Anthony Davis said:
Regarding action games - yes, that's true but I was thinking more along the lines of I don't need a skill parameter to pick locks in FO3, FO:NV, Skyrim, or Thi3f. The skill parameter there just exists to limit what I am allowed to pick, except for Skyrim where I can pick expert and adept locks right out of the gate.
That's major problem I have with FO3. It's also where I'd draw the line between action-adventure and RPG.
1. In an action adventure you can have most components of an RPG, but decisions just open or close certain avenues: c&c (not only story/dialogue wise but also skill wise).
2. In an RPG higher skill should not only equate to more options but also to the ease with which actions can be done.
And the lock-picking in FO3(NV) was an example how not to do it RPG-wise (and if you want to stay faithful to FO). I didn't mind the mini-game itself, but the "sweet spots" were plain bad design. In an action-adventure where you only have 3-5 ranks of lock-picking it's ok if certain locks require certain ranks, in an RPG, where every change on a scale of 100 (or more) should make a difference in your chances, it's stupid. In addition to that higher lock-picking skill actually makes locks harder to pick, since higher skill opens up higher level locks can be tried and they're more difficult in the mini-game than the lower level ones. It's conter intuitive.
You
should have been able to attempt to pick any lock. Only with the difficulty depending on the difficulty of the lock in relation to your skill. And if the difference between the difficulty and your skill is >50 it should auto open without mini-game. (And before somebody comes whining that somebody with very high player skill could conceivably open even the most difficult locks with only one point in lock-picking, that's one of the problems of going action-"RPG". It's not like we asked for FO to be raped.)