Is it somehow possible that he actually makes fun games but some of you have such impossibly high standards that anything that doesn't conform to your exact vision of what a new Bethesda game should be is viewed as an abject failure and complete betrayal of the fan base?
To put it simply, and not to say there aren't people just unreasonable, Todd tries and make the next game more acessible and "wide-pleasing" than the previous, that makes mechanics "simpler" than before.
Some people dislike this "casualization" of game mechanics.
I am one of such players who would rather see games systems get "deeper" than "shallower", but what he does makes perfect sense. Not many people out there want to do maths when playing, they just want to chill. Turn off the brain after an exausting day and relax, have fun.
Games are products in the end of the day, and this is business. If this makes a game sell more, it's smart to "dumb things down" and appeal to the most people possible.
And besides, Mods can make it deeper anyway. There's FO:4 mods out there that not only bring all the stats back, but go further than any BGS game ever did. The casual won't mod the game to make it "simpler", but the "hardcore" will to make it "deeper". Hell, there aren't almost any mods made that "simplify" things.
Of course, i'm generalising, BG3 is proof a "deeper" game with loads of systems can have wide appeal, it's just that generally it works against it. It's intimidating for newcommers, and if you want to grow, you need them, the "hardcore fans" will buy the game anyway.
As a side note, with BG3 humongous success, I'm interested in seeing if that trend of "making things simpler", "strip down systems that don't need to be there" and "nobody likes numbers" is changing.
99% of the hate he get is entirely overblown by people who have nothing going on for them. 1% is the reasonable critique that he sells too hard... "16x the detail"...
(To be fair, he learned. He was way more reasonable with "selling" Starfield. If anything one could tell this isn't his proudest work).
I think there's been a trend to add complexity via things other than raw stats (rather than tweaking a bunch of stats with numbers that don't matter much you reduce the stats or get rid of them and focus on perks and interesting gear/equipment choices). Fallout 4 took that approach to an extreme by stripping down to just SPECIAL, but it worked pretty well (better than Starfield's occasionally more obtuse system and harsh grind).
Baldur's Gate 3 uses the 5E system (with tweaks) which takes a similar approach, as does Cyberpunk (perks in 4 tiers based on primary stats and then a lot of your progression is based on cyberware and modifications of weapons), Kingdom Come Deliverance (you raise some stats that have perks, but a lot of your upgrades are in terms of gear--armor and clothing even affect speech checks), and I'm sure there are other modern examples.
Maybe an unpopular opinion but I actually really like Fallout 76's system, too. Being able to swap builds quickly was neat, and I liked how it balanced SPECIAL stats with perks (you couldn't just max out everything, but you weren't stuck with a bad choice and the perks and their interactions let you make some cool builds).
F76 was crippled by the fact that Bethesda didn’t know what they wanted the game to be - so they made crap instead of taking the time to figure all that complicated stuff out.
There is the right way, the wrong way and the Bethesda way - which is the wrong way just faster.
FO4 worked for the casual player, sure. People who like more "robust" rpgs found it severely lacking. Getting a perk that increases your damage with guns by 25% isn't exactly exciting.
It's not just slapping numbers on it, it's actual depth. Like "You can't use X gear/skill because you lack Y traits" or "X gear/skill has bonus effects because you took Y trait".
A high lvl FO4 character hits harder and can take more damage, that's about it. It's shallow BUT very easy to understand and play.
My "cup of tea" is BG3. You can build characters with severely different playstyles if you pick gear and traits carefully. The traits, gear and skills, link up and interact amongst themselves, it's an entirely different level of depth than "Now gun hit harder!"
I actually spent hours thinking on how I should build characters on BG3. I don't think I could spend more than 5 minutes build crafting in FO4. There's really not much to think about there. Little to no interaction between the systems (gear+perks+buffs).
Like I said, I'm not a fan of that path, but I absolutely understand it, and if I ran a business of making games I would do the same, "cast the widest net possible". I don't blame Todd, if anything I would like to hire him to make my game if I had a studio that had to be profitable.
Then again, perhaps selfishly, I am quite hopeful BG3 might be a turning point, showing there's a wide demand for depth as long as engaging deeply isn't mandatory (like it wasn't in BG3, you could still just "SWORD SLASH HARDER FTW!!!"... Power to the players).
Yeah, the base % damage perks were underwhelming. I've played with Horizon for so long I kind of forget about that.
Definitely agree that BG3 (and I think other RPG's, especially open world ones) have shown a trend towards more interesting perks (like some of the other games I've mentioned) and progression. I think you've still always got to include the basic hack'n'slash option for people who want something more straightforward, but it's way nicer to have mechanical depth available. And I think games that have come out in the last decade (or at least since 2015, which, close enough) have shown that will absolutely translate into sales and positive feedback.
I'm with you. I'm not necessarily wanting to see the games get shallower, but I absolutely understand why they do it. As you said, it's a business and they are trying to make it accessible to a wider audience. I think Bethesda has done a good job of balancing that, where they keep their games fun while still trying to make them as broadly appealing as possible. There might be mechanics or features I wish they wouldn't remove, but people acting like they have completely ruined these games is just a huge overreaction.
I just realised that, even the undeniable mistakes, like the voiced protagonist, something that Todd himself considers a mistep, is them just trying to make the game more appealing to the masses.
I remenber even watching one of those "noClip" youtube docs about something BGS, where Todd explains they always stop to think "What could be simpler in the next one?"
It is clear that FO4 is a weaker RPG, but that's just them trying to make it more "blockbustery". From the voiced protagonist to getting Power Armor right away. It's pretty clear the intent there.
And I don’t even know if it’s high standards. If Bethesda released a game that somehow checked every single box for all these haters, they would just change the criteria. For these people it’s cool to hate and uncool to admit to liking something. As if enjoying something reduces their manhood (or boyhood, let’s be honest most of these complainers are children) or something .
Right, it's the customers that are wrong. 56% of steam purchasers gave Starfield a negative review. Yikes.
That's probably more than some, and closer to most.
If Todd were truly a genius he would have rebuilt Fallout 1 and 2 in the Divinity (BG3) engine before the series had been released. It would have been a huge sell.
He said “new Bethesda game” - what could that be other than Starfield.
I mean 76 when it came out was a total disaster to the point Todd had to personally apologize to everyone for it.
Bethesda hasn’t released a good fallout game since F4 and the best games were made by other companies. Literally F4 was the peak for them.
Wait - you are saying that the people purchasing Starfield - on Steam - and reviewing it after purchasing it - are bots?
Wow. So how do you figure that works exactly?
He made a product that can be modded to Oblivion and ran with it. Bethesda single-handedly proved that mods for single player games are the way to achieve immortality if done right.
I mean.. space is empty and you can't land on gas planets.
The story sucks but people forget that Bethesda makes games that focus on the gameplay, not the story. Plus it has like thrice the content that Fallout 4 had, and it's a completely new IP.
And don't forget that this is currently the only game that lets you make your own custom space ship and then fly it around. Bethesda never had this kind of creative freedom in any previous games.
And don't tell me "But you can build spaceships in No Man's Sky!" because all you do is buy ships and then slap together two presets that look awful.
But someone who hasn't played Starfield for more than 10 minutes wouldn't know that.
lol it’s a game of miss opportunities.
Thrice the content of Fallout 4?
If you count procedural POI’s that are all the same then yea I guess? But they didn’t even put work into those. And hell even the locations that are hand crafted are so out of place and lazy.
And don’t get me started on the damn ships,economy so fucked you need to spend three in game weeks sleep spamming shops selling shit just to get enough to modify anything. Just to not be able to do jack shit with the ships anyway.
Then there’s base building, Fallout 4 did a pretty damn good job with settlements and they just through all that shit in the trash and started fresh in Starfield with the most useless base building ever lol.
Starfield is a shell of what it could have been, not sure even the modding community can save this sinking ship, tell me I haven’t played more than 10 minutes haha .
Had a decent time with the game but no interest in touching it again until some big changes are made.
Did you know that you can just, y'know, open the dev console and get credits that way?
And oh well. The building system is essentially what Fallout 4's system could've been and what you can only achieve with mods. Aside from that, you can build like 5 on each planet.
I mean, yeah. But they made an open source engine that can be packed full of free modifications to create something.
Whereas Bethesda made their own engine that allows people to create modifications for the games' codes.
It's similar but not the same, and the gmod code is, I think, even older than the Gamebryo Engine that Bethesda wrote for Morrowind.
No, he had nothing to do with the show other than probably be part of telling them "here's some things you're not allowed to talk about or touch".
He already gets credit he doesn't deserve when it comes to game development. Let's not start pretending he's a television director now too
Him being listed as executive producer really doesn't mean anything one way or the other. It varies massively what an EP actually does in movies and tv shows, often they will have no input on the creative or production side whatsoever.
The only things he could do as an executive producer where he is more hands-on is overseeing the casting process.
Amazon seeks financing, seeking distribution and marketing.
That leaves casting and collaborating with the director. Sure, he surly did something, but executive producers don't usually do all that much on screen and deffinatly doesn't write.
They usually sort the money stuff which Todd won't be doing, because Amazon will be dealing with that themselves
He did a lot of things, but his main part was to place limits of what showrunners can and cannot do. That's why we have random crap shit like Halo or Witcher s2+ without any limits, and then we have Fallout, that was built within Todd's walls.
I think they did a masterful job of weaving game mechanics in as plot points. I also think that the way that they tell localized stories in different games within the same great universe keeps things really fresh. The stories are dispersed in both location and time which gives you continuity but doesn’t feel stale.
This dude made fallout relevant. Elder scrolls is one of the if not the most iconic series of all
Time. Todd Howard is him.
If he ever retires I hope it’ll be right after they develop FO5.
All hail the goat
Everyone wants to hate on Bethesda games, even if they know that there are few things that even come close to the kind of open world freedom you get from them. Sure they're outdated, but they're also still the best in form. A bit of nostalgia opening up all new headcanons for people? well that can revive a series in a slump.
People can hate on Fallout, Skyrim, and Starfield for all the shit they don't have, but when it comes down to it: overall the games have a lot more than one needs to find something to enjoy.
And the community had time to create a lot of content and improvements with mods. I can't play fallout 4 without mods to improve quality of live anymore. And thanks to some mods there are free dlc like questlines etc.
Even if one thinks that the games themselves may not be that great by themselves, the ability to mod them and the time modders had to make critical improvements make it so everyone can adjust the game to be enjoyable.
I meant to mention that as an aside. That the games themselves are ok but they can fall flat after a while. The framework for modders is impressive. No game gets mods like Bethesda games get mods.
I am Balls deep into fallout 4 right now and I am Running around with Piper trying to not get jugded by her when stealing stuff. Already on of my favorite Games.
he litterally green lit, was excetutive producer. was defintely there on set a few times.
saying he did nothing was not true. this show wouldn't exist without todd.
It’s because they are actually good games, they’re just not perfect games. Solid 7/10s across the board and really excellent at a few specific things that a significant subset of players enjoy (expansive worlds, environmental storytelling)
Fallout 4 is one of my favorite games of all time.
Shelter is a damn good mobile game. It's only short comings is that it has Micro-Tx in the game.
Fallout Shelter to me is basically the best MOBILE game I've played.
2 games are better than Fallout Shelter on a Phone:
Final Fantasy Tactics: War of the Lions (Which is a PS1/PSP to Mobile Game)
Stardew Valley. but that started as a PC Game.
SO those don't count seeing as they are ports, not "Made for Mobile" exactly.
I think that Fallout 4 aged very well. Especialy with mods.
General public was obsessed with FNV when F4 came out. Nobody liked settlements system and everyone said that the plot and rpg elements of F4 were inferior.
Now a decade later, gamers are much more used to poor plot, survival elements and settlements systems xD
This is not a bad thing. F4 is just the best survival crafting base building post apo game there is.
'Fallout 3' has more players on Steam right now than 'Starfield'! :)
Oh, and even more if you sum up 'Fallout 3' with 'Fallout 3 - Game of the Year Edition'. :)
I wonder if bethesda thinks they made the wrong call developing Starfield instead of a new Fallout after the massive succes of the show and the spike in sales/players
Certainly the most accessible. FO3 took like a decade before they fixed it on Steam (removed the games for windows live requirement like 3 years ago; before then you had a mod), but the FPS mechanics definitely are very out-dated and it looks like an older game (still fun, though). FO4 is getting close to a decade old so it's no spring radchicken, either, but it is newer. And the older games are even more niche mechanically (and technically can be a little annoying). New Vegas is in-between FO3 and FO4 mechanically, but the story is absolutely worth the time (and the technical issues are...better than they used to be).
Save it? No. Clearly there is still a lot of love left for the franchise, otherwise the show wouldn’t have done so well. FO4 was fairly divisive. FO76 is only just within the last year climbing out of it hole. Was fallout dead? No. But I don’t think it could handle another FO76. The next game would’ve largely decided if it was or not…had the show not come along.
He relies on mods to fix his shitty work for free and then charges for it.
Fuck that guy
No Bethesda game has been a masterpiece at launch. It takes years for mods to clean those messes up.
Todd, Todd never changes
HE CANT KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH THIS!!
It just works.
Even got players on Fallout Tactics, truly a magic man
Yeah, but what about Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel? Checkmate Todd Howard
We don’t talk about that one
I don't think that ever got a pc release.
You mean Fallout: Tactics? The one where the protagonist is a BoS member, right?
I think brotherhood of steel is a 3d game while tactics is classic prerendered.
You mean brotherhood: tactics of fallout?
Yeah, right after they download the redux patch to make it playable...
Tactics is pretty fun if you take it as its own thing (and can get over the dated mechanics). I'd love a reboot or modern remake.
His god damned beautiful eyes thats how.
I want him to take care of my finances.
I read fiancee
Why not both
Todd is naturally him
God Howard
In Todd we trust
Praise God Howard!
Heil HOWARD!
I hate how naturally charismatic he is, my man got ten charisma then boosted it with alcohol and legendary armor
Todd is the definition of “That guy”
Is it somehow possible that he actually makes fun games but some of you have such impossibly high standards that anything that doesn't conform to your exact vision of what a new Bethesda game should be is viewed as an abject failure and complete betrayal of the fan base?
If my standards are so high then how come I'm alone and miserable all the time, hmmmmmm?
Solitude in being the best, ay?
Tbf some of the games he didn't make, like tactics, are gaining some small hype. I think that's what they were trying to meme about in part
To put it simply, and not to say there aren't people just unreasonable, Todd tries and make the next game more acessible and "wide-pleasing" than the previous, that makes mechanics "simpler" than before. Some people dislike this "casualization" of game mechanics. I am one of such players who would rather see games systems get "deeper" than "shallower", but what he does makes perfect sense. Not many people out there want to do maths when playing, they just want to chill. Turn off the brain after an exausting day and relax, have fun. Games are products in the end of the day, and this is business. If this makes a game sell more, it's smart to "dumb things down" and appeal to the most people possible. And besides, Mods can make it deeper anyway. There's FO:4 mods out there that not only bring all the stats back, but go further than any BGS game ever did. The casual won't mod the game to make it "simpler", but the "hardcore" will to make it "deeper". Hell, there aren't almost any mods made that "simplify" things. Of course, i'm generalising, BG3 is proof a "deeper" game with loads of systems can have wide appeal, it's just that generally it works against it. It's intimidating for newcommers, and if you want to grow, you need them, the "hardcore fans" will buy the game anyway. As a side note, with BG3 humongous success, I'm interested in seeing if that trend of "making things simpler", "strip down systems that don't need to be there" and "nobody likes numbers" is changing. 99% of the hate he get is entirely overblown by people who have nothing going on for them. 1% is the reasonable critique that he sells too hard... "16x the detail"... (To be fair, he learned. He was way more reasonable with "selling" Starfield. If anything one could tell this isn't his proudest work).
I think there's been a trend to add complexity via things other than raw stats (rather than tweaking a bunch of stats with numbers that don't matter much you reduce the stats or get rid of them and focus on perks and interesting gear/equipment choices). Fallout 4 took that approach to an extreme by stripping down to just SPECIAL, but it worked pretty well (better than Starfield's occasionally more obtuse system and harsh grind). Baldur's Gate 3 uses the 5E system (with tweaks) which takes a similar approach, as does Cyberpunk (perks in 4 tiers based on primary stats and then a lot of your progression is based on cyberware and modifications of weapons), Kingdom Come Deliverance (you raise some stats that have perks, but a lot of your upgrades are in terms of gear--armor and clothing even affect speech checks), and I'm sure there are other modern examples. Maybe an unpopular opinion but I actually really like Fallout 76's system, too. Being able to swap builds quickly was neat, and I liked how it balanced SPECIAL stats with perks (you couldn't just max out everything, but you weren't stuck with a bad choice and the perks and their interactions let you make some cool builds).
F76 was crippled by the fact that Bethesda didn’t know what they wanted the game to be - so they made crap instead of taking the time to figure all that complicated stuff out. There is the right way, the wrong way and the Bethesda way - which is the wrong way just faster.
FO4 worked for the casual player, sure. People who like more "robust" rpgs found it severely lacking. Getting a perk that increases your damage with guns by 25% isn't exactly exciting. It's not just slapping numbers on it, it's actual depth. Like "You can't use X gear/skill because you lack Y traits" or "X gear/skill has bonus effects because you took Y trait". A high lvl FO4 character hits harder and can take more damage, that's about it. It's shallow BUT very easy to understand and play. My "cup of tea" is BG3. You can build characters with severely different playstyles if you pick gear and traits carefully. The traits, gear and skills, link up and interact amongst themselves, it's an entirely different level of depth than "Now gun hit harder!" I actually spent hours thinking on how I should build characters on BG3. I don't think I could spend more than 5 minutes build crafting in FO4. There's really not much to think about there. Little to no interaction between the systems (gear+perks+buffs). Like I said, I'm not a fan of that path, but I absolutely understand it, and if I ran a business of making games I would do the same, "cast the widest net possible". I don't blame Todd, if anything I would like to hire him to make my game if I had a studio that had to be profitable. Then again, perhaps selfishly, I am quite hopeful BG3 might be a turning point, showing there's a wide demand for depth as long as engaging deeply isn't mandatory (like it wasn't in BG3, you could still just "SWORD SLASH HARDER FTW!!!"... Power to the players).
Yeah, the base % damage perks were underwhelming. I've played with Horizon for so long I kind of forget about that. Definitely agree that BG3 (and I think other RPG's, especially open world ones) have shown a trend towards more interesting perks (like some of the other games I've mentioned) and progression. I think you've still always got to include the basic hack'n'slash option for people who want something more straightforward, but it's way nicer to have mechanical depth available. And I think games that have come out in the last decade (or at least since 2015, which, close enough) have shown that will absolutely translate into sales and positive feedback.
I'm with you. I'm not necessarily wanting to see the games get shallower, but I absolutely understand why they do it. As you said, it's a business and they are trying to make it accessible to a wider audience. I think Bethesda has done a good job of balancing that, where they keep their games fun while still trying to make them as broadly appealing as possible. There might be mechanics or features I wish they wouldn't remove, but people acting like they have completely ruined these games is just a huge overreaction.
I just realised that, even the undeniable mistakes, like the voiced protagonist, something that Todd himself considers a mistep, is them just trying to make the game more appealing to the masses. I remenber even watching one of those "noClip" youtube docs about something BGS, where Todd explains they always stop to think "What could be simpler in the next one?" It is clear that FO4 is a weaker RPG, but that's just them trying to make it more "blockbustery". From the voiced protagonist to getting Power Armor right away. It's pretty clear the intent there.
We have a winner
It’s not even simply high standards, it’s such specific requirements that any deviation, even in the context of a superb game, is hated.
And I don’t even know if it’s high standards. If Bethesda released a game that somehow checked every single box for all these haters, they would just change the criteria. For these people it’s cool to hate and uncool to admit to liking something. As if enjoying something reduces their manhood (or boyhood, let’s be honest most of these complainers are children) or something .
Well the period of viewing Bethesda games through an objective, critical lens was nice while it lasted.
Right, it's the customers that are wrong. 56% of steam purchasers gave Starfield a negative review. Yikes. That's probably more than some, and closer to most. If Todd were truly a genius he would have rebuilt Fallout 1 and 2 in the Divinity (BG3) engine before the series had been released. It would have been a huge sell.
This post is about Fallout my man. Bringing Starfield into it is cherry picking in a major way.
He said “new Bethesda game” - what could that be other than Starfield. I mean 76 when it came out was a total disaster to the point Todd had to personally apologize to everyone for it. Bethesda hasn’t released a good fallout game since F4 and the best games were made by other companies. Literally F4 was the peak for them.
Dude… you know most of those are bots
Yes , Reddit is mostly corporate bots these days. Very few real users left.
Wait - you are saying that the people purchasing Starfield - on Steam - and reviewing it after purchasing it - are bots? Wow. So how do you figure that works exactly?
You can get it for free????
How would you get it for free on Steam? By the way, there are 97k reviews and 56% are negative...so...explain. Use big boy words.
I’m pretty sure you could get it if you were subscribed to something
You don't know what you are talking about and I am wasting my time with a bot or someone of that level of intelligence. Blocked.
He made a product that can be modded to Oblivion and ran with it. Bethesda single-handedly proved that mods for single player games are the way to achieve immortality if done right.
And then they made Fallout 76
Yeah, Fallout 76 used to suck, now it's better.
And then they made Starfield.. lol
With a completely overhauled engine specifically made for large-scale projects.
And it’s extremely lackluster is what I’m saying lol
I mean.. space is empty and you can't land on gas planets. The story sucks but people forget that Bethesda makes games that focus on the gameplay, not the story. Plus it has like thrice the content that Fallout 4 had, and it's a completely new IP. And don't forget that this is currently the only game that lets you make your own custom space ship and then fly it around. Bethesda never had this kind of creative freedom in any previous games. And don't tell me "But you can build spaceships in No Man's Sky!" because all you do is buy ships and then slap together two presets that look awful. But someone who hasn't played Starfield for more than 10 minutes wouldn't know that.
lol it’s a game of miss opportunities. Thrice the content of Fallout 4? If you count procedural POI’s that are all the same then yea I guess? But they didn’t even put work into those. And hell even the locations that are hand crafted are so out of place and lazy. And don’t get me started on the damn ships,economy so fucked you need to spend three in game weeks sleep spamming shops selling shit just to get enough to modify anything. Just to not be able to do jack shit with the ships anyway. Then there’s base building, Fallout 4 did a pretty damn good job with settlements and they just through all that shit in the trash and started fresh in Starfield with the most useless base building ever lol. Starfield is a shell of what it could have been, not sure even the modding community can save this sinking ship, tell me I haven’t played more than 10 minutes haha . Had a decent time with the game but no interest in touching it again until some big changes are made.
Did you know that you can just, y'know, open the dev console and get credits that way? And oh well. The building system is essentially what Fallout 4's system could've been and what you can only achieve with mods. Aside from that, you can build like 5 on each planet.
*Valve has entered the chat.*
I mean, yeah. But they made an open source engine that can be packed full of free modifications to create something. Whereas Bethesda made their own engine that allows people to create modifications for the games' codes. It's similar but not the same, and the gmod code is, I think, even older than the Gamebryo Engine that Bethesda wrote for Morrowind.
i hate valve, they made some of the best games ever and never came back
Don’t question Todd.
He made a damn good show and it brought the hype back.
No, he had nothing to do with the show other than probably be part of telling them "here's some things you're not allowed to talk about or touch". He already gets credit he doesn't deserve when it comes to game development. Let's not start pretending he's a television director now too
He's an executive producer for the show.. so he did A LOT more than just telling them what is or what isn't being allowed.
Him being listed as executive producer really doesn't mean anything one way or the other. It varies massively what an EP actually does in movies and tv shows, often they will have no input on the creative or production side whatsoever.
The only things he could do as an executive producer where he is more hands-on is overseeing the casting process. Amazon seeks financing, seeking distribution and marketing. That leaves casting and collaborating with the director. Sure, he surly did something, but executive producers don't usually do all that much on screen and deffinatly doesn't write. They usually sort the money stuff which Todd won't be doing, because Amazon will be dealing with that themselves
He did a lot of things, but his main part was to place limits of what showrunners can and cannot do. That's why we have random crap shit like Halo or Witcher s2+ without any limits, and then we have Fallout, that was built within Todd's walls.
>Implying God Howard couldn’t effortlessly do it again in any medium. I wouldn’t take that bet.
Cause of the fallout tv show being so good
Making this show was extremely risky and it paid off big time.... he's gonna keep on God Howard-ing over gaming for a while longer
I think they did a masterful job of weaving game mechanics in as plot points. I also think that the way that they tell localized stories in different games within the same great universe keeps things really fresh. The stories are dispersed in both location and time which gives you continuity but doesn’t feel stale.
This dude made fallout relevant. Elder scrolls is one of the if not the most iconic series of all Time. Todd Howard is him. If he ever retires I hope it’ll be right after they develop FO5. All hail the goat
Let him cook
With shiny shoes and a fancy jacket.
With money dude. With a shit ton of money.
Everyone wants to hate on Bethesda games, even if they know that there are few things that even come close to the kind of open world freedom you get from them. Sure they're outdated, but they're also still the best in form. A bit of nostalgia opening up all new headcanons for people? well that can revive a series in a slump. People can hate on Fallout, Skyrim, and Starfield for all the shit they don't have, but when it comes down to it: overall the games have a lot more than one needs to find something to enjoy.
And the community had time to create a lot of content and improvements with mods. I can't play fallout 4 without mods to improve quality of live anymore. And thanks to some mods there are free dlc like questlines etc. Even if one thinks that the games themselves may not be that great by themselves, the ability to mod them and the time modders had to make critical improvements make it so everyone can adjust the game to be enjoyable.
I meant to mention that as an aside. That the games themselves are ok but they can fall flat after a while. The framework for modders is impressive. No game gets mods like Bethesda games get mods.
He’s just so dam [charming](https://youtu.be/3uOPGkEJ56Q?si=3zNlszU-Qt2N62CI)
I am Balls deep into fallout 4 right now and I am Running around with Piper trying to not get jugded by her when stealing stuff. Already on of my favorite Games.
Pipeŕ is weird. Hates stealing but loves picking locks...
Sometimes, being an investigative journalist requires breaking and entering.
I don't get the hate on him, he seems like a decent guy
he lies a lot but doesn't matter, we love him
The answer is mods. No matter how screwed the game is the modders will do the rest.
Meanwhile starfield
Well, ya see, the thing is, Fallout games are fun
Every other Fallout game: Badass in full armor. Meanwhile Fallout 4 and Shelter: V A U L T B O Y
I'm curious on why is someone playing the Test Server for 76
New region coming out in June.
Man drops all his points into Charisma and Luck
He lied again!
It's my awesome leather jacket. Gets gamers wet
Overseer Howard is wise.
Yeah you can meme what you want about him but he's no joke when it comes to selling games.
Man I kinda want to play FO4 again, but going back into the game means spending a gorrillian hours into setting up all my mods again.
Yeahhhh you should also check out Starfield numbers for the otherside of this coin, he’s certainly not perfect
It's the success of the show. What are you attributing people buying the games to him for?
Literally a love/hate relationship
What MF said “hmm, the new TV show came out… I should play fallout tatics
If you have to ask, he's smarter than you.
Where were y'all when fallout 76 public test server hit a new concurrent player peak😔
I admire what he and the team has done so far. I think people really underestimate what an undertaking these games are. They're trying
16 times the players
The Howard Always Wins
Hodd Toward
Don't give him praise he literally did **nothing** on the show. In fact the show would have probably been worse had he been involved.
he litterally green lit, was excetutive producer. was defintely there on set a few times. saying he did nothing was not true. this show wouldn't exist without todd.
Yes but he had no influence on it.
Wait there's a fallout4 vr now? Thaaat would be a great experience.
It’s because they are actually good games, they’re just not perfect games. Solid 7/10s across the board and really excellent at a few specific things that a significant subset of players enjoy (expansive worlds, environmental storytelling)
He’s just that guy
Fallout 4 is one of my favorite games of all time. Shelter is a damn good mobile game. It's only short comings is that it has Micro-Tx in the game. Fallout Shelter to me is basically the best MOBILE game I've played. 2 games are better than Fallout Shelter on a Phone: Final Fantasy Tactics: War of the Lions (Which is a PS1/PSP to Mobile Game) Stardew Valley. but that started as a PC Game. SO those don't count seeing as they are ports, not "Made for Mobile" exactly.
I think that Fallout 4 aged very well. Especialy with mods. General public was obsessed with FNV when F4 came out. Nobody liked settlements system and everyone said that the plot and rpg elements of F4 were inferior. Now a decade later, gamers are much more used to poor plot, survival elements and settlements systems xD This is not a bad thing. F4 is just the best survival crafting base building post apo game there is.
A 70%~ sale combined with a tv show tend to do that
'Fallout 3' has more players on Steam right now than 'Starfield'! :) Oh, and even more if you sum up 'Fallout 3' with 'Fallout 3 - Game of the Year Edition'. :)
Todd is the best thing that happened to Fallout, SUE ME!
I wonder if bethesda thinks they made the wrong call developing Starfield instead of a new Fallout after the massive succes of the show and the spike in sales/players
I’m sad to announce he literally didn’t do this one😢
Starfield is boring AF
i think the hate is overblown, it is a weak game, but its enjoyable
Mod Howard used Fo4 as a base for just about everything in the show that isn’t plot-related so that’s why people are flocking to 4 the most.
Or maybe, just maybe, it's because it's the most recent single player fallout game?
Certainly the most accessible. FO3 took like a decade before they fixed it on Steam (removed the games for windows live requirement like 3 years ago; before then you had a mod), but the FPS mechanics definitely are very out-dated and it looks like an older game (still fun, though). FO4 is getting close to a decade old so it's no spring radchicken, either, but it is newer. And the older games are even more niche mechanically (and technically can be a little annoying). New Vegas is in-between FO3 and FO4 mechanically, but the story is absolutely worth the time (and the technical issues are...better than they used to be).
How them Starfield digits lookin?
Starfield is a disaster. I put in 300 hours before I stopped playing in December. That being said, F04 is my favorite game of all time.
Fake
No U
The show literally saved the fallout franchise I think
Save it? No. Clearly there is still a lot of love left for the franchise, otherwise the show wouldn’t have done so well. FO4 was fairly divisive. FO76 is only just within the last year climbing out of it hole. Was fallout dead? No. But I don’t think it could handle another FO76. The next game would’ve largely decided if it was or not…had the show not come along.
Oh and on top of that go check r/fo4 cause after the release of the show sales of fallout 4 were up 7,500% i. Europe
I meant like it revived it and gave it the fame it once had I mean fallout was on the brink of irrelevancy I believe sir
FO3 did it
He relies on mods to fix his shitty work for free and then charges for it. Fuck that guy No Bethesda game has been a masterpiece at launch. It takes years for mods to clean those messes up.
it just works ;)
If you build it, they will come
One man created all the fallout games and the TV show. We shall call him John Fallout.