainly don't start that way. If a game casts you as William Tell, things are different, but in TES, you are just a level one newbie, destined to
eventually become great.
Is there a reason for the character to never miss?
The problem is that in Morrowind you were screwed by the RNG. There are limits to how accurately you can aim a weapon in game, and misses do happen based solely on the failure of the player. It really depends on how much player input you want to have, I play ARPGs because I enjoy player input. I like tactics and strategy well enough, but I also like action and reflexes and I certainly prefer that experience in an RPG setting (with a good story, developed characters, and ability to actually role-play) to the one in your typical action game.
Yeah, Morrowind had multiple issues. Hit chance was independent of range, so it didn't matter whether you were shooting at cliff racers you could barely see, or at a paralyzed Ogrim point-blank. And cliff racer hit boxes were all over the place. Doubly bad since cliff racers were exactly the kind of enemies you'd normally want to take out with a bow.
There's nothing wrong with liking games where character skill does not matter, but TES games have not traditionally been those games. Like, Skyrim still has an archery skill. The Dragonborn has a counter attached to him that's supposed to say how good he is with bows. And arrows always hit whatever he's pointing them at, no matter what that counter says. It just feels kind of jarring.
Author
Topic: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (Read 1615553 times)