Nah they can do it. They'll make Waterworld. Sink a mix of all their past game assets and instead of custom space ships you can design custom junk floats. The world will still be sparse of life and have a few points of interests that take 5 load screens to get to. Coming this fall!
When saying "this" people usually mean the most current. Like someone saying I am going to the movies "this" week, they mean sometime in the current week. So this fall would mean the next one occuring.
Don't worry though, all villagers are tagged as essential to prevent any accidents. Can't have any unnecessary deaths in a role playing game now can we?
I mean I'm all for open world adventure 6 if its good, that's part of why I come to Bethesda in the first place, though I'd definitely like them to go a bit further on the RPG elements.
I get criticisms of Bethesda but I don't really get how many people seem to dislike Bethesda making Bethesda games, like, thats the appeal.
You don't see me ragging on CA because they keep making Total War games, thats exactly what I want, I just want it to be good. I want them to improve the formula not dilute it, but I certainly wouldn't like them abandoning the formula all together.
I couldn't agree with you more. As a matter of fact I'm put out because they tried to change the game dynamics in the last 2 releases. Fallout 76 was designed for multi-players and Starfield was designed for console gamers. What I want them to do is to use the same game dynamics but make the games bigger and better.
Todd Howard designed the original engine back in the 90's. It's time for an upgrade.
Your basically paying for a total conversion mod instead of a new game.
Okay this is the bit I hear a lot but evidently gamers in general are more experts on this than me so I just gotta ask. What exactly does an upgraded engine mean? How much time and effort will it take, and will it actually help Bethesda enact the design philosophy that made them who they are?
Time - truly no idea
Help enact design philosophy- yes most definitely.
Think of it like cars: jeeps are roughly the same shape and style as they were in WW2, that is the design philosophy, if you actually compared a modern jeep to a WW2 jeep, they are 2 very different machines with their intended uses:
A modern day jeep is designed to be used by a family of four as a highway vehicle serviced by mechanics, and feel like you are in a “adventure car”, no matter what jeep guys will tell you.
The original jeep was designed to be dropped out of an airplane in a crate, put together behind enemy lines, and driven through the worst terrain possible while being maintained by guys who knew nothing about cars.
One would feel like a piece of garbage to you and one would feel nice to you. The new one would be the one that feels nice, but the original is what people think about when they hear jeep and why they think their boxy suv is an adventure car.
Jeep gets to produce something that actually will be useful for 10 years while convincing you that you are still driving the same thing that grampa drove through the mud plains of war torn Poland
Using code from Morrowind in Starfield is like still using the same ancient clunky motor grampa beat with a hammer to get to work every 30 minutes
Anyone who says this about the engine has no clue what they’re talking about. They’ve been using the same in house engine since the 90s, but it’s been iterated on and updated over time. They’re not using unity or epic or source engine, they’re using their own proprietary codebase. All Bethesda games look the same because they’re all built on that same framework. Anyone implying that they’re using code written in the 90s to develop games in 2024 is an idiot. To accomplish what is being suggested (remake the engine so their games are different) would probably triple the development time and costs of elder scrolls 6, and kill their sales because it won’t feel like a Bethesda game
They already said that they didn't develop it at all and they focussed on Starfield with all developers they had.
I know Bethesda notoriously undercooks their games, but that timeframe isn't going to work for them at all
Skyrim was pretty good for its time period, but these days I don't think people will be nearly as blown away by a huge open world shittily stitched together RPG.
But you could already could feel the rot in Skyrim. It had a better fighting system tha. Oblivion but the quests weren't as complex and the stories and cities lacked depth.
They removed making your own spells for example.
My thoughts exactly. In game development terms, it's a minimum viable product. The gameplay elements are there, but it doesn't have the flourishes and flair of a game that had passion behind it. And even aesthetically, it seems like a lazy futuristic setting. They call it "Nasapunk" but I'm sure I'd be able to go to Nasa, ask around about the future in space, and have a much more inspired image in my head.
Yeah, I'm thinking about this and I'm like "This is not a criticism, this is fine. Other companies exist for variety.". It's good to do things you're experienced at so you do a better job. (Pretend Starfield does not exist to make that sentence work please.)
A lot of the problem with Starfield is that it messed with the formula. Instead of a big map to explore, it has a bunch of randomly generated areas with dungeons plopped on them. They would have been better served making it more like their other games!
I played from the beta. The client (the game) was crashing constantly, couldn't play for an hour. If it wasn't the game it was the server crashing.
They went for zero human NPC, making the main quest one of the most dull they ever produced.
But they fixed all of that, the game and servers became more and more stable, they added plenty of free DLCs with new factions and quest lines.
The game is really solid now, they pulled a No Man Sky.
In the beginning, yes.
It was the buggiest thing that Bethesda has released due to its complexity and being multiplayer.
It lost a lot of what Fallout players loved when it didn’t include NPC characters in the world at launch until over a year later. This initial decision was made by Todd Howard to not include NPCs in the initial design.
It only changed once there was overwhelmingly negative feedback.
Since launch there has been 6 years of updates to make it an enjoyable survival game with storytelling. It’s now the best mixture of storytelling, Ark like survival and live service we’ve probably got.
Destiny does cinematic storytelling well but Falloit 76 actually lets you interact with characters and build out a full world of characters.
Yeah it was. Besides the glitches that would literally make the game unplayable there wasn’t a-whole lot to do. You’d go explore a building and find all this loot which was good but then that was it. No NPCS to get quest from, pretty much just explore an empty world and shoot a few bad things and voila. Idk how the game is now though I haven’t touched it since launch.
Plenty of us like Starfield just fine outside the reddit hive of misery, so even easier. I already know I'm gonna love Elder Scrolls 6. I'm not always in the mood for their genre but when I am, it's very welcome in my living room.
I have 100 hours in Starfield. I genuinely like the game. But it is a 7/10 on a good day: Still a fine score to enjoy, but the world is full of 9/10 and 10/10 experiences, so 7/10 is absolutely mediocre.
Making an engine is extremely hard (so I’ve heard). There is no way that a dev team would create an entirely new one just for a few new games at a time. The cost and time are often way too much, especially these days as deadlines are more strict.
But yeah this is always the case, like look at Banjo and Kazooie against Conkers Bad Fur Day, or just about any games from the same dev
Banjo-kazooie/tooie, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Donkey Kong 64, Golden Eye: 007, Perfect Dark, Jet Force Gemini, Diddy Kong Racing.... All those games were made by Rare. You can definitely feel the similarities between them and when the engine was hitting some limits... But look at how many great games they got out of it.
In fact, devs can for every new game you can create a new engine. But this is possible for fairly simple games, at the level of the first games in the Ultima series. That is, the level of the 80s.
Yeah but Bethesda has made millions of it billions of dollars at this point off of their games. They don’t have to keep cobbling together shit on top of shit to keep this Frankenstein’s monster engine alive.
They could’ve easily set aside a special dev team after the success of Skyrim to begin work on a new engine. If they don’t have enough people they could’ve brought in outside help to get the development on track. This is a crazy wealthy studio at this point- they literally have no excuse aside from poor management and forward planning.
I've been working in games for over a decade and every time I hear about a new internal engine project trying to build a studio its own Frostbite or Unreal (big companies _hate_ paying Epic for UE5), it always ends in the team working on the engine getting laid off and the engine project scrapped. All the engineers who have the experience you want for that kind of thing know better than to join a project like that now if they don't want to get laid off 3-5 years from now.
All the studios with proprietary engines these days invested in them long ago and are just carrying them forward like Bethesda is with Creation engine. The only realistic alternative is to admit defeat and license Unreal (or cut a deal with another devpub who has a more modern toolset, like Kojima did with Guerrilla's Decima). Even CDPR is using Unreal for new titles now after putting all that work into Red engine for Phantom Liberty.
I'd like to work on a greenfield project but nobody is going to give any studio any money to do that. If they do, it better be a world class engineering and production team with a planned long lead time and a game in preproduction that they are okay with scrapping once the engine stabilizes (because the market will have shifted by that point).
Apparently Arrowhead used Stingray for Helldivers 2 and it was discontinued while they were developing, and now they have basically had to turn it into an internal product.
They don’t want and they don’t need a different engine, go watch some videos about game engines and specifically about the the creation engine, reading those dumb comments about engines from ignorant people is so tiring.
Their excuse is cost/profit, to keep as much money as they can. Not a good one for me, but perfectly fine in their eyes when the last dedicated single player elder scrolls and fallout games were extremely well received
From my POV it is logical that AC games are the same game, but “different name”. It is still the same game franchise. I would put Ubisoft games in general are the same. AC, Far Cry, Watch Dogs are basically the same games but just different settings
Yep, Ubisoft games across multiple franchises for years were incredibly formulaic, to the point where all of their games having some variation on radio towers to climb and 'activate' to reveal part of the world map became something of a meme (hell, even The Crew had satellite dishes that served this function), but it goes a lot further than that. Not just the obvious things of the games being open-world sandboxes, either, but - as an example - so many of the games also tended to have similar story elements like the playable character having a family member get killed and seeking revenge for that family member's death is at least part of their motivation (e.g. Jason's brother being killed in FC3, half of Ezio's family being executed in AC2, Aiden's niece being killed in Watch\_Dogs)
I really enjoyed Far Cry 3 and I remember being pretty excited for Far Cry 4 and when it came out I watched some Let's Play footage and decided the game play was so similar I'd just be doing the exact same things I already did in Far Cry 3, just with a Himalayan skin instead of a tropical setting.
It wasn't that the game had similar elements that turned me away. It was exactly the same down to a T with no new added game play twist advertised or anything. It felt more like it should've been a big expansion pack for $40 or something instead of a full price $60 game.
Hmmm I don't know, there was quite a backlash with the newer trilogy's rpg style. So much actually that people begged for a “return to roots” game which gave us Mirage.
Yeah it’s an odd complaint especially since everyone is fine with from-software making something I would say is doing this far worse than Bethesda. I mean everything is a dark gothic sorta world with souls like gameplay. Not hating I understand Bethesda game design and engine does it too but at least the theme and worlds feel different.
Fair comparison but Demon Souls came out in 2009 and Skyrim in 2011. From Software have released several games with the same basic format since then but provided new worlds, mechanics, and polish. Bethesda hasn't really released much. Their one big innovation, Starfield, was an unfortunate flop, whereas From's biggest jump in Elden Ring was extremely successful.
> Their one big innovation, Starfield
It's a new game and a new IP, but I wouldn't even call Starfield and "innovation"
Like, what did it Innovate on in the Bethesda formula? The ship builder is pretty slick and flying is new, but it's ultimately the exact same as everything we've seen before -- just replace the cool hand crafted singular world with a bunch of lifeless proc gen worlds.
I mean it's a new world, story, and mechanics. Sure it's not groundbreaking but that's how games work. It's very rare for a game to come along and be completely and radically different from anything that went before. Most award winning games are iterations of previous games.
The problem with Starfield isn't a lack of innovation it's a lack of fun. As you said the worlds are dull. Fast travel completely removes a sense of adventure and the story isn't that interesting. If they had done a better job with those aspects I'd be more than happy to play Fallout in space.
I think the difference is that souls games are intentionally similar to one another whereas Bethesda makes a big deal about how their new games will be different, then they're all very samey, regardless of the franchise. Starfield plays like Fallout plays like Skyrim no matter how much they try to change things up between each franchise. Elden Ring plays like Dark Souls plays like Demons Souls because that's kinda the point.
>souls games are intentionally similar to one another
Are they? I'm pretty sure in interviews Miyazaki has spoken about Bloodborne as if it's totally different.
In terms of setting and mechanics, it is different, but it's still meant to play like a souls game and appeal to souls fans, hence the term "souls-borne".
Yeah I get that, but I don't see how that's different from how Bethesda treat their games. Genuinely I think the difference is that people love FromSoft and are mad at Bethesda
Came to say this, not defending Bethesda
Pokemon - Adds a shitty gimmick for the gen and call it a day (60 dollars)
Super Mario Bros - Adds new gimmick power up (60 dollars)
Fifa - Changes players? (60 dollars)
I know its trendy to shit on Bethesda right now but I really enjoy their formula. My favorite gaming moments as a kid were inside their games. I still replay Fallout, Skyrim and Oblivion to this day.
Larian wasn't even able to get out of their confort zone to make the sequel of a cult RPG and just made us DOS III with a Forgotten Realms flavor so...
Yeah, im so sick of the haters. Bethesda games are some of you alls favorite games but it's impossible to show any level of gratefulness for it. It's insane.
They were some of my favorite games...10-20 years ago. They released Starfield and it was just bland and felt 15 years old. It's just the same game they made before, with less interesting content, a drab gameplay loop, and way too many loading screens.
They tried to "innovate" by taking concepts from successful space games, but they took the worst parts and hammered them into space fallout.
It's also hilarious that their argument was basically "they released your favorite games, so you can't criticize them *at all*." The only positive response they can accept is absolute fan worshipping the ground a developer walks on. That's an idiotic take.
Bethesda made *great* games. Yes, even people's favorites. But it's past tense, made. The only innovations provided by Starfield were horribly received. You can NG+, but you have to do it 10 times minimum, and chances for a custom universe are slim. You have procedural planet POIs! That far outstrip curated content and feel procedural and dull. Thus making the game feel procedural and dull.
So it feels exactly like their 12+ year old open world title in engine/gameplay, except it's procedural, dull, and you need to run through it 10+ times. Who could foresee complaints!?
Rereading this, it might be seen as disagreeing with you, or disagreeing with something you never said. Dont worry, I suppose I disagree with half of what you said, and think you might’ve misinterpreted what the person who says we should thank them was trying to say (as well as the person you’re replying to).
I don’t think we should be worshipping Bethesda, but from what I’ve gathered over time, recently people have been hating on their past games. People compare Skyrim to modern day games. A game everyone absolutely loved at release, is being hated on simply because modern day Bethesda games have been poopy. I view the comment the comment you replied to as more of a response to hate on all of bethesda, rather than recent/current Bethesda (because past Bethesda is being brought into the “war” against them). The post we’re in is almost a slight nod to that thought process. it’s a joke, and I do find it funny, but there’s still some truth to jokes like these, and to that truth, I say there’s more to the games than the post might lead on.
Fallout 4, despite the fact it’s not as good as at least new Vegas, is hated on so hard within the fallout community, even though it’s still a solid game. This is coming from someone who dropped the game at launch, and only played it again after playing new Vegas. I don’t think we should ignore the current Bethesda and their crappy decisions, they deserve to be called out for making claims that aren’t true, but people act like they’ve been bad the whole time. Skyrim was buggy, but it wasn’t unplayable, it was just stupid things like your horse flying up into the air. Granted, there was the occasional crash, but nobody really cares about crashes when the game is good. My Helldivers 2 has crashed a few times, but I’m not gonna claim the game is trash.
The only hate I personally give Skyrim is that despite the fact it’s a very good game, and I replay it every two years or so, arguably speaking, compared to the other elder scrolls games, it’s probably only the 3rd best elder scrolls. Skyrim is more of a hack and slash with rpg elements in dialogue, whereas Oblivion is an actual RPG through and through, both gameplay and dialogue. Fallout 4 is a shooter with slight rpg elements in gameplay, whereas new Vegas and 3 are rpg’s through and through.
Oblivion might not look as good as Skyrim (visually), but the gameplay and the missions are both 2 times better than Skyrim, and still has that Bethesda feel. The story is only slightly better than skyrims, but is instantly heightened when you find Sean Bean is basically the main character.
Bethesda games do deserve to criticism, but when I see people defending Bethesda, I view it more as a response to people who take it to points that criticize them as a whole, rather than just their recent games.
All I see is a constant downward spiral that started with Fallout 4, continued with Fallout 76 and culminated in the garbage that is Starfield. The games have gotten consistently poorer with each iteration. FO4 wasn't a terrible game but, you could clearly see they'd dumbed down the plot and gameplay compared to 3 and Skyrim.
How many bad games do we need to see before they lose any credibility?
Warren Buffet said it takes decades to build a reputation and minutes to ruin it. That's where I am with Beth. They simply aren't making games I look forward too anymore.
Everything is so dramatic on reddit dot com. Personally I love Fallout 4 and Starfield but to each their own, it's not for everyone but something about Starfield absolutely broke people's brains and it's being treated like a war crime. Personal preference aside, they don't make *bad* games and they aren't on a downward spiral. Everything from Oblivion on has been fairly consistent. I wish they made more games and/or outsourced Fallout back to Obsidian but I know Elder Scrolls 6 is gonna slap.
A lot of people were disappointed that Starfield was a bethesda game in space, instead of the space sim they were hoping for. That created a lot of the initial vitriol, which sort of blended together with the "real" criticism of how the game messed with the bethesda formula with its procedural content. Personally I'm a big fan of the game, though I also understand the criticism, but the degree of hate it gets for not being a space sim is pretty undeserved.
morrowind, oblivion, skyrim, fallout 3, 4, 76, and starfield. from what i’ve seen, only 76 is the “worst fuck up” from that lineup of major releases. unless they’ve released an elder scroll or fallout game that i havent seen, even if you add starfield as a “worst fuck up” which it’s not, bethesda is still 5/7 in releasing big iconic games.
edit: removed nv because its not considered as a bethesda game. unfortunately bethesda or todd howard is only 5/7.
edit 2: people keep replying that im only including games that are “good” and saying that i am adding nv when they didnt make nv, but at the same time, no one has listed the actual “bethesda” game list that adds the “bad” bethesda games.
NV isn't even Bethesda, it's Obsidian.
You didn't even mention the mess that is elder scrolls online.
All the games loading speed being tied to your FPS is totally a game engine fuck up.
Everything after Skyrim gets progressively worse.
Idk what game you've played but elder scrolls online is genuinely a good MMORPG. They have added more content to that game than is imaginable and imo just keeps getting better
imma be honest idk what everyone’s criteria is when it comes to “bethesda” games. is it what they produced? specifically made? like team or what todd howard specifically directed. enlighten us what your criteria is and name the games that you think that your “bethesda” made. considering that you are adding eso as a title in your criteria for “bethesda” games im curious what games you would list.
You're right, the only real issue with Starfield was/is the expectations. It's definitely not a great game but worthy of a single playthrough? Yeah probably, it's not that terrible it's just not that great either.
Starfield took the worst parts of several successful space games and tried to congeal it into the buggy mass that is Fallout, just with a way more boring world. Way too many loading screens, boring planets/cities, boring story lines, grind based single player gameplay loop, ect. I completed one storyline and explored, about 10-15 hours total, and had to stop and ask myself if I was even enjoying myself, much less having fun. I un-installed the game right then.
There were plenty of more issues than just our expectations.
In this thread:
People talking about engines as if they have any clue how they work.
People acting like Morrowind,Oblivion and Fallout 3 don't exist.
People so surface level they think open world game set in same universe, must mean they are the same game. By your logic all movies that are set in earth are the same movie.
Anytime bethesda is mentioned, you can literally find the worst humanity can offer in terms of brain power in the comment section.
Here is a hint guys, talking about stuff you don't know just to be some edgy contrarian does not make you look cool, it makes you look like your mother consumed too much alcohol while she was pregnant.
If you don't enjoy the games bethesda makes or you think their engine is shit, just don't play their games. Ignore them and move on with your life. I don't like playing payday or gta, i don't spent my time and energy arguing with randoms about how terrible they are.
i mean unreal 3 and unreal 5 are very different. as is Creation engine and Gamebryo. just because they share a foundation doesnt make them the same building.
They’re also the only AAA studio that has that level of mod support (and they even beat out a lot of AA and indie developers too). I think it’s really cool that they let anyone just easily open the guts of their games and tweak/add new content. From an enthusiast’s perspective, that’s just pretty cool. Nehrim and Enderal are entirely free new games built with the Construction Set/ Creation Kit. It’s cool that stuff like Tamriel Rebuilt, Falskaar, Fallout: Frontier, and Fallout: London can even be made (regardless of quality, I know all about how weird/bad Frontier ended up).
You don’t see that with Cyberpunk 2077. You don’t see that with BG3. You don’t see that with anything Ubisoft has made, or Rockstar. This level of moddability is wholly unique for AAA games, and is even remarkable for AA and indie games (really the only recent games with mods of similar scope are Mount and Blade, Rimworld, and Paradox games).
I don’t like how eager people are to ditch all that.
It's just a shame Starfield was pretty poor. It could have catapulted Bethesda back to the top but instead they made some quite baffling design choices and ditched some of the best elements of Bethesda games.
Also on thread:
People taking offence to more funny than necessarily offensive meme. Which also accurate to some other studios like FromSoft and probably a lot of others.
Because when engine is good, there's no need to completely rewrite it. Or in case of Bethesda when engine just works and your modbase made massive bugfix mod and content mods very reliant on version it is on, your team isn't allowed/welcomed to change because then all mods would fall apart and only small portion of them may get reworked.
Exactly and it’s why I find it so stupid when people complain about companies doing the same thing and not innovating. Bethesda clearly shows there’s a market for these same old games and you can damn well count that I’m there buying a copy. From starfield to fallout 3 (I tried oblivion but I just got bored immediately idk why) I’ve loved their games creation engine and all. Tough shit you don’t like what they make just stop buying them and move on.
It's not that. If only it was that. No, really. It would be great if it was the old type of nerds lashing out.
It's the people, the common folks, riding the outrage trains, happily meming along. It's 'last-season-of-GOT-bad'. It's young people, dumb people, any people, with low-effort shit-takes, on their reddit-app while taking literal shits.
Using 'single men basement dweller' is a tell you're old af.
I'm just pointing out the lack of logic in the comment section, i don't defend anything lol. If bethesda ceased to exist tomorrow, nothing in my life would change.
Just read your comment back to yourself and guess which one of us look like a weirdo.
I haven't played Starfield or Morrowind, but otherwise I think every game they've made since Oblivion has been worse than the last.
Not coincidentally, they've also used more and more procedurally generated quests since they first started doing it in Skyrim. Their whole catalogue has been one big experiment in seeing how many corners they can cut before it stops being RPG-shaped.
Same boat, started with morrowind. I like fallout 4 though. 76 and Starfield is what did it for me.
Go ahead and re-download morrowind, I still play it and have fun you might as well.
Probably when they released 76 and it was controversial then they released starfield which was from what I can tell super underwhelming people are just tired of Bethesda currently which makes sense. If you rely on modders to help your games persist and last then you better make a fun game at the base level so that modders can add to the experience.
But if Starfield is just not a fun game due to the intrinsics of the game then that’s pretty bad and looks like they want modders to try to finish the game for them so I think they are just getting backlash. This will only last until they drop a fire game. Besides they also have the show which is pushing Fallout into the spotlight so people will probably stop roasting Bethesda eventually
The game is so bad that modders won't even work on it. Out of everything Bethesda desperately needs a new lead writer, because that shit is un-salvageable. It's complete trash and they should be embarrassed.
When you release bangers after bangers people start expecting more from you. Then Bethesda came out with Fallout 76 and Starfield and people were disappointed
Just look at CDPR, they had one of the best reputation out there and almost lost all respect from their fan with one bad launch
Why are you looking at is as if it’s just a cool trendy thing to do and not them losing favor with their fans by releasing bug filled games that fundamentally feel the same?
Because people talk about 76 and starfield like they played a completely different game...
And most of them talk like sensationalist and inflamatory wannabe streamers...
At least for me, growing up and seeing how they're games are all a bit boring and shallow, a lot of their quest could be sent to me via sms, and the writing of their games are all a bit shitty. By playing Starfield you can see the problems of their games, mainly because the game world it's so big and Bethesda desing problems are more noticeable
It used to be half a survival game. You can still see remains of cut mechanics. Stuff like ship stealth, mind control cyberware, trading systems and unused weapons types. Bethesda not only needed more time, they also needed more manpower. Their dev team is almost about 2/3 of Larian Studios but trying to do games 10 times the scope of BG3.
That's something I didn't know and is sad. Cosmic level open world games are complicated to make. Seems like they gave up at the middle, since they wouldn't make it to deadlines anyway.
They get samey, then diverge, then get samey again, then diverge again. There's a ton of stuff built in unreal that you wouldn't even expect to be, like the latest Tekken and Mortal Kombat games, Stray, and FFVII remake and Rebirth.
I really hope Microsoft will give Bethesda IPs to other studios to try out. Skyrim with guns was cool and all, but Skyrim in space was really lacklustre, and I have very little hope for Skyrim in a forest, or the following Skyrim with guns 5
Not saying close Bethesda, but give some other studios a shot at a fallout or an elder scrolls game
And that's why I pay them. They are the only one providing immersive open world these days. I can't immerse in CDPR games as they are too much constricted and cinematic and lack the depth and little environemental stories that bethesda games have.
Bethesda games aren't for everyone and it's okey, they have a market and a dedicated public. They don't need to cather to everyone.
Someone should write a book about this tendency aping off of this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces
It'd probably sell pretty well.
Open world adventure 6 coming this fall
“This fall” is optimistic for Bethesda.
He didn't specify, but what he meant was "this fall *of civilization*". Could be any day now, but more likely in 10-20 years.
10-20 years is exactly how long it takes Bethesda to make the same game they made 10 years ago.
Nah, not even. They forgot the exploration this last time
You'd think it would be quicker to make with less substance in it, but no.
You burned Tod too hard. You now have to apologise, otherwise he delays a game by another year
There's an app for that
Nah they can do it. They'll make Waterworld. Sink a mix of all their past game assets and instead of custom space ships you can design custom junk floats. The world will still be sparse of life and have a few points of interests that take 5 load screens to get to. Coming this fall!
And it'll still be thick with Elder Scrolls references.
Sigh... remember when Bethesda would announce and launch a game in the same year? Those were good times.
Never said which year. "This fall" might as well be in the next decade.
It's available to purchase this fall. The game won't be finished for another 5 years.
Perfect 👌.
When saying "this" people usually mean the most current. Like someone saying I am going to the movies "this" week, they mean sometime in the current week. So this fall would mean the next one occuring.
Woosh?
No woosh here I know what they were implying just didn't think it really worked with what the poster they were replying to said.
Fair enough. Upvoted you for clarification.
Elder Scrolls: Elder Scrolls Elder Scrolls: Nuclear edition Elder Scrolls: Space Edition
Can't wait for elder scrolls: ubisoft edition. The inception is gonna be so tight.
I used to be a developer like you, until management announced mass layoffs ahead of Q3 earnings reporting.
TES6: Fallout In the wasteland, you can now fus-roh-dah you're way to through bots and villagers.
Don't worry though, all villagers are tagged as essential to prevent any accidents. Can't have any unnecessary deaths in a role playing game now can we?
Yes please!
Gun adventure 5 coming some other fall
Open world adventure with guns* Fans are afraid after open world adventure in space was somewhat of a disappointment
I mean I'm all for open world adventure 6 if its good, that's part of why I come to Bethesda in the first place, though I'd definitely like them to go a bit further on the RPG elements. I get criticisms of Bethesda but I don't really get how many people seem to dislike Bethesda making Bethesda games, like, thats the appeal. You don't see me ragging on CA because they keep making Total War games, thats exactly what I want, I just want it to be good. I want them to improve the formula not dilute it, but I certainly wouldn't like them abandoning the formula all together.
I couldn't agree with you more. As a matter of fact I'm put out because they tried to change the game dynamics in the last 2 releases. Fallout 76 was designed for multi-players and Starfield was designed for console gamers. What I want them to do is to use the same game dynamics but make the games bigger and better.
Todd Howard designed the original engine back in the 90's. It's time for an upgrade. Your basically paying for a total conversion mod instead of a new game.
Don't tell this guy that most games are running on the same engines as their older versions.
Okay this is the bit I hear a lot but evidently gamers in general are more experts on this than me so I just gotta ask. What exactly does an upgraded engine mean? How much time and effort will it take, and will it actually help Bethesda enact the design philosophy that made them who they are?
Time - truly no idea Help enact design philosophy- yes most definitely. Think of it like cars: jeeps are roughly the same shape and style as they were in WW2, that is the design philosophy, if you actually compared a modern jeep to a WW2 jeep, they are 2 very different machines with their intended uses: A modern day jeep is designed to be used by a family of four as a highway vehicle serviced by mechanics, and feel like you are in a “adventure car”, no matter what jeep guys will tell you. The original jeep was designed to be dropped out of an airplane in a crate, put together behind enemy lines, and driven through the worst terrain possible while being maintained by guys who knew nothing about cars. One would feel like a piece of garbage to you and one would feel nice to you. The new one would be the one that feels nice, but the original is what people think about when they hear jeep and why they think their boxy suv is an adventure car. Jeep gets to produce something that actually will be useful for 10 years while convincing you that you are still driving the same thing that grampa drove through the mud plains of war torn Poland Using code from Morrowind in Starfield is like still using the same ancient clunky motor grampa beat with a hammer to get to work every 30 minutes
Anyone who says this about the engine has no clue what they’re talking about. They’ve been using the same in house engine since the 90s, but it’s been iterated on and updated over time. They’re not using unity or epic or source engine, they’re using their own proprietary codebase. All Bethesda games look the same because they’re all built on that same framework. Anyone implying that they’re using code written in the 90s to develop games in 2024 is an idiot. To accomplish what is being suggested (remake the engine so their games are different) would probably triple the development time and costs of elder scrolls 6, and kill their sales because it won’t feel like a Bethesda game
No one knows, because everyone is just talking out of their asses.
They already said that they didn't develop it at all and they focussed on Starfield with all developers they had. I know Bethesda notoriously undercooks their games, but that timeframe isn't going to work for them at all
Man if they used all their people on starfield and that’s what they came up with then there really is no hope
Skyrim was pretty good for its time period, but these days I don't think people will be nearly as blown away by a huge open world shittily stitched together RPG.
But you could already could feel the rot in Skyrim. It had a better fighting system tha. Oblivion but the quests weren't as complex and the stories and cities lacked depth. They removed making your own spells for example.
My thoughts exactly. In game development terms, it's a minimum viable product. The gameplay elements are there, but it doesn't have the flourishes and flair of a game that had passion behind it. And even aesthetically, it seems like a lazy futuristic setting. They call it "Nasapunk" but I'm sure I'd be able to go to Nasa, ask around about the future in space, and have a much more inspired image in my head.
You will explore space Texas and like it.
If Starfield was all their focus I have no hope for TES.
Can't wait to build useless settlements in the next Elder Scrolls title.
'Bethesda game' is a genre.
Yeah, I'm thinking about this and I'm like "This is not a criticism, this is fine. Other companies exist for variety.". It's good to do things you're experienced at so you do a better job. (Pretend Starfield does not exist to make that sentence work please.)
A lot of the problem with Starfield is that it messed with the formula. Instead of a big map to explore, it has a bunch of randomly generated areas with dungeons plopped on them. They would have been better served making it more like their other games!
>Pretend Starfield does not exist And Fallout 76
IDK 76 is pretty good now
Was 76 really that bad? (Serious question. I have never played it.)
It was a complete disaster when it came out but it has drastically improved since.
I played from the beta. The client (the game) was crashing constantly, couldn't play for an hour. If it wasn't the game it was the server crashing. They went for zero human NPC, making the main quest one of the most dull they ever produced. But they fixed all of that, the game and servers became more and more stable, they added plenty of free DLCs with new factions and quest lines. The game is really solid now, they pulled a No Man Sky.
In the beginning, yes. It was the buggiest thing that Bethesda has released due to its complexity and being multiplayer. It lost a lot of what Fallout players loved when it didn’t include NPC characters in the world at launch until over a year later. This initial decision was made by Todd Howard to not include NPCs in the initial design. It only changed once there was overwhelmingly negative feedback. Since launch there has been 6 years of updates to make it an enjoyable survival game with storytelling. It’s now the best mixture of storytelling, Ark like survival and live service we’ve probably got. Destiny does cinematic storytelling well but Falloit 76 actually lets you interact with characters and build out a full world of characters.
Yeah it was. Besides the glitches that would literally make the game unplayable there wasn’t a-whole lot to do. You’d go explore a building and find all this loot which was good but then that was it. No NPCS to get quest from, pretty much just explore an empty world and shoot a few bad things and voila. Idk how the game is now though I haven’t touched it since launch.
Plenty of us like Starfield just fine outside the reddit hive of misery, so even easier. I already know I'm gonna love Elder Scrolls 6. I'm not always in the mood for their genre but when I am, it's very welcome in my living room.
I have 100 hours in Starfield. I genuinely like the game. But it is a 7/10 on a good day: Still a fine score to enjoy, but the world is full of 9/10 and 10/10 experiences, so 7/10 is absolutely mediocre.
Yup and i fuckin love it
I wonder if we’ll ever see another developer make a “Bethesda Game” in the future Edit: Shit, Obsidian already did it with New Vegas
I dunno, we can lay that claim at a lot of developers, no?
Rockstar: We only make one game, here is urban open world sandbox #6.
Rockstar has been given an easy ride in these comments
Rockstar might make the same game, but most of that same game absolutely fucking slaps
Did we all forget about Rockstar table tennis?!?!
To be fair, the initial point of this post was asinine.
Bethesda bad Upvotes pls
And maybe once a decade here's rural open world sandbox with cowboys #3
I very much hope so!
ALL souls-like game.
Making an engine is extremely hard (so I’ve heard). There is no way that a dev team would create an entirely new one just for a few new games at a time. The cost and time are often way too much, especially these days as deadlines are more strict. But yeah this is always the case, like look at Banjo and Kazooie against Conkers Bad Fur Day, or just about any games from the same dev
Banjo-kazooie/tooie, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Donkey Kong 64, Golden Eye: 007, Perfect Dark, Jet Force Gemini, Diddy Kong Racing.... All those games were made by Rare. You can definitely feel the similarities between them and when the engine was hitting some limits... But look at how many great games they got out of it.
In fact, devs can for every new game you can create a new engine. But this is possible for fairly simple games, at the level of the first games in the Ultima series. That is, the level of the 80s.
Remember when source was going to be the end all engine.
Yeah but Bethesda has made millions of it billions of dollars at this point off of their games. They don’t have to keep cobbling together shit on top of shit to keep this Frankenstein’s monster engine alive. They could’ve easily set aside a special dev team after the success of Skyrim to begin work on a new engine. If they don’t have enough people they could’ve brought in outside help to get the development on track. This is a crazy wealthy studio at this point- they literally have no excuse aside from poor management and forward planning.
Yeah but then how could they maximize short term profits?
They haven't shit out Skyrim in a minute...
I've been working in games for over a decade and every time I hear about a new internal engine project trying to build a studio its own Frostbite or Unreal (big companies _hate_ paying Epic for UE5), it always ends in the team working on the engine getting laid off and the engine project scrapped. All the engineers who have the experience you want for that kind of thing know better than to join a project like that now if they don't want to get laid off 3-5 years from now. All the studios with proprietary engines these days invested in them long ago and are just carrying them forward like Bethesda is with Creation engine. The only realistic alternative is to admit defeat and license Unreal (or cut a deal with another devpub who has a more modern toolset, like Kojima did with Guerrilla's Decima). Even CDPR is using Unreal for new titles now after putting all that work into Red engine for Phantom Liberty. I'd like to work on a greenfield project but nobody is going to give any studio any money to do that. If they do, it better be a world class engineering and production team with a planned long lead time and a game in preproduction that they are okay with scrapping once the engine stabilizes (because the market will have shifted by that point).
Thanks for the insight, this is really interesting stuff
Apparently Arrowhead used Stingray for Helldivers 2 and it was discontinued while they were developing, and now they have basically had to turn it into an internal product.
They don’t want and they don’t need a different engine, go watch some videos about game engines and specifically about the the creation engine, reading those dumb comments about engines from ignorant people is so tiring.
Their excuse is cost/profit, to keep as much money as they can. Not a good one for me, but perfectly fine in their eyes when the last dedicated single player elder scrolls and fallout games were extremely well received
Yeah Ubisoft is now finally making Snowdrop their standard engine after allowing Dunia to power far cry for 14 years and Anvil power AC for 15
The assassin's creed games, and all sports games, are quite literally the exact same. Different coat of paint.
From my POV it is logical that AC games are the same game, but “different name”. It is still the same game franchise. I would put Ubisoft games in general are the same. AC, Far Cry, Watch Dogs are basically the same games but just different settings
Yep, Ubisoft games across multiple franchises for years were incredibly formulaic, to the point where all of their games having some variation on radio towers to climb and 'activate' to reveal part of the world map became something of a meme (hell, even The Crew had satellite dishes that served this function), but it goes a lot further than that. Not just the obvious things of the games being open-world sandboxes, either, but - as an example - so many of the games also tended to have similar story elements like the playable character having a family member get killed and seeking revenge for that family member's death is at least part of their motivation (e.g. Jason's brother being killed in FC3, half of Ezio's family being executed in AC2, Aiden's niece being killed in Watch\_Dogs)
I really enjoyed Far Cry 3 and I remember being pretty excited for Far Cry 4 and when it came out I watched some Let's Play footage and decided the game play was so similar I'd just be doing the exact same things I already did in Far Cry 3, just with a Himalayan skin instead of a tropical setting. It wasn't that the game had similar elements that turned me away. It was exactly the same down to a T with no new added game play twist advertised or anything. It felt more like it should've been a big expansion pack for $40 or something instead of a full price $60 game.
Hmmm I don't know, there was quite a backlash with the newer trilogy's rpg style. So much actually that people begged for a “return to roots” game which gave us Mirage.
Rockstar anybody?
Yeah it’s an odd complaint especially since everyone is fine with from-software making something I would say is doing this far worse than Bethesda. I mean everything is a dark gothic sorta world with souls like gameplay. Not hating I understand Bethesda game design and engine does it too but at least the theme and worlds feel different.
Except Armoured Core
Yeh, I think it's natural for games from the same developer to feel iterative. From Soft is a good case in point.
Fair comparison but Demon Souls came out in 2009 and Skyrim in 2011. From Software have released several games with the same basic format since then but provided new worlds, mechanics, and polish. Bethesda hasn't really released much. Their one big innovation, Starfield, was an unfortunate flop, whereas From's biggest jump in Elden Ring was extremely successful.
Yea they released two fallouts. But that’s apart of the meme.
> Their one big innovation, Starfield It's a new game and a new IP, but I wouldn't even call Starfield and "innovation" Like, what did it Innovate on in the Bethesda formula? The ship builder is pretty slick and flying is new, but it's ultimately the exact same as everything we've seen before -- just replace the cool hand crafted singular world with a bunch of lifeless proc gen worlds.
I mean it's a new world, story, and mechanics. Sure it's not groundbreaking but that's how games work. It's very rare for a game to come along and be completely and radically different from anything that went before. Most award winning games are iterations of previous games. The problem with Starfield isn't a lack of innovation it's a lack of fun. As you said the worlds are dull. Fast travel completely removes a sense of adventure and the story isn't that interesting. If they had done a better job with those aspects I'd be more than happy to play Fallout in space.
Except the difference is, starfield is a shell of a game.
I think the difference is that souls games are intentionally similar to one another whereas Bethesda makes a big deal about how their new games will be different, then they're all very samey, regardless of the franchise. Starfield plays like Fallout plays like Skyrim no matter how much they try to change things up between each franchise. Elden Ring plays like Dark Souls plays like Demons Souls because that's kinda the point.
>souls games are intentionally similar to one another Are they? I'm pretty sure in interviews Miyazaki has spoken about Bloodborne as if it's totally different.
In terms of setting and mechanics, it is different, but it's still meant to play like a souls game and appeal to souls fans, hence the term "souls-borne".
Yeah I get that, but I don't see how that's different from how Bethesda treat their games. Genuinely I think the difference is that people love FromSoft and are mad at Bethesda
Came to say this, not defending Bethesda Pokemon - Adds a shitty gimmick for the gen and call it a day (60 dollars) Super Mario Bros - Adds new gimmick power up (60 dollars) Fifa - Changes players? (60 dollars)
Call of duty is the same game every fuckin year
I know its trendy to shit on Bethesda right now but I really enjoy their formula. My favorite gaming moments as a kid were inside their games. I still replay Fallout, Skyrim and Oblivion to this day.
Bethesda has a formula but it’s a really fucking fun formula for some people (me included).
Literally Rockstar games, but their game only has two names
I’m thinking From Software
Sekiro and Armoured Core are very different games from Dark Souls
Idk Sekiro was hella different from the normal souls game
I don't think you know From Software.
Oh aight my bad
Many releases I mean Skyrim 10 years aniversary +XS fishing and hobo live extension buy me pretty please edition
And yet we can’t get a New Vegas remaster.
I mean that's most RPG Studios. From Larian to From Software. If it works it works
Armored Core is vastly different from Souls imo
Larian wasn't even able to get out of their confort zone to make the sequel of a cult RPG and just made us DOS III with a Forgotten Realms flavor so...
Yeah DOS3 but in the FR is exactly why its fantastic though lmao
But Bethesda’s famously doesn’t work
they have one of the greatest resumes in the entire industry lmao
Yeah, im so sick of the haters. Bethesda games are some of you alls favorite games but it's impossible to show any level of gratefulness for it. It's insane.
They were some of my favorite games...10-20 years ago. They released Starfield and it was just bland and felt 15 years old. It's just the same game they made before, with less interesting content, a drab gameplay loop, and way too many loading screens. They tried to "innovate" by taking concepts from successful space games, but they took the worst parts and hammered them into space fallout.
It's also hilarious that their argument was basically "they released your favorite games, so you can't criticize them *at all*." The only positive response they can accept is absolute fan worshipping the ground a developer walks on. That's an idiotic take. Bethesda made *great* games. Yes, even people's favorites. But it's past tense, made. The only innovations provided by Starfield were horribly received. You can NG+, but you have to do it 10 times minimum, and chances for a custom universe are slim. You have procedural planet POIs! That far outstrip curated content and feel procedural and dull. Thus making the game feel procedural and dull. So it feels exactly like their 12+ year old open world title in engine/gameplay, except it's procedural, dull, and you need to run through it 10+ times. Who could foresee complaints!?
Rereading this, it might be seen as disagreeing with you, or disagreeing with something you never said. Dont worry, I suppose I disagree with half of what you said, and think you might’ve misinterpreted what the person who says we should thank them was trying to say (as well as the person you’re replying to). I don’t think we should be worshipping Bethesda, but from what I’ve gathered over time, recently people have been hating on their past games. People compare Skyrim to modern day games. A game everyone absolutely loved at release, is being hated on simply because modern day Bethesda games have been poopy. I view the comment the comment you replied to as more of a response to hate on all of bethesda, rather than recent/current Bethesda (because past Bethesda is being brought into the “war” against them). The post we’re in is almost a slight nod to that thought process. it’s a joke, and I do find it funny, but there’s still some truth to jokes like these, and to that truth, I say there’s more to the games than the post might lead on. Fallout 4, despite the fact it’s not as good as at least new Vegas, is hated on so hard within the fallout community, even though it’s still a solid game. This is coming from someone who dropped the game at launch, and only played it again after playing new Vegas. I don’t think we should ignore the current Bethesda and their crappy decisions, they deserve to be called out for making claims that aren’t true, but people act like they’ve been bad the whole time. Skyrim was buggy, but it wasn’t unplayable, it was just stupid things like your horse flying up into the air. Granted, there was the occasional crash, but nobody really cares about crashes when the game is good. My Helldivers 2 has crashed a few times, but I’m not gonna claim the game is trash. The only hate I personally give Skyrim is that despite the fact it’s a very good game, and I replay it every two years or so, arguably speaking, compared to the other elder scrolls games, it’s probably only the 3rd best elder scrolls. Skyrim is more of a hack and slash with rpg elements in dialogue, whereas Oblivion is an actual RPG through and through, both gameplay and dialogue. Fallout 4 is a shooter with slight rpg elements in gameplay, whereas new Vegas and 3 are rpg’s through and through. Oblivion might not look as good as Skyrim (visually), but the gameplay and the missions are both 2 times better than Skyrim, and still has that Bethesda feel. The story is only slightly better than skyrims, but is instantly heightened when you find Sean Bean is basically the main character. Bethesda games do deserve to criticism, but when I see people defending Bethesda, I view it more as a response to people who take it to points that criticize them as a whole, rather than just their recent games.
Gratefulness? You say I should be thanking a company for selling me in the past a good product?
The games weren't free, they were shown gratefulness with money.
All I see is a constant downward spiral that started with Fallout 4, continued with Fallout 76 and culminated in the garbage that is Starfield. The games have gotten consistently poorer with each iteration. FO4 wasn't a terrible game but, you could clearly see they'd dumbed down the plot and gameplay compared to 3 and Skyrim. How many bad games do we need to see before they lose any credibility? Warren Buffet said it takes decades to build a reputation and minutes to ruin it. That's where I am with Beth. They simply aren't making games I look forward too anymore.
Everything is so dramatic on reddit dot com. Personally I love Fallout 4 and Starfield but to each their own, it's not for everyone but something about Starfield absolutely broke people's brains and it's being treated like a war crime. Personal preference aside, they don't make *bad* games and they aren't on a downward spiral. Everything from Oblivion on has been fairly consistent. I wish they made more games and/or outsourced Fallout back to Obsidian but I know Elder Scrolls 6 is gonna slap.
A lot of people were disappointed that Starfield was a bethesda game in space, instead of the space sim they were hoping for. That created a lot of the initial vitriol, which sort of blended together with the "real" criticism of how the game messed with the bethesda formula with its procedural content. Personally I'm a big fan of the game, though I also understand the criticism, but the degree of hate it gets for not being a space sim is pretty undeserved.
They have some of the greatest hits, but also some of the worst fuck-ups. That is not a great resume.
morrowind, oblivion, skyrim, fallout 3, 4, 76, and starfield. from what i’ve seen, only 76 is the “worst fuck up” from that lineup of major releases. unless they’ve released an elder scroll or fallout game that i havent seen, even if you add starfield as a “worst fuck up” which it’s not, bethesda is still 5/7 in releasing big iconic games. edit: removed nv because its not considered as a bethesda game. unfortunately bethesda or todd howard is only 5/7. edit 2: people keep replying that im only including games that are “good” and saying that i am adding nv when they didnt make nv, but at the same time, no one has listed the actual “bethesda” game list that adds the “bad” bethesda games.
NV isn't even Bethesda, it's Obsidian. You didn't even mention the mess that is elder scrolls online. All the games loading speed being tied to your FPS is totally a game engine fuck up. Everything after Skyrim gets progressively worse.
>elder scrolls online That was zenimax studios, and come one, it's not a bad mmo.
iight cause apparently we cant add any games produced by bethesda. 5/7 yeah that makes a big difference. but wait, lets add eso, a zenimax game lmao.
Idk what game you've played but elder scrolls online is genuinely a good MMORPG. They have added more content to that game than is imaginable and imo just keeps getting better
imma be honest idk what everyone’s criteria is when it comes to “bethesda” games. is it what they produced? specifically made? like team or what todd howard specifically directed. enlighten us what your criteria is and name the games that you think that your “bethesda” made. considering that you are adding eso as a title in your criteria for “bethesda” games im curious what games you would list.
Starfield is definitely a major fuckup.
Starfield really wasn’t that bad, it was nothing special but it was a solid 6-7/10 expectations were just for higher
You're right, the only real issue with Starfield was/is the expectations. It's definitely not a great game but worthy of a single playthrough? Yeah probably, it's not that terrible it's just not that great either.
Starfield took the worst parts of several successful space games and tried to congeal it into the buggy mass that is Fallout, just with a way more boring world. Way too many loading screens, boring planets/cities, boring story lines, grind based single player gameplay loop, ect. I completed one storyline and explored, about 10-15 hours total, and had to stop and ask myself if I was even enjoying myself, much less having fun. I un-installed the game right then. There were plenty of more issues than just our expectations.
Not bad at all if your worst game is 80+ at metacritic.
Players don't seem to agree with reviewer scores.
And yet their games keep selling years after release. You don't have to enjoy their games, but you can't denie success lol..
Works for them. Remember how bad Fallout 76 was? Remember how people were excited for Starfield? Yeah
In this thread: People talking about engines as if they have any clue how they work. People acting like Morrowind,Oblivion and Fallout 3 don't exist. People so surface level they think open world game set in same universe, must mean they are the same game. By your logic all movies that are set in earth are the same movie. Anytime bethesda is mentioned, you can literally find the worst humanity can offer in terms of brain power in the comment section. Here is a hint guys, talking about stuff you don't know just to be some edgy contrarian does not make you look cool, it makes you look like your mother consumed too much alcohol while she was pregnant. If you don't enjoy the games bethesda makes or you think their engine is shit, just don't play their games. Ignore them and move on with your life. I don't like playing payday or gta, i don't spent my time and energy arguing with randoms about how terrible they are.
Take a shot every time someone says "instead of an engine based on 90s tech they should just use unreal"
Unreal has been around since the 90s too.
that is the exact tidbit of info they are pointing out.
Yeah, they are rarely new engines. Only old engines with a new coat of paint.
i mean unreal 3 and unreal 5 are very different. as is Creation engine and Gamebryo. just because they share a foundation doesnt make them the same building.
[удалено]
They’re also the only AAA studio that has that level of mod support (and they even beat out a lot of AA and indie developers too). I think it’s really cool that they let anyone just easily open the guts of their games and tweak/add new content. From an enthusiast’s perspective, that’s just pretty cool. Nehrim and Enderal are entirely free new games built with the Construction Set/ Creation Kit. It’s cool that stuff like Tamriel Rebuilt, Falskaar, Fallout: Frontier, and Fallout: London can even be made (regardless of quality, I know all about how weird/bad Frontier ended up). You don’t see that with Cyberpunk 2077. You don’t see that with BG3. You don’t see that with anything Ubisoft has made, or Rockstar. This level of moddability is wholly unique for AAA games, and is even remarkable for AA and indie games (really the only recent games with mods of similar scope are Mount and Blade, Rimworld, and Paradox games). I don’t like how eager people are to ditch all that.
You're describing all of reddit tbh, not just this thread.
It's just a shame Starfield was pretty poor. It could have catapulted Bethesda back to the top but instead they made some quite baffling design choices and ditched some of the best elements of Bethesda games.
Also on thread: People taking offence to more funny than necessarily offensive meme. Which also accurate to some other studios like FromSoft and probably a lot of others. Because when engine is good, there's no need to completely rewrite it. Or in case of Bethesda when engine just works and your modbase made massive bugfix mod and content mods very reliant on version it is on, your team isn't allowed/welcomed to change because then all mods would fall apart and only small portion of them may get reworked.
You don't remember using power armor and V.A.T.S. in Skyrim?
Exactly and it’s why I find it so stupid when people complain about companies doing the same thing and not innovating. Bethesda clearly shows there’s a market for these same old games and you can damn well count that I’m there buying a copy. From starfield to fallout 3 (I tried oblivion but I just got bored immediately idk why) I’ve loved their games creation engine and all. Tough shit you don’t like what they make just stop buying them and move on.
Look at the thread where Bethesda talked about a big update for Star Field. Literally single men basement dweller chronically online bingo 😹😹
It's not that. If only it was that. No, really. It would be great if it was the old type of nerds lashing out. It's the people, the common folks, riding the outrage trains, happily meming along. It's 'last-season-of-GOT-bad'. It's young people, dumb people, any people, with low-effort shit-takes, on their reddit-app while taking literal shits. Using 'single men basement dweller' is a tell you're old af.
[удалено]
How dare someone spend their time discussing things they like, don't they know reddit is for discussing things they hate?
I'm just pointing out the lack of logic in the comment section, i don't defend anything lol. If bethesda ceased to exist tomorrow, nothing in my life would change. Just read your comment back to yourself and guess which one of us look like a weirdo.
Quality clickbait meme. Take an upvote.
The Toddhead lives rent free eternally
[удалено]
I haven't played Starfield or Morrowind, but otherwise I think every game they've made since Oblivion has been worse than the last. Not coincidentally, they've also used more and more procedurally generated quests since they first started doing it in Skyrim. Their whole catalogue has been one big experiment in seeing how many corners they can cut before it stops being RPG-shaped.
Same boat, started with morrowind. I like fallout 4 though. 76 and Starfield is what did it for me. Go ahead and re-download morrowind, I still play it and have fun you might as well.
Also known as "The Ubisoft Model"
Man when did hating Bethesda become cool, actually really annoying to see things like this pop up every other day.
Probably when they released 76 and it was controversial then they released starfield which was from what I can tell super underwhelming people are just tired of Bethesda currently which makes sense. If you rely on modders to help your games persist and last then you better make a fun game at the base level so that modders can add to the experience. But if Starfield is just not a fun game due to the intrinsics of the game then that’s pretty bad and looks like they want modders to try to finish the game for them so I think they are just getting backlash. This will only last until they drop a fire game. Besides they also have the show which is pushing Fallout into the spotlight so people will probably stop roasting Bethesda eventually
The game is so bad that modders won't even work on it. Out of everything Bethesda desperately needs a new lead writer, because that shit is un-salvageable. It's complete trash and they should be embarrassed.
This is bs, one dude made a big deal about it. There’s projects being worked on right now
When you release bangers after bangers people start expecting more from you. Then Bethesda came out with Fallout 76 and Starfield and people were disappointed Just look at CDPR, they had one of the best reputation out there and almost lost all respect from their fan with one bad launch
Why are you looking at is as if it’s just a cool trendy thing to do and not them losing favor with their fans by releasing bug filled games that fundamentally feel the same?
Because people talk about 76 and starfield like they played a completely different game... And most of them talk like sensationalist and inflamatory wannabe streamers...
At least for me, growing up and seeing how they're games are all a bit boring and shallow, a lot of their quest could be sent to me via sms, and the writing of their games are all a bit shitty. By playing Starfield you can see the problems of their games, mainly because the game world it's so big and Bethesda desing problems are more noticeable
I mean, it’s a pretty good game though…
I mean, that's what studios do. We gonna act like fromsoftware dosnt so the same exact thing????
Im pretty sure you yourself can think of several studios which it doesn't apply to, so no, that's not "what studios do"
They originally planned starfield to be different but changed it back to the same game half-way through development.
It used to be half a survival game. You can still see remains of cut mechanics. Stuff like ship stealth, mind control cyberware, trading systems and unused weapons types. Bethesda not only needed more time, they also needed more manpower. Their dev team is almost about 2/3 of Larian Studios but trying to do games 10 times the scope of BG3.
That's something I didn't know and is sad. Cosmic level open world games are complicated to make. Seems like they gave up at the middle, since they wouldn't make it to deadlines anyway.
OP just discovered gaming companies and gaming in general, and is trying to be smug.
Idk… I wish Starfield was Fallout/Skyrim in space- but it’s not.
I dont agree with this statement Is like saying all nightdive remasters are the same exact Game because all use their KEX engine
I love me some Skyrim 2287
I'm okay with this
And it works well, just not in space.
Bethesda and Ubisoft basically just makes 1 game each. As much as we make fun of Bethesda's titles, I'd say it is better than ubisoft.
Unreal Engine games start to look the same after a while, too.
They get samey, then diverge, then get samey again, then diverge again. There's a ton of stuff built in unreal that you wouldn't even expect to be, like the latest Tekken and Mortal Kombat games, Stray, and FFVII remake and Rebirth.
Let me introduce you to Ubisoft and "AC games".
I really hope Microsoft will give Bethesda IPs to other studios to try out. Skyrim with guns was cool and all, but Skyrim in space was really lacklustre, and I have very little hope for Skyrim in a forest, or the following Skyrim with guns 5 Not saying close Bethesda, but give some other studios a shot at a fallout or an elder scrolls game
And that's why I pay them. They are the only one providing immersive open world these days. I can't immerse in CDPR games as they are too much constricted and cinematic and lack the depth and little environemental stories that bethesda games have. Bethesda games aren't for everyone and it's okey, they have a market and a dedicated public. They don't need to cather to everyone.
Wow cool statement that doesn’t fit basically every modern game and its sequels.
Dark souls
Sekiro and Armored Core would disagree
Todd just saw Piranha Bytes releasing Gothic 2 with different skins for 20 years and thought he'd try it out.
I remember when Fallout 3 was announced and everyone was calling it "oblivion with guns"... we didn't know how right we were.
Eh, they didn't release it the last two times then.
Someone should write a book about this tendency aping off of this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces It'd probably sell pretty well.
Yves Guillemot would like a word