[quote name='way2lazy2care' timestamp='1331750607' post='4922035']
My counterpoint would be why include melee at all then?

If nothing at all, what kind of semi-medieval/fantasy game would it be if it just CUT melee? Considering the setting, and the history of the game, removing melee would be unbelievably nonsensical.[/quote]
I think you missed the point. The point isn't that they should have cut melee, it's that melee combat should have been better as it's so important to the game.

I wonder what exactly it is about the combat you dislike? Deeming it 'shitty' because you didn't like it, with no explanation of why,
[/quote]
It's sluggish and inaccurate. It's been getting progressively better for the series, but there are games that have already done much better.

I wonder what exactly it is about the combat you dislike? Deeming it 'shitty' because you didn't like it, with no explanation of why...

It's claustrophobic: the very short ranges required for melee combat, tied to a narrow field of view, mean that you can only see the opponent directly in front of you (and not the one to the right who is hacking you to death).

It's repetitive: hack, hack, block, hack, hack, block... Rinse-and-repeat ad infinitum. Or I can switch to lightning, and just burn everything to death from a distance.

It has no tactical depth: regardless of whether you play a mage or a swordsman, your only real edge is obtained by spec'ing your character for optimal damage output and absorption (which is in itself a meta-game, I suppose). Apart from that, its just the good 'ole rinse-and-repeat.

It's claustrophobic: the very short ranges required for melee combat, tied to a narrow field of view, mean that you can only see the opponent directly in front of you (and not the one to the right who is hacking you to death).

It's repetitive: hack, hack, block, hack, hack, block... Rinse-and-repeat ad infinitum. Or I can switch to lightning, and just burn everything to death from a distance.

It has no tactical depth: regardless of whether you play a mage or a swordsman, your only real edge is obtained by spec'ing your character for optimal damage output and absorption (which is in itself a meta-game, I suppose). Apart from that, its just the good 'ole rinse-and-repeat.
[/quote]
As well as the fact that if somehow you are about to die (which is an impossibility once you level up a couple of times), you can just run away and spam energy potions. Hell, I've killed a mammoth at level one like that. And don't throw me any of that "then don't use it" talk - it does not work. If it's there, it's there for a reason, and trying to play without it will end in frustration anyway because the game was designed with its presence in mind. Kind of like fast-travel, or no-compass mode (quest texts are horribly shallow, and trying to complete one without the marker is an exercise in frustration because it takes forever to find the place you're supposed to go as the quest text essentially sums up to "follow the marker" with no additional information, although sometimes it's nice enough to tell you which county you're supposed to go to).

The quick-save feature is also very psychologically disturbing to some people (me included) and encourages the "move up five meters, press F5" attitude. The result is that the game has no real challenge to offer. Either you crush your opponents effortlessly, or they one-shot you. Then you quickload and start again.

And the difficulty slider is also worthless as it only increases the health and damage output of your enemies and not their AI, the result being that the strategy used to defeat them is exactly the same. The only difference is that it takes six times longer to achieve anything - hardly a challenge. Perhaps if the slider actually made the enemies smarter by encouraging them to take cover and coordinate ambushes, it would be better.

I used to play skyrim like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee[/quote]
I guess somebody had to make that joke