
Joystiq: Last week's column on changes in role-playing combat systems through history ruffled a few feathers, so I thought it would be a good idea to discuss what, in my opinion, makes for good RPG combat systems. I had no intention of sounding like I hated turn-based combat (since my two favorite RPGs use it!), or that every new game was better than old.
A new Skyrim Switch 2 update delivers major visual upgrades, surpassing some console settings, but locks the game to 30fps and introduces noticeable input lag.

Bioware writes: "Like you, we’ve heard the rumors lately. You’ve made it clear you care deeply about what’s next. So let’s start by setting the record straight: the next Mass Effect game is in development, and EA and BioWare remain committed to telling more stories in this universe."
I expected nothing and I'm still disappointed
Like with Fallout, it's starting to feel studios are using TV / Film adaptations when they have no game info to talk about.
So the TV show will take place after the OG trilogy. I wonder which ending they’ll use?
Should’ve just posted a picture of an Elcor saying “regretfully, we have nothing to share.”

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim lead designer Bruce Nesmith explains that the game's bucket stealth was an unintended feature of the game.
Specifically with those Infinity Engine games it was more because all the elements of the game held it together well.
The combat was good. It had a depth and learning curve to it. Plus there was replayability due tot he fact of there being a multitude of classes and races.
But like I said, BG, Icewind Dale and Planescape; they were held together by a mixture of their stories, music and gameplay to diferent degrees depending on the game.
e.g most seem to think Planescapes combat wasn't as good.
It wasn't 'as good' but it still used that same style of mechanics which had a depth to it. Only it was held together well by it's story and music. tbh, I don't mind planescapes combat.