Has Beth lost its edge on RPG gaming?

[Mashi]

As a game developer though you shouldn't be relying on the fans to make content and fix your games , especially when you are charging a 60€ premium price .

 

 

 

Quite true, the thing is they've become accustomed to fans fixing their games and making content.  There seems to be a mentality of "it's good enough, we'll just let the fans build on top of it"  coming from Bethesda.  Then again, there aren't really many companies out there that build games like theirs either in the RPG setting.  Strategy games sure?  Probably the worse example of a screw-up would be Creative Assembly and ROME 2.  It ended up being fans fixing the game, then them coming back and re-releasing the title.

 

 

 

OK, I withdraw the EA comment

 

Really, I suppose the thing with Beth isn't so much "lost their edge" as "lost their way". They used to be company with a vision, and it seems like they are losing sight of that on account of all those pesky dollar bills getting in the way.

 

 

Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm following the discussions still, but I have no intention of playing or modding until they get all these DLC out of the way and I have an idea of what the final game is going to look like.

 

 

Well in Beth's case, I'd say you're right.  I think they saw the big dollar signs with Skyrim and thought "ah we can milk this and they'll buy it even if it's terrible."  As for playing, it was the first game I got a refund for via steam.  I was really disappointed by it, I'll likely pick it up when the "grand emperor GOTY/Century edition" is launched.  I'm not disappointed by Witcher 3 though which blows it solidly out of the water.

[Guest endgameaddiction]

 

As a game developer though you shouldn't be relying on the fans to make content and fix your games , especially when you are charging a 60€ premium price .

 

 

 

Quite true, the thing is they've become accustomed to fans fixing their games and making content.  There seems to be a mentality of "it's good enough, we'll just let the fans build on top of it"  coming from Bethesda.  Then again, there aren't really many companies out there that build games like theirs either in the RPG setting.  Strategy games sure?  Probably the worse example of a screw-up would be Creative Assembly and ROME 2.  It ended up being fans fixing the game, then them coming back and re-releasing the title.

 

 

And it's become a habit that most gamers will settle with buying broken products like Bethesda games and not care of the quality because they have now relied on modders to fix the stuff that needs to be taken care of by BGS.

 

This is why paid mods will return and will become successful in the end. Because one way or the other people will settle for less like the whole DRM fiasco which is now for good a part of gaming.

 

The only reason why Bethesda stepped back with Skyrim was because it was an old game. Once that ball starts rolling on console mods they'll have a easier chance with paid mods, to the point it won't matter for pc. And it's not like they care about pc. Hell, if they can (and probably will) they'll kill off their pc version so that we migrate to console modding. They wouldn't have to deal with piracy. They wouldn't have to deal with adult mods. They wouldn't have to deal with 3rd party mod sites when they can have control of it on their website.

 

Maybe I'm right, or maybe I'm wrong. I just don't trust Bethesda anymore.

 

What I do know is that Bethesda will never die out. They have too many fans who are happy buying broken games and relying on modders to fix it. And whether or not Bethesda knows this by either ignoring it, or simply doesn't even care, one thing is for sure: they are generating revenue and as long as they are making a fortune out of their overly hyped bad quality games, it's all the same to them. They see it as they are doing just fine because the consumers are content with their product as is. Especially if they have massive people pre-ordering their games.

 

If I am so wrong on that, title after title has been the same thing: broken games.

[DocClox]

I'm not saying don't complain, I'm saying aim it at the management

 

Has anyone been blamin the developers? In this thread, I mean.

 

What I do know is that Bethesda will never die out. They have too many fans who are happy buying broken games and relying on modders to fix it.

Oh, I don't know. All it would take is a couple of under-performing releases. Beth misjudge the casual market want this week, and don't make the sort of profit they usually manage; add to that the cost of maintaining a second studio and Zenimax decide they're not getting the ROI their spreadsheets predicted and sell the company to EA. EA stripmine all the IP, close the Bethesda studios and produce about 100 identical Skyrim sequels, all more or less the same except for minimal changes to the art assets. Henceforth the most interesting thing to happen in the TES world is the legal wrangle between Zenimax and EA as to who owns the Online rights.

 

That's how games companies die.

[prinyo]

 

 

Has anyone been blamin the developers? In this thread, I mean.  

 

The original comment from tazdotnet seems to say that the devs are to blame for the problems with the game because they couldn't make it within the deadlines and for the problems with the DLC because the devs decided to try to do more different DLCs instead of properly finishing the ones they create.

 

 

 

 

management gave the dev team 4 years to make a game that really should have been much more fun but they did not make it. this explains all the cut content people have been bitching about  (...)

the dev team pitched a rough idea of the DLC they wanted to make to management and management gave the a certain amount of time (more than expected) so the dev team decided to make more DLC because they would have time

 

 

 

 

But then in his next post he says that the management is to blame for everything. I guess I could have misread his original post. Or maybe he decided to point the finger in the other direction. 

[ToJKa]

...and Zenimax decide they're not getting the ROI their spreadsheets predicted and sell the company to EA.

Except that Zenimax is owned by the people of BGS. It's a legal thing i understand, mostly the same people behind both of them.

 

Also it's a privately held company, so none of those evil shareholders to deal with.

And besides, they are becoming another EA

[Guest ...failure]

 

...and Zenimax decide they're not getting the ROI their spreadsheets predicted and sell the company to EA.

Except that Zenimax is owned by the people of BGS. It's a legal thing i understand, mostly the same people behind both of them.

 

Also it's a privately held company, so none of those evil shareholders to deal with.

And besides, they are becoming another EA

 

 

 

[xartom]

Imo they never really had one, look at their first game ES Arena.... Yes it had scope, but little else. MW was the only game with even half-assed lore, rest of them are meh or complete crap in the case of Arena. Great sandboxes though, lots of fun to mod, not so sure on the RPG part without use of imagination rather than what's directly in game.

[spoonsinger]

Ummm, considering the hardware limitations, Arena - and in fact Daggerfall - had to run within, they were really quite good. I actually never liked Arena though - I don't think the lore had been fleshed out at that point, but did appreciate where it could go. It was like the start of the 'bell curve' of the gaming series. Where the high point of that curve is probably open to conjecture.

 

Anyway just for a quick idea. Has anybody counted the number of cultural references & easter eggs in FO4 compared to other Beth games? It's probably a rubbish metric, but might give an indication of the 'fun' the developers were actually having while creating the game. (and thus how likely it was just a cash cow thing, rather than a labour of love).

 

[Nergui]

Ummm, considering the hardware limitations, Arena - and in fact Daggerfall - had to run within, they were really quite good. I actually never liked Arena though - I don't think the lore had been fleshed out at that point, but did appreciate where it could go. It was like the start of the 'bell curve' of the gaming series. Where the high point of that curve is probably open to conjecture.

 

Anyway just for a quick idea. Has anybody counted the number of cultural references & easter eggs in FO4 compared to other Beth games? It's probably a rubbish metric, but might give an indication of the 'fun' the developers were actually having while creating the game. (and thus how likely it was just a cash cow thing, rather than a labour of love).

 

I've found quite a few. I got a general sense that they enjoyed building the FO4 world. I even found one place that was deliberately making fun of a frequent mistake by FO3 and FNV players.

 

Here it is. Don't look if you want to discover it for yourself.

 

 

 

 

[bjornk]

 

 

 

Who is to blame? Todd, clearly. This is what you get when you oversimplify your RPG by cutting down the things that you deem "unnecessary".

[Guest Mogie56]

I think someone is oversimplifying a chart thinking it proves a point but it makes no sense whatsoever. whom ever put the chart together hasn't played the game nor has a clue. 

[Anbeegod]

I think someone is oversimplifying a chart thinking it proves a point but it makes no sense whatsoever. whom ever put the chart together hasn't played the game nor has a clue. 

 

Think about it, it isn't all wrong. At least the comparison is perfectly correct.

[Bindair Dundat]

As a matter of fact, Witcher 3 is extremely overrated. Good game? Yes. But not even best in the series. People just ignore its many flaws in favour of its massive size and pwetty gwaphics. And due to CDProjektRed not being whores like Ubisoft or EA. Yet.

 

UI: why wasn't there a search bar? hundreds of quests, characters and diagrams in a long list and we were forced to roll through them.

Quests: we could only track one? Why? We could track more in the previous games.

Journal: nerfed compared to the previous games. No location or book entries.

Alchemy: no journal or minimap aide. Didn't know that Celandine only grows in one specific area? Tough luck.

Controls: either do jumping or don't do jumping, but this Dark Souls type of "jumping" is atrocious. I couldn't roll past a pavement in combat, but I accidentally climbed the market stand out of combat. And screw igni+lightsources. NEVER does the game require us to extinguish lightsources, yet they freaking mapped it on the general interact key. Bravo...

Exploration: they messed this up by marking all the interesting locations with "?". If Skyrim had a "?" at every location, we wouldn't have spent half as much time exploring it.

Villain: the most boring title villains in video game history ever. Even random trolls were more well-developed than the Wild Hunt.

Pacing: extremely long and boring Act 1, a good Act 2, and a very short Act 3 where all the 3 Wild Hunt bosses are cramped into. We barely had time to learn Caranthir's name before killing him. 2 of the 3 villains died within 5 minutes of each other.

Story: why ignore Iorveth's Act 2 from TW2 entirely? No mention of Iorveth, Saskia, Yarpen, or the situation in Vergen. It's like Roche's Act 2 was canon.

Writing: it was painfully obvious that they decided to make the 3 "find Ciri" starting quests available at once in the last minute of development. Because the order was obvious and we were just held back by assholes who didn't tell everything until you needed it to progress further. If my daughter was in danger, I wouldn't wait on someone's whims to tell me where she was. If they knew and didn't say it, I would beat it out of them. Or find one of my many sorceress friends to rip the information out of their minds.

Minigames: after 2 Witcher games with their own minigames, why the hell do people still ask back if we want to play now? Why else would we click the "play" option?

Geralt: "How about a game of gwent?"

Guy: "Do you want to play now?"

Me: "No, I freaking want to play tomorrow..."

 

In conclusion, they wanted to do so many things in one game that they didn't have enough time to put everything tightly together. But at least they tried to add many new things as opposed to FO4. Hope they learn from this and fare better in their next game. As for Bethesda, one "meh" game won't ruin them. But after the reception, they will sure as hell work harder to deliver next time. And I sure as hell won't be buying TES6 until after I've read some reviews.

[bjornk]

https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/418m3o/the_biggest_difference_between_new_vegas_and/

also

 

Role-playing games mainly involve interaction with NPCs through dialogues, if you don't like that why make or play RPGs? There are many games for people who just want to shoot things.

 

 

[Frozium]

https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/418m3o/the_biggest_difference_between_new_vegas_and/

 

also

 

 

Role-playing games mainly involve interaction with NPCs through dialogues, if you don't like that why make or play RPGs? There are many games for people who just want to shoot things.

You'd be surprised if you knew the amount of "Will Obsidian save Fallou?" threads. Personally, I'm praying for Obsidian to do so 

[Guest endgameaddiction]

And create another boring so called wasteland so everyone fanatic can back it up and say it is? I doubt BGS is going to allow Obsidian make another Fallout.

 

If Obsidian wants to "save" Fallout, then they should pressure Bethesda into selling them over the rights. Wait, I doubt they have the budget to even consider that since they almost went out of business if it wasn't for Pillars Of Eternity.

 

If Obsidian bought the rights to the Fallout franchise, you bet I'd never support or buy any of the games. Let alone join a forum and solely talk about it like no tomorrow. I would never continue to support the franchise on a developing team I don't like and continue to argue about it. And that's where I will never understand why this is constantly being argued Obsidian does a better job from Obsidian fans when they continue to purchase Bethesda's interpretation of Fallout.

 

I didn't even buy Fallout 4. I have no desire to support Bethesda no more. I'm fed up with their ongoing broken unstable games. I can't stress enough the shit I went through with Skyrim that turned out to be the pinnacle of all unstable games. I really wish I would of never gotten into the TES franchise. But I did. If I could return TES Anthology and get my money back, I'd do it in a heart beat. Thus I will go back to play testing games before I make the decision to invest in another game again.

 

The only thing that draws my attention to Fallout 4 is the world. And BodySlide because it something that I wish existed for Fallout 3. The ME Dialogue style choices and voiced protagonist is what turned me off about that game. Apart from the whole ascending from the vault into the wasteland to find another family member. It was good enough for Fallout 3 and this one may be good (I don't know), but if they are constantly going to be repetitive with a vault dweller ascending from the vault scenario, it's already gotten old.

[Guest Mogie56]

 

I think someone is oversimplifying a chart thinking it proves a point but it makes no sense whatsoever. whom ever put the chart together hasn't played the game nor has a clue. 

 

Think about it, it isn't all wrong. At least the comparison is perfectly correct.

 

The Comparison is only correct if you hate Bethesda and Bethesda Games and Todd Howard. People try so hard to make their opinions of a game and it's developer out to be gospel and they are not, they are nothing more then opinions that have relevance to the one that has that opinion and others that may agree with that opinion. But then they argue the whole world agrees with them by saying "Most People" and that isn't even close. The majority of people that actually bought Fallout 4 are playing it not complaining about it. but of course some had their expectations extremely high and they weren't met. Then I see some of the comments like in this thread as to knowing what kind of sloppy developer Bethesda is but I wonder, Why the hell did they even bother to buy the game if they already knew. Do people not learn from what they consider past mistakes. Did they somehow think their almighty Obsidian had a hand in making the game and found out too late they did not. If you hate the game, then hate the game but don't sit and bitch about it for the next 2 decades. none of this is being seen by those who would need to see it if they so chose to correct the problems mentioned in what, 30 plus threads here on LL condemning Bethesda. and by the same small group. Not everybody hates the bloody game.

[Anbeegod]

 

The Comparison is only correct if you hate Bethesda and Bethesda Games and Todd Howard. People try so hard to make their opinions of a game and it's developer out to be gospel and they are not, they are nothing more then opinions that have relevance to the one that has that opinion and others that may agree with that opinion. But then they argue the whole world agrees with them by saying "Most People" and that isn't even close. The majority of people that actually bought Fallout 4 are playing it not complaining about it. but of course some had their expectations extremely high and they weren't met. Then I see some of the comments like in this thread as to knowing what kind of sloppy developer Bethesda is but I wonder, Why the hell did they even bother to buy the game if they already knew. Do people not learn from what they consider past mistakes. Did they somehow think their almighty Obsidian had a hand in making the game and found out too late they did not. If you hate the game, then hate the game but don't sit and bitch about it for the next 2 decades. none of this is being seen by those who would need to see it if they so chose to correct the problems mentioned in what, 30 plus threads here on LL condemning Bethesda. and by the same small group. Not everybody hates the bloody game.

 

 

 

 

Would you bother elaborating which part is incorrect though?

 

 

People buy the game for a number of reasons, it's not an excuse to say "many have bought it so it doesn't suck that much".

 

1. It will have mods. With mods you basically don't even need to bother with the main game because you can literally play in a new world. Imagine Falskaar with 3 times larger map, with an alternate start mod that allows you to choose Falskaar to start the game.

 

2. Figuratively speaking, early birds didn't know they'd be fed with infected, contaminated worms.

 

3. It will continue to receive official updates, which might add new features to the game and make enhancement.

 

 

Fallout 4 has its good side. The combat system is a huge evolution due to its fluency, and the game itself is more fluent than previous games. Fluency is what Fallout 4 has improved. That being said, its flaws - let's say there's nothing that can't be fixed by mods.

[BringtheNoise]

RPG's are okay but tend to get on my "Grind for this Grind for that... fuck that lets shoot something" Nerve.

 

Fallout 4 is nice if you don't play the story... it has Mind craft type settlement builds.... just never go into the building with that one minuteman and you can pretty much go on a Zombie, Green Giant, SuperBug Murdering Spree and completely ignore that one newspaper person... cause who gives a shit about the news... Make the news instead.

 

It will get better with people that have imaginations using the CK to create good content....

 

Trainwiz made an interesting 2 part go find and kill just as a learning curve with the new CK and I have no idea what DDproductions is working with Vault whatever... If it breaks the lore then who really cares, maybe it will do a better job at the RPG bits then Beth did with the original game.

 

I will laugh my ass off is someone one or a group put together a mod in short order that out does Beth's on Full Size DLC (hopefully it can be done before the DLC's lands on end users ).

 

Irony I'ld like to see DD Productions do a version of the Disc World mod for FO4 as it would just be funny as hell and a welcomed expansion to the games current setup.

 

I'm also hoping that with the CK being available that Nifskope's and Xedit's development can greatly improve so we can get some updates to the tools and really see new shit show up for the updated Gamebro engine....oops I ment FO4

[GrimReaper]

 

Role-playing games mainly involve interaction with NPCs through dialogues, if you don't like that why make or play RPGs? There are many games for people who just want to shoot things.

 

Nah.

[Guest Mogie56]

 

 

The Comparison is only correct if you hate Bethesda and Bethesda Games and Todd Howard. People try so hard to make their opinions of a game and it's developer out to be gospel and they are not, they are nothing more then opinions that have relevance to the one that has that opinion and others that may agree with that opinion. But then they argue the whole world agrees with them by saying "Most People" and that isn't even close. The majority of people that actually bought Fallout 4 are playing it not complaining about it. but of course some had their expectations extremely high and they weren't met. Then I see some of the comments like in this thread as to knowing what kind of sloppy developer Bethesda is but I wonder, Why the hell did they even bother to buy the game if they already knew. Do people not learn from what they consider past mistakes. Did they somehow think their almighty Obsidian had a hand in making the game and found out too late they did not. If you hate the game, then hate the game but don't sit and bitch about it for the next 2 decades. none of this is being seen by those who would need to see it if they so chose to correct the problems mentioned in what, 30 plus threads here on LL condemning Bethesda. and by the same small group. Not everybody hates the bloody game.

 

 

 

 

Would you bother elaborating which part is incorrect though?

 

 

People buy the game for a number of reasons, it's not an excuse to say "many have bought it so it doesn't suck that much".

 

1. It will have mods. With mods you basically don't even need to bother with the main game because you can literally play in a new world. Imagine Falskaar with 3 times larger map, with an alternate start mod that allows you to choose Falskaar to start the game.

 

2. Figuratively speaking, early birds didn't know they'd be fed with infected, contaminated worms.

 

3. It will continue to receive official updates, which might add new features to the game and make enhancement.

 

 

Fallout 4 has its good side. The combat system is a huge evolution due to its fluency, and the game itself is more fluent than previous games. Fluency is what Fallout 4 has improved. That being said, its flaws - let's say there's nothing that can't be fixed by mods.

 

Because the chart is not fact, it is but an "opinion" of 2 Companies and their Games. It may be correct to you but not to me only because we have differing opinions of the games. the chart in and of itself is a bias opinion and not fact. With or without mods I enjoy FO4 as it is, it isn't perfect but what is?. I did not enjoy NV to me it was nothing more then a revenge game and that's as deep as it went (for me), but that is MY opinion and not fact. but because I did not enjoy NV doesn't mean I'm going to waste all my time condemning it and trying to get others to not enjoy it. that's as much a waste of time as the 30 plus threads here on LL made for no other reason then to bitch about FO4 and Mainly Bethesda. I just feel time would have been better served if all these complaints had been made to Beth.net and not cluttering up LL's forums. But...not my monkey...not my circus.

[Anbeegod]

 

Because the chart is not fact, it is but an "opinion" of 2 Companies and their Games. It may be correct to you but not to me only because we have differing opinions of the games. the chart in and of itself is a bias opinion and not fact. With or without mods I enjoy FO4 as it is, it isn't perfect but what is?. I did not enjoy NV to me it was nothing more then a revenge game and that's as deep as it went (for me), but that is MY opinion and not fact. but because I did not enjoy NV doesn't mean I'm going to waste all my time condemning it and trying to get others to not enjoy it. that's as much a waste of time as the 30 plus threads here on LL made for no other reason then to bitch about FO4 and Mainly Bethesda. I just feel time would have been better served if all these complaints had been made to Beth.net and not cluttering up LL's forums. But...not my monkey...not my circus.

 

 

 

 

 

So... you gave only an opinion, which is going all about Beth-hate, corp-hate and not the game itself. People made the chart not because it's true, but only because they hate Beth and want to shame it? Before saying an opinion, I believe it's necessary to address the opposite sides' first.

 

If Fallout 4 is not a Fallout, no one would have had expectation of a Fallout on it. Fallout 4 uses the name of Fallout, yet it fails to give what a Fallout should give by limiting the freedom and roleplayability. That's the problem. If Beth was not ready to make a sequel for Fallout yet, they basically shouldn't make an entirely different game using Fallout's name. Tell you what? Fallout without roleplaying freedom is like The Witcher without monster hunting, World of Warcraft without story, Dragon Age without characters, and Skyrim without mods.

[DocClox]

Because the chart is not fact, it is but an "opinion" of 2 Companies and their Games. It may be correct to you but not to me only because we have differing opinions of the games.

Well, there are two charts. The NV one seems pretty factual. I've not been through the GECK to check it, but it looks about right from what I remember. The F4 one, while quite clearly an exaggeration, does make a point valid about the essential linearity of the F4 radiants. A more accurate representation would be something like this:

 

talk to Preston -> go to settlement -> talk to settler -> "You gotta help us!" -> four options, all meaning "yes" -> go to dungeon -> kill boss -> go to settlement -> talk to setter & get reward -> talk to Preston -> lather, rinse, repeat

Which isn't as trivial as the chart made it out to be, but it's undeniably linear in comparison with the NV quest cited.

 

You could also argue (with some justification) that the two charts don't compare apples to apples. On the one hand we have a branch of the main quest (if memory serves) and on the other a busywork mission intended to pad out the game content. Although even then, the only place you see this sort of complex decision tree in F4 is in the MQ after meeting Father where you have to decide who to side with. And that's the whole of the MQ you have to consider. The NV chart is still one side branch, and you get similar complexity in other areas of the game.

 

That said, I think the real issue runs deeper still. The problem to my mind is that Bethesda seem to want to transition the format from a multiple-solution, investigation and problem solving format to something more mission based, with an NPC handing out targets and the player running off to fulfil them. The actual story based quests in F4 feel like more of a supplement to the main business of running little errands for the factions, rather than the radiants supplementing story based content the way they did in Skyrim.

 

Which is all fine and dandy if that's what you're looking for, I suppose. But it's not their traditional format, and it's not what a lot of people expected or wanted. Hence all the fuss, really.

 

but because I did not enjoy NV doesn't mean I'm going to waste all my time condemning it and trying to get others to not enjoy it. that's as much a waste of time as the 30 plus threads here on LL made for no other reason then to bitch about FO4 and Mainly Bethesda.

Damn, Mogie! If you like F4, then you have fun playing it! I don't think anyone's saying you're not entitled to have a good time. I enjoyed playing it myself (for the most part, anyway). I just found it got old a bit too fast.

 

That said, I do think the game is interestingly flawed, and I'm quite interested in talking about that.

 

I just feel time would have been better served if all these complaints had been made to Beth.net and not cluttering up LL's forums. But...not my monkey...not my circus.

Bethesda.net? How can I put this? I'd sooner stand alone in the middle of the desert and shout my opinion to the uncaring winds than I would participate in that ridiculous, javascript-heavy, EULA-encumbered, buggy, excuse for a "community portal". Just saying.

[GrimReaper]

 

...

 

 

The Big Dig had quite a few moments where there were a few branching paths to take. The Silver Shroud was also a really good quest in my opinion. It's not like FNV did not have its fair share of 'go there, kill something, get reward' quests to be fulfilled. The chart is bonkers because if you compared a generic fetch quest from New Vegas with one of the bigger quests from FO4 New Vegas would look like the dumbed down version of a franchise many hold dear while FO4 would come off as a true successor, which it isn't.

[Jazzman]

Guess antagonistic generalizations of individual game impressions might lead you guys to nowhere. Think about it.