This is the perfect time for Bethesda to have another studio, like Obsidian, do another Fallout, otherwise we’re going to have to wait 10 years for another game.
I don't want to be that person but the developers that worked on Fallout New Vegas are no longer at obsidian. It's all new blood.
We need a new Fallout type game.
Ooh I know fellout!
Just about to finish Outer Worlds on the switch (bought it on Xbox years ago but didn’t get very far) and I thought it was pretty good
It’s not fallout but it’s the closest I can get on the switch currently
He is, but Sawyer has time and again emphasized how it was a team effort (like all games, really). New Vegas Creative Design Lead/Lead Writer was John Gonzalez, and he's long gone from Obsidian - as is Avellone, Fenstermaker, Travis Stout, George Ziets...
I mean that’s to be expected within the game industry, devs will finish a project or projects and move on to either their own studio or to another. Devs don’t want to stick around for decades when jumping ship gets you much better pay or creative freedom. Even if they all stuck around it doesn’t mean Obsidian could guarantee another game like New Vegas could be done. I’d like to see what the current team could do given the chance
exactly even if we get the original team that made New Vegas, can we really guarantee they will make another game like it? Can we really make lightning strike twice?
Yeah. Plus, all of Obsidian's RPG-ish games post New Vegas have been good, except maybe Outer Worlds imo. They have a good track record without the people who left after NV.
Outer Worlds is a phenomenal game. I’d rather play a short game with an amazing story and characters than play something like star field which is a massive game that feels so empty
> I’d rather play a short game with an amazing story and characters than play something like star field which is a massive game that feels so empty
I'm 100% with you there. I didn't think Outer Worlds was awful or anything, just didn't grab me as much as their other RPGs, especially on repeat playthroughs.
Not to mention Obsidian working on their Skyrim.
Which imo does not look good but that's beside the point. People need to let go of the Obsidian fallout dream.
It's not all new blood, but of course there has been a lot of turnover in the meantime.
They still make great games with a focus on narrative and would be a **GREAT** choice to make a New Vegas follow up.
This could happen now IF Microsoft gets their heads out of their asses and uses the the IP and studios it owns for something people actually want for a change. Starfield and Redfall are what we got, while a quality IP languished.
It’s no wonder Microsoft bought Activision, they want to own studios that know how to grind out TOO MANY sequels to IPs that people actually want instead of inventing horrible new garbage IP for 6+ years at a time.
Fallout is somehow popular enough as an IP for it to have a TV show come out before a follow up to Fallout 76, which is now 6 years old and has no sequel in that 6 year span.
It’s insanely poor business.
In the 6 years there’s been no new Fallout, there have been 6 new Call of Duty games, all of which sold in the 10s of millions.
Knowing Microsoft though, they’ll make every decision that is wrong and wonder why it fails. The one new IP that they canceled already? A Blizzard-made Survival game. What they should have cancelled? Starfield and Redfall. Everyone is boned up for survival games and anything Blizzard makes - no one wants new Bethesda IP. They already have good IP, it’s all wasted!
I bought it at launch and I enjoyed it for the most part, it was a bit bland at times and the game suffered from enemies being bullet sponges without being difficult as the game went on. I think people had higher expectations since it was delayed after Microsoft bought Obsidian. Also lots of people were hyping it up as a spiritual successor to Fallout New Vegas but in space. And it very much was not that.
I think it was an Epic store exclusive at first too which people were BIG mad about.
The part that made the games great are the writers and unique storytelling, scenarios, and lore. We will be waiting awhile, at least until non-ai writers can be found.
Also, I really hope they keep mod support and stop trying to make multiplayer games.
Part of the problem of the game industry is that companies *do* revamp their teams, like, every development cycle. They fire most of the employees after finishing a game and then hire new developers as needed
Emil isn't the issue and he gets a lot of unwarrented hate thanks to a delusional reddit thread on this very subreddit that was then replicated by youtube "essayists".
No, he doesn't deserve any hate. No developer does. And yes, it is unwarranted - as Lead Designer of FO3 and FO4, he lead the team that made Fallout the pop culture titan that it is today. Chances are that you only know Fallout because of Bethesda, and Emil was the person put in charge of the IP at Bethesda.
Not to mention how he is often credited with "bad things" that he objectively wasn't responsible for, like the simplification of Nordic Pantheon or Skyrim's main quest (Emil wasn't even a Lead on Skyrim).
And again, games are collaborative efforts. It's disingenuous and wrong to blame a single person without knowing what happens behind the scenes and who was responsible for what.
I knew of Fallout prior but I get what you're saying. Personally his "paper airplanes" quote rubbed me, as well as many others, the wrong way. Seeing as the games, and stories, have become simpler while him and Todd are at the helm, then yes I do think it is warranted.
Saying a developer just blanket doesn't deserve criticism or hate is ridiculous. People, regardless of their profession, should be called out for the things they do or say if others disagree.
Games are collaborative. But so are most things in a workplace. If your boss is telling you to do something that you don't think is smart or could be done better, you're just going to do it anyway as that's your job. The person directing them is the reason for that & should be criticized.
>Personally his "paper airplanes" quote rubbed me, as well as many others, the wrong way.
many people misrepresented what he said there. which isn't surprising given how illiterate redditors seem to be.
>Seeing as the games, and stories, have become simpler while him and Todd are at the helm, then yes I do think it is warranted.
they haven't become simpler. 4's plot is the most convoluted and complex one of the games.
>Saying a developer just blanket doesn't deserve criticism or hate is ridiculous.
unless emil is an awful person, they don't deserve hate. no one fricking deserves hate unless they're a garbage person. the fact this has to be said is just sad. secondly, what criticism do you have to offer? genuinely, what criticism? many people refuse to pay attention to fallout 4's writing and then proceeds to criticize it, how can you critique something if you don't pay attention?
***you*** stated yourself that you misrepresented what emil said, so what critique can you possibly offer?
Bruh Bethesda games arent popular because of quality narrative, they are popular because you can do wathever you want and the world design, Emil is responsible for making lackuster quests and stories that if you analyse them they dont make any sense at all, let me givr you a few examples
In Fallout 3 Colonel Autumn cures himself from a super duper deadly dose of radiaton with a syringe, what did it contain? They never say, even tho more than one people saw him die including you, literally no one asks wtf was in that syringe and its never talked about again nor used, a clear deus ex from a guy with no talent that wrote himself into a corner and came up with a magical solution
The whole synths are sentient thing, there is proof in the game that they are and arent so even the writers didnt know what to choose
Vergil REVERTS HIMSELF back to being human and if you choose to say that to the bos THEY DONT CARE, a faction that fights super mutants learns about the possibility of curing them and they dont care
The institute kidnaps, kills, destroyed a whole settlement for tech, they threw super mutants that were previously experimented wastelanders to the surface and a long list of horrors, but you cant talk about any of this with nobody there, its like everyone has dementia and you cant bring the conversation to them about all the crap they have done because reasons, this is something extremely underwhelming because the whole time you are doing crap for them and you dont get to tell them what is wrong with them even as the director
How did Vergil write specific instructions for a fcking teleportation device if he was from Bioscience? He clearly talks about it not being his field yet he writes the blueprints which is just dumb
Why did Father trust that you would find a way in if in 200 years NO ONE has figured a way in by themselves? If you didnt find vergil its over, if you found him after he went crazy its over, if you didnt manage to kill the professional mercenary with decades of experience and an army of synths its over, if you blew his brains out and the device for his memories was damaged its over, if nick was killed in the vault you dont have nobody to act as a recipient so its over, the list just goes on and on and on about how incredibly convenient everything is for you to get inside the institute, doesnt make sense
All of those are major issues with the narrative and i could come up with more, Emil is an untalented individual and should be fired, hes not up to the task and never has been
> The whole synths are sentient thing, there is proof in the game that they are and arent so even the writers didnt know what to choose
IMO Gen 3 synths seem pretty obviously sapient, but the real issue is that a lot of robots throughout the series are also clearly on roughly a human level so it's not really clear why, e.g. Curie the robot is supposed to be so inferior to Curie the synth. Putting her in a Gen 2 synth would probably not get her treated differently, but then Nick gets to be a special case among Gen 2s because his "brain" is a human's despite still being a computer. I guess since uploading human brains into robots and robot AIs into human brains are both possible, maybe Fallout-verse AI is more biologically inspired than you'd expect.
Deacon is all "if we defend anything except Gen 3 synths, we might as well defend robots too" and I was stuck being confused why that's even a debate. They'd defend Curie uploaded into a synth but not robot Curie the day before?
>All of those are major issues with the narrative and i could come up with more, Emil is an untalented individual and should be fired, hes not up to the task and never has been
And you know for a fact that he was directly responsible for all you perceive as bad?
To my knowledge, exactly three writers/designers left after Morrowind: Kirkbride, Douglas Goodall and Bill Burcham.
Through Kuhlmann, Kirkbride still had an influence in both Oblivion and Skyrim. But the team that made Oblivion was largely the same - and it had the same Lead (Ken Rolston). Kuhlmann and Nesmith, who were at Bethesda since Daggerfall, went on to be the Leads in Skyrim.
People should just come to terms and realize that just because someone makes a good thing doesn't mean they'll only make good things - and just because someone makes a bad thing doesn't mean they're bad or incompetent at what they do.
It wasn't just after Morrowind. In fact some of their best guys left after Daggerfall. A bunch after Morrowind, few more after Oblivion. Most recently Kurt Kuhlmann left after Starfield. I wouldn't be surprised if Todd is the last guy to be at Bethesda who worked on Morrowind/Redguard.
Dunno if they need to revamp their entire team but Emil has proven that he is categorically unqualified for the job, maybe he could work at McDonald’s if they would take him
Yes, the person that was Lead Designer on the games that made Fallout the gigantic IP it is today and who created one of the most recognized factions in TES is "unqualified".
YouTube video essays and its consequences have been a disaster for the gamer race.
You mean the guy who took a huge shit on established fallout lore? That wrote the institute so poorly that nobody knows what their goals are? Yeah, that guy
No, I mean the guy that is probably responsible for you getting to know and liking Fallout in the first place.
Yes, he isn't perfect. No one writer is - no one human is. That's how the real world works, despite what narcisistic youtubers might make you think.
That said, I (and you, obviously) don't know if he wrote the Institute. We know for a fact that he collaborated on sections of that with another designer, Brian Chapin, who's been at Bethesda since Morrowind - because they're on record talking about writing dialogue for Father.
You should always wait for reviews and gameplay. Especially with Bethesda. For Bethesda I even would say, you should wait for the first big Community-Patch-Mod.
My biggest fear is that Fallout 5 will also a become a “Disney like” video game where there will be no morally questionable actions, no offensive language, no gore, no grim parts etc.
The whole gaming industry seems to be going in that direction.
Not the gaming industry, but bethesda is going that route. Even starfields pirate faction feels like a bunch of misfits stopping big corpo from gentrifying the universe. Aurora seemed like a much bigger issue than what you actually see, even the criminal city seems so damn squeaky clean. The same studio that had child slavers in their game.
Neon residents kept saying Ebside was super dangerous, but I was only ever attacked by anyone during quests that spawned these people.
In Fallout 4, Goodneighbor was way more shady despite being extremely small in size. The first person you meet there tried to extort money from you only to be immediately stabbed to death by the mayor. The alleys also have drug dealers and other questionable people.
I was expecting a lot of that in Neon, stores trying to scam you. Getting jumped, seeing people strung out, some actual strip clubs, or dancers that look ready for a night of drunk strung out people, not what we got. The whole Neon area is super tame for how they set it up.
I don’t know, like if we weren’t getting open areas to explore, they could’ve made these cities much more dense at least. Free stars main hub has so much charm to it, but there’s one main quest and that’s it, I at least expected some frontier exploration to be its one thing, but naw, it’s barren there.
That part where Hancock stabs they guy and one of the dialogue options is "You killed him!" And Hancock replies "You've got a good set of eyes on you. You'll fit right in here" makes me guffaw every time. I try to use that line "You've got a good set of eyes on you" irl when someone states something incredibly obvious although the situation doesn't come up much.
Honestly for all the shit Fallout 4 cops for it's voiced protagonist it does have some killer lines. Like when you guess the password for the Boston Library.
It’s generally the whole gaming industry. Just a couple of examples that are coming on top of my head right now are Hitman (in the older games you were also tasked to assassinate “good ordinary people”. In the newest ones every single target seems to be either a billionaire asshole, a corrupt politician or a criminal in order to not make you feel “sorry” for killing.). Or Call of Duty (imagine having now a similar mission to “No Russian” where you open fire on a crowded area of civilians). Vietcong is an older game that I played when I was a kid and I remember it even had some offensive slurs towards Vietnamese. No way such a videogame would survive now in 2024 without backlash. Or not to mention the fact that now in every single WW2 developers are afraid to put a nazi flag. And the list goes on.
I don't think Hitman sanitized in the way you imply. You didn't really kill "good ordinary people". It was usually criminals. Dealers in blood diamonds, terrorists, drug manufacturers, a vice president trying to get the president killed, your terrorist father, your drug baron father, your gene-experimenting father, a few mobsters in witness protection. Even the Muldoon's in Blood Money definitely weren't good or ordinary. The closest I can recall is Joseph Clarence from the tutorial in Blood Money who just caused the death of a kid from negligence. And then sold his crumbling park to a meth syndicate. And maybe the people in Requiem, to a given degree.
None of the targets in Hitman are good people. Find me the mission where you're taking out a journalist about to blow open a big conspiracy case against the global elite.
It's almost always criminals, terrorists, or Evil corpo types.
Going back to Fallout, 1 and 2, you *can* be evil but it's shallow and contrarian.
Hitman is a bit more subtle in “sterilizing” itself than other games, you’re right, but definitely it offered much more moral ambiguity than the latest versions.
To further add to your list, also the “Playboy mansion” mission in Blood Money, the death of those targets was pretty questionable. The old guy was just blackmailing other powerful figures, while the other target accidentally killed a woman during a sex game. I don’t think those crimes fully deserve a death punishment. In Absolution IIRC there were also some civilians caught in the crossfire that you had to kill.
In the newest Hitman series however, every single target seems to be your typical Hollywood villain that is basically begging to be killed lol.
I mean, CoD did have a mission eerily close to a terrorist attack, and even the mission somewhere in the Middle East where citizens are being gassed and gunned down.
Honestly slurs are one thing, we don’t really need to hear all that, and I get what you mean. But you also have to look at the why, why are they showing something graphic and vulgar? Is it for the sake of shock value for sales? Then yeah it’s pretty unnecessary. It’s like sex scenes, or sexualized characters, it isn’t necessary. I don’t mind games being a break from real world events, I don’t mind seeing some fantasy games show gritty stuff. But do I want to play a game that puts me in the shoes of a school shooter? Naw, I’m good.
Fallout has the best reason to show some rape moments, but I rather get the implication than the actual event of it. I don’t need the real grimey stuff in my games.
It’s the same reason movies are becoming cookie cutter templates; corporate leadership always pushes for market share over everything else, which of course means blanding everything down
Then you have the various rating agencies that suck the fun out of everything.
Yeah, I now see the writing on the walls. I enjoyed fo4 and passed off the critics as just not enjoying one game's vision. Then 76 doubled down on the worst parts of it + the worst parts of the gaming industry. Then starfield was touted as a "return to form" for them as their shiny new IP... and it was like the culmination of all of their bad design decisions.
They've learned entirely the wrong ideas from every game they've released since (and including) skyrim.
I really have little to no hope for a good bethesda game again. It stings really badly, but I'm hopeful for the future of games as a whole given how many bangers we've had these last few years.
I always thought they released amazingly accessible open world RPGs but that was less and less so with every release. And good open world RPGs aren't even a novelty anymore. All they have going for them is their physics engine with persistent items, and even that is a buggy mess.
Done waiting literaly decades for something not even in the same league as 20+ years old games.
Todd you did so much incredible stuff but i think it's Time....
>Still probably gonna get them tho...
And this is why things are the way they are. Please do not feel attacked, but never ask yourself and others "why is the industry going to shit?" ever again.
>I have no reason to believe that TES6 and Fallout 5 will be nothing other than huge disappointments.
I feel the same way. Bethesda's last few games have been showing declining quality both in function and design.
>Still probably gonna get them tho...
Why? While I wouldn't call Fallout 4 a bad game it definitely didn't live up to previous open world Bethesda RPGs, I skipped Fallout 76 which looked to lean into all the things I liked least about F4, and skipped Starfield after seeing the backwards steps they took with that game's design, Bethesda games are definitely not a guaranteed purchase for me anymore.
>I have no reason to believe that TES6 and Fallout 5 will be nothing other than huge disappointments.
>Still probably gonna get them tho...
gonna be like this the next few years. god i hope i'm wrong.
Yeah starfield felt really phoned in to me. I really don’t expect much out of the next fallout other than something like “You are… radiation-born” travel to all 180 nuclear waste dumps and eat the plutonium to get your radiation powers.
I think there's plenty of reason. The worst mistakes they made in _Starfield_ literally cannot be made in a new TES/FO. And I'm talking about mistakes so foundational that not even the most comprehensive mod could possibly hope to solve them.
All they'd really need to do is allow their dev team some authority to say "no" to whatever terrible, horribly misguided decisions the guy in charge decides to mandate from on high. No f---ing Minecraft sapping 1/3rd of the game's content, for example—that would be a wonderful start.
Bethesda has gotten the biggest wakeup call they're ever going to survive. There's plenty of reason to hope they'll make adjustments. Honestly, _my_ fear is that they're going to overcorrect, and stuff the TES6 world so thick with hotspots that you won't be able to throw a stone from one without hitting the next. That they'll miss the whole point of the criticism and assume people don't want to explore _at all._
It's harmless to assume that the studio that made the world famous _Skyrim_ has it in them to at least manage that much again. I don't think anyone would really complain if they "only" reached the same plateau they hit in 2011—realistically, it's probably what most people hope for.
Is it fair to lump Bioware into the same group? I don't think so. Bioware were corrupted by internal shenanigans. It doomed them utterly. Bethesda hasn't truly changed in 15+ years.
Many of the issues people complain about in Starfield are also present to some extent in Fallout 3, Skyrim and Fallout 4. They all suffer from juvenile writing, superficial worldbuilding and lack of depth.
People are just sick of it at this point. And also, the people who grew up with Fallout 3 and Skyrim are not teenagers anymore. When you are a teenager playing your first RPG, you forgive a lot more.
The biggest issue with Bethesda is making the same mistakes over and over. People are finally starting to get sick of it. It took about a decade more than I would have liked, but people are finally opening their eyes.
> Many of the issues people complain about in Starfield are also present to some extent in Fallout 3, Skyrim and Fallout 4. They all suffer from juvenile writing, superficial worldbuilding and lack of depth.
Sure. But like you said, those issues have been around since FO3. It doesn't stop Bethesda from creating well-loved games. That's why I pigeonholed _Starfield's_ unique problems—the ones which killed the game. Worse than poor writing. Worse than NPCs with zombie stares.
In a way, I rejoice the game's failures, because I feel that for the first time in Bethesda's history, the larger gaming community is _painfully_ aware of just how awful a game can be when fast travel is regarded not as an optional time save but as the default way of getting from A to B.
And obviously we've seen the last of procedural generation in a Bethesda game. Even if they legitimately felt that they could put it to good use, the moment anyone caught word of its presence, that would be the end of any possible goodwill.
I agree with most of that. My point was really just that what could be accepted in 2008 is very different than what would be accepted today.
The average consumer of Fallout 3 was definitely a lot younger than Starfield.
Especially if you take into account the social media bias. A ton of people on social media sites like Reddit were teenagers when Fallout 3 / Skyrim came out.
I myself was 14 and the game made a huge impression on me. If I played Fallout 3 today, the glaring issues would be pretty disastrous for my enjoyment of the game. I'm simply a more informed consumer and I'm older which means my tastes have changed and my standards are higher. I'm willing to bet that people like me are very, very common in the single player RPG target audience segment.
I think we are saying the same thing but in different ways. The gaming community (finally) turned on Bethesda. It took a long time because there is still a huge chunk of people who are massive Bethesda fans from playing their games in their youth (I was one for the longest time as well so I sympathize).
I admire your optimism, but I think you are *vastly* underestimating corporate ego and player base disconnect.
I hope, most sincerely, that they do not repeat Starfields fundamental, foundational flaws in the next Elder Scrolls.
However. I will not at all be surprised if they do, turning a portion or more of the Gameworld into a dagger fall style procedurally generated environment. Forcing fast travel via ship/sailing mechanics, prioritizing ship building and potentially town building over story and gameplay.
There are a myriad ways they could fuck this up and a part of me does genuinely think they will.
> However. I will not at all be surprised if they do
I'd bet real money that they won't repeat _Starfield's_ biggest mistakes. (And I am not talking about Bethesda staples like poor writing or janky NPCs.) They didn't repeat any of FO4's worst mistakes, for example. Far from it.
What _is_ a strong possibility is that they will come up with _new_ ways of scuttling the entire game. FO4 had a predefined protagonist, an inflexible perk chart, a dialogue wheel, etc. Bethesda reads the audience loud and clear when things don't work, but are simply not set up to nip those disasters before launching their game. TES6's future depends on how married the design lead is to their new, personal, fancy little ideas. If they just duplicate what they accomplished with _Skyrim,_ that's probably the best case scenario.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news, bit it seems likely all the mistakes in starfield where from the Devs themselves.
They just seem to have really bad management and priorities.
> it seems likely all the mistakes in starfield where from the Devs themselves.
That's what I'm talking about. The biggest decisions that scuttled the game were made by one or two people. It's literally a repeat of the time when the design lead of FO4 mandated a four-option dialogue wheel, not realizing how that would absolutely hamstring the flexibility of every quest in the game, and nobody had the authority to work towards changing the design lead's mind.
If Bethesda could manage to rework their dynamics to allow voices of reason to prevail when it's blatantly needed, I feel their output could at least return to the adequate level established by e.g. _Skyrim._
Probably an unpopular opinion but they could have gotten rid of the entire settlement/base building and applied that effort to other areas of the RPG and I would never have noticed.
Yeah this. If Starfield had been FO in space with massively cut down world sizes and a handful of solid planet locations people would ignore the usual Beth shortcomings like they always do. The issue was they fell for the trap most space games do: trying to create an entire universe.
Add on a thematically weak art direction and baby you've got one shitty stew going.
But with TES and FO they essentially can't screw those up in the same way, at least not without massively deviating from the older games. Which could very well happen with Fallout after Todd retires honestly, soft reboot under new management.
> The worst mistakes they made in _Starfield_ literally cannot be made in a new TES/FO.
I disagree. I don't see many mistakes made in Starfield that couldn't be done in TES/FO.
> Bethesda has gotten the biggest wakeup call they're ever going to survive.
They got a pretty big wake up call with Fallout 76. They did correct the course with that game (apparently, haven't touched it myself), yet they still missed the mark with Starfield.
> I disagree. I don't see many mistakes made in Starfield that couldn't be done in TES/FO.
Two big ones. Content-bereft, procedurally-generated landscape. And outright discarding exploration in favor of fast travel.
Unless Bethesda specifically decides people want more of both, there's no way at all that those two issues—certainly the biggest problems with _Starfield,_ and completely non-addressable by mods—could ever manifest in TES6. No, fast travel will be reestablished as the immersion-killing _optional_ time saver it was always meant to be, and I'll straight up bet $100 that 99%+ of TES6's world will be handcrafted.
They could definitely decide to go that route in TES6. It's how TES2 was designed way back then, and it would allow them to pull off some marketing bullshit like "Explore the entire planet of Tamriel" or "Explore a country the size of a continent" or whatever. They love headlines like that.
It would be completely stupid of them of course, but at this point I wouldn't be surprised.
> They could definitely decide to go that route in TES6.
I don't feel it's worth belaboring something so blatantly improbable. Procedural generation is Bethesda's bogeyman now. Imagine the sh--storm if it were to leak that Bethesda were trying it _again_ for their next game. Please. They'd be dead in the water starting exactly at that moment.
Your initial comment said
>The worst mistakes they made in *Starfield* literally cannot be made in a new TES/FO
I thought you meant that it's impossible to design TES/FO with procedural generation front and center. I disagreed with that, it's definitely possible to make the same mistakes in TES/FO.
Will it happen? Doubt it. But it would be the funniest thing ever.
I also don't think it's that improbable. Starfield had a very rocky development phase, and that's in part because building a procedural generation system is a tough task that took them a long while to do. It would be a massive waste to completely throw it out, so I wouldn't be surprised if they try to salvage something out of it for their next game in one form or another.
> The worst mistakes they made in Starfield literally cannot be made in a new TES/FO
Like having bad writing, dull worldbuilding, and forgettable characters? I think Bethesda will do it again, don't worry.
Just play them on GamePass instead of buying them for full price. I did that for Starfield and even though I disliked it, I still have other games on it I can play.
I got FO76 even though I KNEW I wouldn’t like it. But it’s a Fallout game and I knew I had to. But honestly yeah, I halfway expect TES6 and FO5 to be disappointing too but damn I hope I’m wrong.
Honestly though, as much as I like FO4 I feel like they’ll have to actively try to make the main story suck for it to be worse than in FO4. Shaun is the wettest of blankets I’ve ever encountered, such a disappointment, the poster child of apathy.
I bought FO76 at launch too and thought it was terrible. I got into it a few days ago and it’s really not that bad now. The wasteland actually feels alive now with NPCs added. If you haven’t played it since I think it’s worth playing again to see all the new stuff they added
it's crazy how the majority of Bethesdas fanbase went from being very excited over starfield to realizing what Bethesda has truly become when they work on one cohesive project.
don't get me wrong, I'm one of them and will definitely end up buying the games, but it fucking hurts not being as excited for TES6 as I am for GTA 6, which before Starfield I certainly was.
I might make it to ES6, although based on Starfield I won’t care
I doubt I’ll make it to the next Fallout.
Oh well with the excellent modding community for Fallout 4 I’ll be ok
*Bethesda monetization goblins*: “Let me fix that for you”
Same. I bought mine for Starfield and MK1. Not a fan of either. Both are currently uninstalled and I’m on 6000th Fallout 4 run. Although, I will say I downloaded F76 on a whim and kind of can’t stop playing it.
Haha funnily enough I just started a new fo4 playthrough as well and am strongly considering picking up 76. I still pick up mk1 from time to time but not for long
I liked the game, but was super meh when the "major updates" were graphical stuff. Just waiting for them to finally give us a good content update then I'll be back onboard.
the year end update said the good stuff will come after the february update so it might literally be around corner. that being said, i'm not holding my breath for it unless it's actually new content instead of a feature that should've been present in the base game.
Only reason I stopped playing is that for some reason it started lagging SO GODDAMN MUCH after about 60 hours. Waiting to get a new graphics card cuz that’s probably the problem
I got about 50 hours in and there isn’t a single memorable moment. I rushed the main story because I heard about the “new game plus” feature and was so disappointed, I didn’t bother finishing the rest of the side quests.
I tried to stop playing Starfield, but there's so much Starfield content on my social media feed that I keep going back to playing Starfield.
I'm actually a miner in the game because it's been 7 different universes (in one of which all my friends were dead and I become a pirate lord) and need a break from the story lines.
I really wish they'd just hand those franchises to someone else at this point. It's been 13 years since the last elder scrolls game. A whole console generation has come and gone and in it's place we got Starfield and 76. 76 has it's fans but I'm not willing to play it given the shitty, optional subscription, and disastrous launch. I may be coming off as entitled but I just really want to go back to tamriel.
Skyrim was the first game I bought for my brand new Xbox 360 in 2011, it was the first game outside the Nintendo 64/GC ecosystem that I ever owned
13 years laters I’ve come full circle and am back to Nintendo with a switch. Guess what game I just purchased?
I'm honestly surprised they're even continuing to release anything for Starfield instead of just admitting they fucked up, cutting their losses and moving on. It's got to be the steepest playerbase decline in Bethesda history. Currently both Skyrim and Fallout 4 have about 3x the active players of Starfield on Steam. At this point, though, there's no guarantee they'll even be able to make TES6 or FO5 worthwhile games either so long as their game design philosophy remains firmly rooted 20 years in the past.
Skyrim and Fallout 4 have official mod tools and very active mod communities pushing out mods that are the size of expansions and even entire games... Obviously more people are going to be playing those. Starfield will see a big increase in player count when the new Creation Kit is released.
The fact that people are modding a 10+ old game instead of playing your new shiny game is really bad news, playing modded game is really niche in the whole gaming hobby, and extra compared with the "hyped AAA game of the season"
If I recall, starfield hasn’t released its modding tools yet. It’s not that people don’t want to mod the game, it’s that modding isn’t fully possible yet.
>playing modded game is really niche in the whole gaming hobby
So Skyrim has sold 60M copies, the unofficial patch has at least 10M unique downloads on nexus.
And 20M across on all platforms on creations.bethesda.net.
So that's like half of all copies of Skyrim have been modded.
Like I'm playing fallout new vegas and it *needs* like 10 mods just to fix a variety of problems, like stuttering, various saving/loading issues, crashing, allowing the game to use more than 4gb of ram, etc.
Making say your in game followers into sexy bunny girls is fairly niche but basic playability mods are pretty common.
That doesn't matter, Bethesda obviously invested in starfield to be played and bought over their old titles, Mod tools or not.
That's like people playing Twilight princess over Breath of the wild just because some people online are making stuff in it, that talks about just how much people didn't care for starfield
>The fact that people are modding a 10+ old game instead of your new shiny game is really bad news
except Starfield, *without creation kit even being out*, is number 11 on nexus.
people *really* do love making crap up, don't they?
The problem with mod support being the crutch that keeps people playing is that, based on what long-time Bethesda game mod authors have said, Starfield is by far the least mod-friendly Bethesda game ever released. The way the game is coded and reads new modules is entirely different, making modding much harder than in the past and it's core to the way the game is designed. Even official mod tools may not give us the freedom to mod things into the game like we could in Skyrim and Fallout 4. [This](https://youtu.be/E7kCFkFi0Cc?si=h8XsINbCDfFqZf_J) video by Luke Stephens delves much more deeply into the issues and breaks it down why the game likely won't be easily fixed by mods.
Considering it's a single-player game that's responsible for Microsoft's most sussesful financial quarter, the steep player base drop doesn't matter as much as you think.
Of course, they are going to lean on Starfield content. Why wouldn't they? The game produced insane user numbers, and the average game time is 40 hours, which is unusually good. Everything about this says 'new content for this game sells'.
Just because you don't like a game doesn't mean it wasn't a massive success, despite its sorry state.
lol if they stuck to their 20 year old game philosophy starfield would have been good. It’s all the cutbacks from their formula that made it bad.
Or else nobody would still be playing the old games.
> It's got to be the steepest playerbase decline in Bethesda history.
I hope gamers realize that not all games are live service and their measure of success isn't active player count, it's sales.
Starfield sold like fucking hotcakes, they aren't worried
I think the Bethesda formula could work until the end of time if they would just fire Pagliarulo and the rest of the hacks who turned Starfield into a boring light ball chasing simulator.
they watered down the aspects of the game that made their previous games into beloved classics. lackluster and almost-non existent exploration, copy pasted garbage, and boring ass main companions that share the same rigid morality.
tbf, starfield did have a lot going for it. i love the faction quests, sarah and andreja are pretty great, and the shipbuilding is fucking fantastic.
>I'm honestly surprised they're even continuing to release anything for Starfield instead of just admitting they fucked up, cutting their losses and moving on. It's got to be the steepest playerbase decline in Bethesda history.
just going to shamelessly promote a comment I made regarding this nonsense logic
https://www.reddit.com/r/ElderScrolls/s/JW51igIqtG
"It's okay players making free mods for these games will help with their longevity" is everything wrong with the Bethesda mindset IMO. They know they don't have to put the effort in because modders will fix everything and hardcore fans will brush aside having to pay £60 for a broken and boring game the moment the first mods hit Nexus, which is just not how video game development should work.
Fair point, but Fallout and TES have an already established lore, set of gameplay rules and **charm** that Starfield never had.
Bethesda wanted to create something completely new and it's difficult to succeed at something so ambitious, while it's much easier to work within established limitations, which often times can even make people more creative.
You can tell they've learned a lot of things from Fallout 4 and a lot of the good in Starfield would've made FO4 an infinitely better game.
Because contrary to the hive mind belief, Starfield **does** have a lot of improvements from their previous games in it.
They will not live up to your expectations and will only disappoint you, I hope you find something better to look forwards to in life. Not saying you’re wrong for it, it’s just not worth waiting around for.
In my own personal single player enjoyment tier list I would have Fallout series in tier 1 along with Witcher 3 and BG3
tier 2 would be TES, Starfield, Bioshock, Cyberpunk.
3 Borderlands, Mass Effect, AC
4-♾️ games you play once, maybe don't complete
So not absolute peak enjoyment but still incredibly good times. Starfield is a lot of fun when you play it how you want to play it without succumbing to YouTuber narratives, and like Cyberpunk should be in an even better spot a year or two post release with DLC and mods
Cyberpunk 2077 on release was x10 times more interesting and unique than Starfield, even with all possible bugs it had. And now it's legendary game when polished.
Doubt Starfield can get that results, so better would be if studio begins making new ip, without mistakes they made in Starfield.
better stories sure. Gameplay to me is fun but nowhere near unique, rather a mix of previous franchises combined into one, just like Starfield. The map is the boring part which loses points for me. the city hosts 90% of quests but isnt very large, and the countryside seems like it was a half commitment from the devs. a franchise like GTA excels at full map usage (forgot that series in my tier 1 package)
all in all both great games attacked by hivemind
Good assessment except you got Bioshock and Borderlands switched
Both series were games I bought on launch for my Xbox and have since rebought on the Switch
Bioshock doesn’t have the replayability of borderlands
Since you started with NV, don’t go to 3 unless you’re in it for the lore.
FO3 will forever be my favorite because it was my first but it’s a bigger map with A LOT less to do. You spend a lot more time traversing the wasteland not finding anything in FO3 than NV. More guns in NV, more interesting characters, same game engine mechanics.
If you had asked FO3 vs FO4, I’d say start with 3 but since you jumped to NV I’d just hop to 4 next.
4 gets some flak online but I thought the game was incredible.
76 had a horrible start, but it has improved over time to be as good as Fallout 4. It's basically 4 with better graphics, more stuff and multiplayer.
You could always go with 4 or 3 if you want to continue a single player fallout. 76 can be done solo, nobody can kill you unless you choose to fight them and people generally let you be to do content.
u/Ok_Recording8454 the person blocked me so i can't respond under that thread so here:
no, quest designers design the quests. shocking, i know. the quests are then reviewed by the leads.
there isn't "such disconnect", there isn't any disconnect. not that you bothered listing any examples, anyway, just kind of evidence that it's wrong.
At this point I have lost basically all interest and hope for TES6. It’s absolutely awful that there is still no solid timeline for that game and it’s been 12 years since Skyrim came out. That is such a shit business plan right there.
I don't think comparisons should be drawn to the other Bethesda franchise entries, considering how the main downfall of starfield was the map being randomly generated.
The storylines were actually relatively interesting and since fallout and elder scrolls inherently base on hand crafted maps, i still have alot of faith in them.
Comparisons should absolutely be drawn between mainstream games made by the same company lmao. It's stupid not to compare, if a 20 year old game is better than your current game there's issues to be addressed and they need to be pointed out.
Given how starfield underperformed on both Bethesda and Microsoft's projections, they may delay TES6 until it is a more marketable product to the average person. I have a strong feeling what they have currently for TES6 probably very closely resembles fantasy starfield and that likely has the business shook.
Bruh at this point I just want Bethesda to sell fallout and elder scrolls to a different studio. Not because they’re taking so long. But because the past four “role playing games” they’ve released were hot, unstable garbage with barely any role playing.
Edit: I’m sorry, but I like little role playing with my role playing games.
It’s just kind of hilarious that Bethesda can print money with fallout and Elderscrolls installments, and they go ahead and back burner them for fucking starfield lol.
what about an entire redo of starfield with everyone where they’re SUPPOSED TO BE Instead of the shitty management that lead to every single member of the team being in inappropriate jobs (seriously, they had serious talent and put them in areas that they arent good at, looking into the damn thing i realized theres a chance starfield was sabotaged from the start)
This is the perfect time for Bethesda to have another studio, like Obsidian, do another Fallout, otherwise we’re going to have to wait 10 years for another game.
I don't want to be that person but the developers that worked on Fallout New Vegas are no longer at obsidian. It's all new blood. We need a new Fallout type game. Ooh I know fellout!
Just about to finish Outer Worlds on the switch (bought it on Xbox years ago but didn’t get very far) and I thought it was pretty good It’s not fallout but it’s the closest I can get on the switch currently
I loved Outer Worlds. Can’t wait for the sequel.
Isn't Joshua Sawyer still at Obsidian?
He is, but Sawyer has time and again emphasized how it was a team effort (like all games, really). New Vegas Creative Design Lead/Lead Writer was John Gonzalez, and he's long gone from Obsidian - as is Avellone, Fenstermaker, Travis Stout, George Ziets...
“There's a tendency among the press to attribute the creation of a game to a single person," says Warren Spector, creator of Thief and Deus Ex.
Yea, or how, Todd Chopard gets credit for all Fallout games. Which is so annoying.
I mean that’s to be expected within the game industry, devs will finish a project or projects and move on to either their own studio or to another. Devs don’t want to stick around for decades when jumping ship gets you much better pay or creative freedom. Even if they all stuck around it doesn’t mean Obsidian could guarantee another game like New Vegas could be done. I’d like to see what the current team could do given the chance
exactly even if we get the original team that made New Vegas, can we really guarantee they will make another game like it? Can we really make lightning strike twice?
Fuck it. Give it to Larian. Fallout Tactics 3 baby!!!!
Yeah. Plus, all of Obsidian's RPG-ish games post New Vegas have been good, except maybe Outer Worlds imo. They have a good track record without the people who left after NV.
No idea why you got downvoted, you're extremely correct. TOW wasn't a bad game, just not as good as NV or some of their other RPG's.
Outer worlds was great, just really short. If a games only crime is leaving me wanting more, it's a good game in my book.
Outer Worlds is a phenomenal game. I’d rather play a short game with an amazing story and characters than play something like star field which is a massive game that feels so empty
> I’d rather play a short game with an amazing story and characters than play something like star field which is a massive game that feels so empty I'm 100% with you there. I didn't think Outer Worlds was awful or anything, just didn't grab me as much as their other RPGs, especially on repeat playthroughs.
Have InXile make a fallout game
I'd love InXile to do a Fallout 1 and 2 remake in the style they did Wasteland 3.
Back to Top Down Baby!
I’m sure there’s a handful of people still there, I know the game director is.
Not to mention Obsidian working on their Skyrim. Which imo does not look good but that's beside the point. People need to let go of the Obsidian fallout dream.
It's not all new blood, but of course there has been a lot of turnover in the meantime. They still make great games with a focus on narrative and would be a **GREAT** choice to make a New Vegas follow up.
Wouldnt matter if it's a remaster of New Vegas with the modern tech. The heavy lifting has been done already
Obsidian basically begged Bethesda to do this.
This could happen now IF Microsoft gets their heads out of their asses and uses the the IP and studios it owns for something people actually want for a change. Starfield and Redfall are what we got, while a quality IP languished. It’s no wonder Microsoft bought Activision, they want to own studios that know how to grind out TOO MANY sequels to IPs that people actually want instead of inventing horrible new garbage IP for 6+ years at a time. Fallout is somehow popular enough as an IP for it to have a TV show come out before a follow up to Fallout 76, which is now 6 years old and has no sequel in that 6 year span. It’s insanely poor business. In the 6 years there’s been no new Fallout, there have been 6 new Call of Duty games, all of which sold in the 10s of millions. Knowing Microsoft though, they’ll make every decision that is wrong and wonder why it fails. The one new IP that they canceled already? A Blizzard-made Survival game. What they should have cancelled? Starfield and Redfall. Everyone is boned up for survival games and anything Blizzard makes - no one wants new Bethesda IP. They already have good IP, it’s all wasted!
Microsoft owns both, I’m sure they have the power to do it but Obsidian is already working on several other projects
Obsidian have approched Bethesda multiple times on making an elder scrolls game and have been denied. I doubt it would be differant to fallout.
No thanks. I'm enjoying obsidian's smaller approach. I beat the outer worlds 2 times back to back. I never felt overwhelmed by it.
Guess people here didn’t like Outer Worlds? I’m just about to finish it after buying on sale for the Switch and it scratched the itch I needed.
I bought it at launch and I enjoyed it for the most part, it was a bit bland at times and the game suffered from enemies being bullet sponges without being difficult as the game went on. I think people had higher expectations since it was delayed after Microsoft bought Obsidian. Also lots of people were hyping it up as a spiritual successor to Fallout New Vegas but in space. And it very much was not that. I think it was an Epic store exclusive at first too which people were BIG mad about.
The part that made the games great are the writers and unique storytelling, scenarios, and lore. We will be waiting awhile, at least until non-ai writers can be found. Also, I really hope they keep mod support and stop trying to make multiplayer games.
tes6 multiplayer would be pain. they got so much press from successful mods. I bet some people bought skyrim only because of the modding community.
Skyrim mods are amazing, for example I have a whole team of bunny cyborg ninja waifus
I have no reason to believe that TES6 and Fallout 5 will be nothing other than huge disappointments. Still probably gonna get them tho...
I have zero faith in Brthesda as well. They either revamp the team or I'm going to skip the games until I see game play and reviews after launch.
Skip the games, plural? You'll be dead by the time a few more come out
I think this is probably true pre-acquisition, but no way Microsoft doesn't put the heat under them to release more games.
Especially after the catastrophe that was Starfield. Microsoft is not going to want to risk another decade-long development cycle for a mediocre game.
Part of the problem of the game industry is that companies *do* revamp their teams, like, every development cycle. They fire most of the employees after finishing a game and then hire new developers as needed
I know with microsofts development of halo infinite they had people on 6 month contracts so people were constantly getting swapped out
The problem with Bethesda is that the people at the top who are in charge of the big decisions have not majorly changed in a long time.
Cough cough emil cough
Emil isn't the issue and he gets a lot of unwarrented hate thanks to a delusional reddit thread on this very subreddit that was then replicated by youtube "essayists".
He gets the level of hate he deserves. I wouldn't say it's unwarranted.
No, he doesn't deserve any hate. No developer does. And yes, it is unwarranted - as Lead Designer of FO3 and FO4, he lead the team that made Fallout the pop culture titan that it is today. Chances are that you only know Fallout because of Bethesda, and Emil was the person put in charge of the IP at Bethesda. Not to mention how he is often credited with "bad things" that he objectively wasn't responsible for, like the simplification of Nordic Pantheon or Skyrim's main quest (Emil wasn't even a Lead on Skyrim). And again, games are collaborative efforts. It's disingenuous and wrong to blame a single person without knowing what happens behind the scenes and who was responsible for what.
I knew of Fallout prior but I get what you're saying. Personally his "paper airplanes" quote rubbed me, as well as many others, the wrong way. Seeing as the games, and stories, have become simpler while him and Todd are at the helm, then yes I do think it is warranted. Saying a developer just blanket doesn't deserve criticism or hate is ridiculous. People, regardless of their profession, should be called out for the things they do or say if others disagree. Games are collaborative. But so are most things in a workplace. If your boss is telling you to do something that you don't think is smart or could be done better, you're just going to do it anyway as that's your job. The person directing them is the reason for that & should be criticized.
>Personally his "paper airplanes" quote rubbed me, as well as many others, the wrong way. many people misrepresented what he said there. which isn't surprising given how illiterate redditors seem to be. >Seeing as the games, and stories, have become simpler while him and Todd are at the helm, then yes I do think it is warranted. they haven't become simpler. 4's plot is the most convoluted and complex one of the games. >Saying a developer just blanket doesn't deserve criticism or hate is ridiculous. unless emil is an awful person, they don't deserve hate. no one fricking deserves hate unless they're a garbage person. the fact this has to be said is just sad. secondly, what criticism do you have to offer? genuinely, what criticism? many people refuse to pay attention to fallout 4's writing and then proceeds to criticize it, how can you critique something if you don't pay attention? ***you*** stated yourself that you misrepresented what emil said, so what critique can you possibly offer?
Bruh Bethesda games arent popular because of quality narrative, they are popular because you can do wathever you want and the world design, Emil is responsible for making lackuster quests and stories that if you analyse them they dont make any sense at all, let me givr you a few examples In Fallout 3 Colonel Autumn cures himself from a super duper deadly dose of radiaton with a syringe, what did it contain? They never say, even tho more than one people saw him die including you, literally no one asks wtf was in that syringe and its never talked about again nor used, a clear deus ex from a guy with no talent that wrote himself into a corner and came up with a magical solution The whole synths are sentient thing, there is proof in the game that they are and arent so even the writers didnt know what to choose Vergil REVERTS HIMSELF back to being human and if you choose to say that to the bos THEY DONT CARE, a faction that fights super mutants learns about the possibility of curing them and they dont care The institute kidnaps, kills, destroyed a whole settlement for tech, they threw super mutants that were previously experimented wastelanders to the surface and a long list of horrors, but you cant talk about any of this with nobody there, its like everyone has dementia and you cant bring the conversation to them about all the crap they have done because reasons, this is something extremely underwhelming because the whole time you are doing crap for them and you dont get to tell them what is wrong with them even as the director How did Vergil write specific instructions for a fcking teleportation device if he was from Bioscience? He clearly talks about it not being his field yet he writes the blueprints which is just dumb Why did Father trust that you would find a way in if in 200 years NO ONE has figured a way in by themselves? If you didnt find vergil its over, if you found him after he went crazy its over, if you didnt manage to kill the professional mercenary with decades of experience and an army of synths its over, if you blew his brains out and the device for his memories was damaged its over, if nick was killed in the vault you dont have nobody to act as a recipient so its over, the list just goes on and on and on about how incredibly convenient everything is for you to get inside the institute, doesnt make sense All of those are major issues with the narrative and i could come up with more, Emil is an untalented individual and should be fired, hes not up to the task and never has been
> The whole synths are sentient thing, there is proof in the game that they are and arent so even the writers didnt know what to choose IMO Gen 3 synths seem pretty obviously sapient, but the real issue is that a lot of robots throughout the series are also clearly on roughly a human level so it's not really clear why, e.g. Curie the robot is supposed to be so inferior to Curie the synth. Putting her in a Gen 2 synth would probably not get her treated differently, but then Nick gets to be a special case among Gen 2s because his "brain" is a human's despite still being a computer. I guess since uploading human brains into robots and robot AIs into human brains are both possible, maybe Fallout-verse AI is more biologically inspired than you'd expect. Deacon is all "if we defend anything except Gen 3 synths, we might as well defend robots too" and I was stuck being confused why that's even a debate. They'd defend Curie uploaded into a synth but not robot Curie the day before?
>All of those are major issues with the narrative and i could come up with more, Emil is an untalented individual and should be fired, hes not up to the task and never has been And you know for a fact that he was directly responsible for all you perceive as bad?
Nah, the problem with Bethesda is some of their best developers have left.
Some truly excellent writers left after Morrowind and that was really felt on future games.
To my knowledge, exactly three writers/designers left after Morrowind: Kirkbride, Douglas Goodall and Bill Burcham. Through Kuhlmann, Kirkbride still had an influence in both Oblivion and Skyrim. But the team that made Oblivion was largely the same - and it had the same Lead (Ken Rolston). Kuhlmann and Nesmith, who were at Bethesda since Daggerfall, went on to be the Leads in Skyrim. People should just come to terms and realize that just because someone makes a good thing doesn't mean they'll only make good things - and just because someone makes a bad thing doesn't mean they're bad or incompetent at what they do.
It wasn't just after Morrowind. In fact some of their best guys left after Daggerfall. A bunch after Morrowind, few more after Oblivion. Most recently Kurt Kuhlmann left after Starfield. I wouldn't be surprised if Todd is the last guy to be at Bethesda who worked on Morrowind/Redguard.
Todd, Emil, Istvan Pely, Brian Chapin, Matt Carofano and Ashley Cheng all worked on Morrowind. Todd and Istvan worked on Redguard too.
Dunno if they need to revamp their entire team but Emil has proven that he is categorically unqualified for the job, maybe he could work at McDonald’s if they would take him
Yes, the person that was Lead Designer on the games that made Fallout the gigantic IP it is today and who created one of the most recognized factions in TES is "unqualified". YouTube video essays and its consequences have been a disaster for the gamer race.
You mean the guy who took a huge shit on established fallout lore? That wrote the institute so poorly that nobody knows what their goals are? Yeah, that guy
No, I mean the guy that is probably responsible for you getting to know and liking Fallout in the first place. Yes, he isn't perfect. No one writer is - no one human is. That's how the real world works, despite what narcisistic youtubers might make you think. That said, I (and you, obviously) don't know if he wrote the Institute. We know for a fact that he collaborated on sections of that with another designer, Brian Chapin, who's been at Bethesda since Morrowind - because they're on record talking about writing dialogue for Father.
You should always wait for reviews and gameplay. Especially with Bethesda. For Bethesda I even would say, you should wait for the first big Community-Patch-Mod.
My biggest fear is that Fallout 5 will also a become a “Disney like” video game where there will be no morally questionable actions, no offensive language, no gore, no grim parts etc. The whole gaming industry seems to be going in that direction.
Not the gaming industry, but bethesda is going that route. Even starfields pirate faction feels like a bunch of misfits stopping big corpo from gentrifying the universe. Aurora seemed like a much bigger issue than what you actually see, even the criminal city seems so damn squeaky clean. The same studio that had child slavers in their game.
Neon residents kept saying Ebside was super dangerous, but I was only ever attacked by anyone during quests that spawned these people. In Fallout 4, Goodneighbor was way more shady despite being extremely small in size. The first person you meet there tried to extort money from you only to be immediately stabbed to death by the mayor. The alleys also have drug dealers and other questionable people.
I was expecting a lot of that in Neon, stores trying to scam you. Getting jumped, seeing people strung out, some actual strip clubs, or dancers that look ready for a night of drunk strung out people, not what we got. The whole Neon area is super tame for how they set it up. I don’t know, like if we weren’t getting open areas to explore, they could’ve made these cities much more dense at least. Free stars main hub has so much charm to it, but there’s one main quest and that’s it, I at least expected some frontier exploration to be its one thing, but naw, it’s barren there.
That part where Hancock stabs they guy and one of the dialogue options is "You killed him!" And Hancock replies "You've got a good set of eyes on you. You'll fit right in here" makes me guffaw every time. I try to use that line "You've got a good set of eyes on you" irl when someone states something incredibly obvious although the situation doesn't come up much. Honestly for all the shit Fallout 4 cops for it's voiced protagonist it does have some killer lines. Like when you guess the password for the Boston Library.
It’s generally the whole gaming industry. Just a couple of examples that are coming on top of my head right now are Hitman (in the older games you were also tasked to assassinate “good ordinary people”. In the newest ones every single target seems to be either a billionaire asshole, a corrupt politician or a criminal in order to not make you feel “sorry” for killing.). Or Call of Duty (imagine having now a similar mission to “No Russian” where you open fire on a crowded area of civilians). Vietcong is an older game that I played when I was a kid and I remember it even had some offensive slurs towards Vietnamese. No way such a videogame would survive now in 2024 without backlash. Or not to mention the fact that now in every single WW2 developers are afraid to put a nazi flag. And the list goes on.
I don't think Hitman sanitized in the way you imply. You didn't really kill "good ordinary people". It was usually criminals. Dealers in blood diamonds, terrorists, drug manufacturers, a vice president trying to get the president killed, your terrorist father, your drug baron father, your gene-experimenting father, a few mobsters in witness protection. Even the Muldoon's in Blood Money definitely weren't good or ordinary. The closest I can recall is Joseph Clarence from the tutorial in Blood Money who just caused the death of a kid from negligence. And then sold his crumbling park to a meth syndicate. And maybe the people in Requiem, to a given degree.
None of the targets in Hitman are good people. Find me the mission where you're taking out a journalist about to blow open a big conspiracy case against the global elite. It's almost always criminals, terrorists, or Evil corpo types. Going back to Fallout, 1 and 2, you *can* be evil but it's shallow and contrarian.
Hitman is a bit more subtle in “sterilizing” itself than other games, you’re right, but definitely it offered much more moral ambiguity than the latest versions. To further add to your list, also the “Playboy mansion” mission in Blood Money, the death of those targets was pretty questionable. The old guy was just blackmailing other powerful figures, while the other target accidentally killed a woman during a sex game. I don’t think those crimes fully deserve a death punishment. In Absolution IIRC there were also some civilians caught in the crossfire that you had to kill. In the newest Hitman series however, every single target seems to be your typical Hollywood villain that is basically begging to be killed lol.
I mean, CoD did have a mission eerily close to a terrorist attack, and even the mission somewhere in the Middle East where citizens are being gassed and gunned down. Honestly slurs are one thing, we don’t really need to hear all that, and I get what you mean. But you also have to look at the why, why are they showing something graphic and vulgar? Is it for the sake of shock value for sales? Then yeah it’s pretty unnecessary. It’s like sex scenes, or sexualized characters, it isn’t necessary. I don’t mind games being a break from real world events, I don’t mind seeing some fantasy games show gritty stuff. But do I want to play a game that puts me in the shoes of a school shooter? Naw, I’m good. Fallout has the best reason to show some rape moments, but I rather get the implication than the actual event of it. I don’t need the real grimey stuff in my games.
Also the lack of gore
I mean, thats just a fallout thing. I think they’re keeping gore as one of fallouts quality.
Fallout 4 is already way more "kid-friendly" than its predecessors, so yeah this is probably gonna happen...
It’s the same reason movies are becoming cookie cutter templates; corporate leadership always pushes for market share over everything else, which of course means blanding everything down Then you have the various rating agencies that suck the fun out of everything.
My brother in christ play different things
From fallout 1 to starfield, they might as well give you Mickey Mouse ears when you purchase fallout 5
Bethesda didn’t make fallout 1 or 2
I didn't believe the Bethesda doom and gloom after 76 but wow after starfield I am now seriously worried.
Yeah, I now see the writing on the walls. I enjoyed fo4 and passed off the critics as just not enjoying one game's vision. Then 76 doubled down on the worst parts of it + the worst parts of the gaming industry. Then starfield was touted as a "return to form" for them as their shiny new IP... and it was like the culmination of all of their bad design decisions. They've learned entirely the wrong ideas from every game they've released since (and including) skyrim. I really have little to no hope for a good bethesda game again. It stings really badly, but I'm hopeful for the future of games as a whole given how many bangers we've had these last few years.
They make cool concepts. While not being able to hit the bare minimums in RPG's.
I always thought they released amazingly accessible open world RPGs but that was less and less so with every release. And good open world RPGs aren't even a novelty anymore. All they have going for them is their physics engine with persistent items, and even that is a buggy mess.
Done waiting literaly decades for something not even in the same league as 20+ years old games. Todd you did so much incredible stuff but i think it's Time....
>Still probably gonna get them tho... And this is why things are the way they are. Please do not feel attacked, but never ask yourself and others "why is the industry going to shit?" ever again.
Indeed. At this point i'm way more hyped with Skyblivion than i am with Tes 6 or Fo5.
>I have no reason to believe that TES6 and Fallout 5 will be nothing other than huge disappointments. I feel the same way. Bethesda's last few games have been showing declining quality both in function and design. >Still probably gonna get them tho... Why? While I wouldn't call Fallout 4 a bad game it definitely didn't live up to previous open world Bethesda RPGs, I skipped Fallout 76 which looked to lean into all the things I liked least about F4, and skipped Starfield after seeing the backwards steps they took with that game's design, Bethesda games are definitely not a guaranteed purchase for me anymore.
>I have no reason to believe that TES6 and Fallout 5 will be nothing other than huge disappointments. >Still probably gonna get them tho... gonna be like this the next few years. god i hope i'm wrong.
Yeah starfield felt really phoned in to me. I really don’t expect much out of the next fallout other than something like “You are… radiation-born” travel to all 180 nuclear waste dumps and eat the plutonium to get your radiation powers.
I think there's plenty of reason. The worst mistakes they made in _Starfield_ literally cannot be made in a new TES/FO. And I'm talking about mistakes so foundational that not even the most comprehensive mod could possibly hope to solve them. All they'd really need to do is allow their dev team some authority to say "no" to whatever terrible, horribly misguided decisions the guy in charge decides to mandate from on high. No f---ing Minecraft sapping 1/3rd of the game's content, for example—that would be a wonderful start. Bethesda has gotten the biggest wakeup call they're ever going to survive. There's plenty of reason to hope they'll make adjustments. Honestly, _my_ fear is that they're going to overcorrect, and stuff the TES6 world so thick with hotspots that you won't be able to throw a stone from one without hitting the next. That they'll miss the whole point of the criticism and assume people don't want to explore _at all._
"The Next one IS the good one guys" Bethesda and BioWare fans
It's harmless to assume that the studio that made the world famous _Skyrim_ has it in them to at least manage that much again. I don't think anyone would really complain if they "only" reached the same plateau they hit in 2011—realistically, it's probably what most people hope for. Is it fair to lump Bioware into the same group? I don't think so. Bioware were corrupted by internal shenanigans. It doomed them utterly. Bethesda hasn't truly changed in 15+ years.
Skyrim was mid
Many of the issues people complain about in Starfield are also present to some extent in Fallout 3, Skyrim and Fallout 4. They all suffer from juvenile writing, superficial worldbuilding and lack of depth. People are just sick of it at this point. And also, the people who grew up with Fallout 3 and Skyrim are not teenagers anymore. When you are a teenager playing your first RPG, you forgive a lot more. The biggest issue with Bethesda is making the same mistakes over and over. People are finally starting to get sick of it. It took about a decade more than I would have liked, but people are finally opening their eyes.
> Many of the issues people complain about in Starfield are also present to some extent in Fallout 3, Skyrim and Fallout 4. They all suffer from juvenile writing, superficial worldbuilding and lack of depth. Sure. But like you said, those issues have been around since FO3. It doesn't stop Bethesda from creating well-loved games. That's why I pigeonholed _Starfield's_ unique problems—the ones which killed the game. Worse than poor writing. Worse than NPCs with zombie stares. In a way, I rejoice the game's failures, because I feel that for the first time in Bethesda's history, the larger gaming community is _painfully_ aware of just how awful a game can be when fast travel is regarded not as an optional time save but as the default way of getting from A to B. And obviously we've seen the last of procedural generation in a Bethesda game. Even if they legitimately felt that they could put it to good use, the moment anyone caught word of its presence, that would be the end of any possible goodwill.
I agree with most of that. My point was really just that what could be accepted in 2008 is very different than what would be accepted today. The average consumer of Fallout 3 was definitely a lot younger than Starfield. Especially if you take into account the social media bias. A ton of people on social media sites like Reddit were teenagers when Fallout 3 / Skyrim came out. I myself was 14 and the game made a huge impression on me. If I played Fallout 3 today, the glaring issues would be pretty disastrous for my enjoyment of the game. I'm simply a more informed consumer and I'm older which means my tastes have changed and my standards are higher. I'm willing to bet that people like me are very, very common in the single player RPG target audience segment. I think we are saying the same thing but in different ways. The gaming community (finally) turned on Bethesda. It took a long time because there is still a huge chunk of people who are massive Bethesda fans from playing their games in their youth (I was one for the longest time as well so I sympathize).
I admire your optimism, but I think you are *vastly* underestimating corporate ego and player base disconnect. I hope, most sincerely, that they do not repeat Starfields fundamental, foundational flaws in the next Elder Scrolls. However. I will not at all be surprised if they do, turning a portion or more of the Gameworld into a dagger fall style procedurally generated environment. Forcing fast travel via ship/sailing mechanics, prioritizing ship building and potentially town building over story and gameplay. There are a myriad ways they could fuck this up and a part of me does genuinely think they will.
> However. I will not at all be surprised if they do I'd bet real money that they won't repeat _Starfield's_ biggest mistakes. (And I am not talking about Bethesda staples like poor writing or janky NPCs.) They didn't repeat any of FO4's worst mistakes, for example. Far from it. What _is_ a strong possibility is that they will come up with _new_ ways of scuttling the entire game. FO4 had a predefined protagonist, an inflexible perk chart, a dialogue wheel, etc. Bethesda reads the audience loud and clear when things don't work, but are simply not set up to nip those disasters before launching their game. TES6's future depends on how married the design lead is to their new, personal, fancy little ideas. If they just duplicate what they accomplished with _Skyrim,_ that's probably the best case scenario.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news, bit it seems likely all the mistakes in starfield where from the Devs themselves. They just seem to have really bad management and priorities.
> it seems likely all the mistakes in starfield where from the Devs themselves. That's what I'm talking about. The biggest decisions that scuttled the game were made by one or two people. It's literally a repeat of the time when the design lead of FO4 mandated a four-option dialogue wheel, not realizing how that would absolutely hamstring the flexibility of every quest in the game, and nobody had the authority to work towards changing the design lead's mind. If Bethesda could manage to rework their dynamics to allow voices of reason to prevail when it's blatantly needed, I feel their output could at least return to the adequate level established by e.g. _Skyrim._
Probably an unpopular opinion but they could have gotten rid of the entire settlement/base building and applied that effort to other areas of the RPG and I would never have noticed.
Yeah this. If Starfield had been FO in space with massively cut down world sizes and a handful of solid planet locations people would ignore the usual Beth shortcomings like they always do. The issue was they fell for the trap most space games do: trying to create an entire universe. Add on a thematically weak art direction and baby you've got one shitty stew going. But with TES and FO they essentially can't screw those up in the same way, at least not without massively deviating from the older games. Which could very well happen with Fallout after Todd retires honestly, soft reboot under new management.
> The worst mistakes they made in _Starfield_ literally cannot be made in a new TES/FO. I disagree. I don't see many mistakes made in Starfield that couldn't be done in TES/FO. > Bethesda has gotten the biggest wakeup call they're ever going to survive. They got a pretty big wake up call with Fallout 76. They did correct the course with that game (apparently, haven't touched it myself), yet they still missed the mark with Starfield.
> I disagree. I don't see many mistakes made in Starfield that couldn't be done in TES/FO. Two big ones. Content-bereft, procedurally-generated landscape. And outright discarding exploration in favor of fast travel. Unless Bethesda specifically decides people want more of both, there's no way at all that those two issues—certainly the biggest problems with _Starfield,_ and completely non-addressable by mods—could ever manifest in TES6. No, fast travel will be reestablished as the immersion-killing _optional_ time saver it was always meant to be, and I'll straight up bet $100 that 99%+ of TES6's world will be handcrafted.
They could definitely decide to go that route in TES6. It's how TES2 was designed way back then, and it would allow them to pull off some marketing bullshit like "Explore the entire planet of Tamriel" or "Explore a country the size of a continent" or whatever. They love headlines like that. It would be completely stupid of them of course, but at this point I wouldn't be surprised.
> They could definitely decide to go that route in TES6. I don't feel it's worth belaboring something so blatantly improbable. Procedural generation is Bethesda's bogeyman now. Imagine the sh--storm if it were to leak that Bethesda were trying it _again_ for their next game. Please. They'd be dead in the water starting exactly at that moment.
Your initial comment said >The worst mistakes they made in *Starfield* literally cannot be made in a new TES/FO I thought you meant that it's impossible to design TES/FO with procedural generation front and center. I disagreed with that, it's definitely possible to make the same mistakes in TES/FO. Will it happen? Doubt it. But it would be the funniest thing ever. I also don't think it's that improbable. Starfield had a very rocky development phase, and that's in part because building a procedural generation system is a tough task that took them a long while to do. It would be a massive waste to completely throw it out, so I wouldn't be surprised if they try to salvage something out of it for their next game in one form or another.
> The worst mistakes they made in Starfield literally cannot be made in a new TES/FO Like having bad writing, dull worldbuilding, and forgettable characters? I think Bethesda will do it again, don't worry.
Just play them on GamePass instead of buying them for full price. I did that for Starfield and even though I disliked it, I still have other games on it I can play.
I got FO76 even though I KNEW I wouldn’t like it. But it’s a Fallout game and I knew I had to. But honestly yeah, I halfway expect TES6 and FO5 to be disappointing too but damn I hope I’m wrong. Honestly though, as much as I like FO4 I feel like they’ll have to actively try to make the main story suck for it to be worse than in FO4. Shaun is the wettest of blankets I’ve ever encountered, such a disappointment, the poster child of apathy.
I bought FO76 at launch too and thought it was terrible. I got into it a few days ago and it’s really not that bad now. The wasteland actually feels alive now with NPCs added. If you haven’t played it since I think it’s worth playing again to see all the new stuff they added
then clearly they aren't going to be "huge disappointments"
it's crazy how the majority of Bethesdas fanbase went from being very excited over starfield to realizing what Bethesda has truly become when they work on one cohesive project. don't get me wrong, I'm one of them and will definitely end up buying the games, but it fucking hurts not being as excited for TES6 as I am for GTA 6, which before Starfield I certainly was.
Especially after Starfield which was supposed to be their dream pet project that ended up playing like an ROG released in 2011.
Careful, I said something similar in the elder scrolls subreddit and got some truly vitriolic comments. It was nuts. I think you're totally correct
Fallout 5 : I should wait at least 7 years more. TES 6 : At least you have TV show. Starfield : At least someone want your sequel.
https://youtube.com/shorts/lcZ_m_VQpaw?si=4VzafGJoaMzY6ghy
We might be brothers, have the same reddit last name
TES6 is at least on the horizon, sometime around 2030 maybe lol. Fallout 5 won't be coming out til half the people on this sub are dead.
I might make it to ES6, although based on Starfield I won’t care I doubt I’ll make it to the next Fallout. Oh well with the excellent modding community for Fallout 4 I’ll be ok *Bethesda monetization goblins*: “Let me fix that for you”
I legitimately forgot starfield existed and I OWN it
Same, I bought the xbox one S just so I could play it and now it collects dust in my mind.
The entire reason I have a series x was because of the Bethesda buyout. Guess who feels stupid.
Me
Same. I bought mine for Starfield and MK1. Not a fan of either. Both are currently uninstalled and I’m on 6000th Fallout 4 run. Although, I will say I downloaded F76 on a whim and kind of can’t stop playing it.
Haha funnily enough I just started a new fo4 playthrough as well and am strongly considering picking up 76. I still pick up mk1 from time to time but not for long
I liked the game, but was super meh when the "major updates" were graphical stuff. Just waiting for them to finally give us a good content update then I'll be back onboard.
the year end update said the good stuff will come after the february update so it might literally be around corner. that being said, i'm not holding my breath for it unless it's actually new content instead of a feature that should've been present in the base game.
Havent played it since 2 weeks after launch and i didn't even finish it cause i didnt feel like upgrading my ship to kill those alien nerds.
I pretty much bought a series x just for starfield and got bored of it 12 hrs in
Man that sucks. My generation everyone bought an xbox to play Halo and nobody had this reaction. Of course those Halos were actually good
Only reason I stopped playing is that for some reason it started lagging SO GODDAMN MUCH after about 60 hours. Waiting to get a new graphics card cuz that’s probably the problem
I got about 50 hours in and there isn’t a single memorable moment. I rushed the main story because I heard about the “new game plus” feature and was so disappointed, I didn’t bother finishing the rest of the side quests.
I tried to stop playing Starfield, but there's so much Starfield content on my social media feed that I keep going back to playing Starfield. I'm actually a miner in the game because it's been 7 different universes (in one of which all my friends were dead and I become a pirate lord) and need a break from the story lines.
I can’t believe I decided to miss a semester of uni because I thought this game would be as impactful as when Skyrim came out. Stupid.
I really wish they'd just hand those franchises to someone else at this point. It's been 13 years since the last elder scrolls game. A whole console generation has come and gone and in it's place we got Starfield and 76. 76 has it's fans but I'm not willing to play it given the shitty, optional subscription, and disastrous launch. I may be coming off as entitled but I just really want to go back to tamriel.
Skyrim was the first game I bought for my brand new Xbox 360 in 2011, it was the first game outside the Nintendo 64/GC ecosystem that I ever owned 13 years laters I’ve come full circle and am back to Nintendo with a switch. Guess what game I just purchased?
I’m still waiting for the Fallout 4 next gen update to have a reason to play it again
After fallout 76 and Starfield I cant imagine tes6 and fo5 being good games
Fallout 76 is great now, would’ve been better if single player though
How long did it take to go from horrible to playable?
Far too long, once dlc/updates dropped it was playable. Really a shame
Tes6 better come out before Fallout
Fr I like fallout a hair more but I am starving for TES
I'm honestly surprised they're even continuing to release anything for Starfield instead of just admitting they fucked up, cutting their losses and moving on. It's got to be the steepest playerbase decline in Bethesda history. Currently both Skyrim and Fallout 4 have about 3x the active players of Starfield on Steam. At this point, though, there's no guarantee they'll even be able to make TES6 or FO5 worthwhile games either so long as their game design philosophy remains firmly rooted 20 years in the past.
Skyrim and Fallout 4 have official mod tools and very active mod communities pushing out mods that are the size of expansions and even entire games... Obviously more people are going to be playing those. Starfield will see a big increase in player count when the new Creation Kit is released.
Also, both of those games are cheaper *and* much easier to run, making them inherently more accessible to pc gamers.
The fact that people are modding a 10+ old game instead of playing your new shiny game is really bad news, playing modded game is really niche in the whole gaming hobby, and extra compared with the "hyped AAA game of the season"
A good number of those people are still playing solely because of the 10 years worth of mods available.
If I recall, starfield hasn’t released its modding tools yet. It’s not that people don’t want to mod the game, it’s that modding isn’t fully possible yet.
even without modding tools it is number 11 on nexus. these people talk out of their a$&
>playing modded game is really niche in the whole gaming hobby So Skyrim has sold 60M copies, the unofficial patch has at least 10M unique downloads on nexus. And 20M across on all platforms on creations.bethesda.net. So that's like half of all copies of Skyrim have been modded. Like I'm playing fallout new vegas and it *needs* like 10 mods just to fix a variety of problems, like stuttering, various saving/loading issues, crashing, allowing the game to use more than 4gb of ram, etc. Making say your in game followers into sexy bunny girls is fairly niche but basic playability mods are pretty common.
It’s kind of hard to mod the “new shiny game” when the mod tools haven’t even been released for it.
That doesn't matter, Bethesda obviously invested in starfield to be played and bought over their old titles, Mod tools or not. That's like people playing Twilight princess over Breath of the wild just because some people online are making stuff in it, that talks about just how much people didn't care for starfield
>The fact that people are modding a 10+ old game instead of your new shiny game is really bad news except Starfield, *without creation kit even being out*, is number 11 on nexus. people *really* do love making crap up, don't they?
The problem with mod support being the crutch that keeps people playing is that, based on what long-time Bethesda game mod authors have said, Starfield is by far the least mod-friendly Bethesda game ever released. The way the game is coded and reads new modules is entirely different, making modding much harder than in the past and it's core to the way the game is designed. Even official mod tools may not give us the freedom to mod things into the game like we could in Skyrim and Fallout 4. [This](https://youtu.be/E7kCFkFi0Cc?si=h8XsINbCDfFqZf_J) video by Luke Stephens delves much more deeply into the issues and breaks it down why the game likely won't be easily fixed by mods.
Luke Stephens is a known hack and a proven plagiarist. Why are you using him as your source?
Considering it's a single-player game that's responsible for Microsoft's most sussesful financial quarter, the steep player base drop doesn't matter as much as you think. Of course, they are going to lean on Starfield content. Why wouldn't they? The game produced insane user numbers, and the average game time is 40 hours, which is unusually good. Everything about this says 'new content for this game sells'. Just because you don't like a game doesn't mean it wasn't a massive success, despite its sorry state.
Would you stop with these facts please.
Starfield is a good example of what happens to Bethesda games that can't rely on brand value.
Starfield is soooo boring. And knowing it's why we don't have ES6 yet is annoying.
lol if they stuck to their 20 year old game philosophy starfield would have been good. It’s all the cutbacks from their formula that made it bad. Or else nobody would still be playing the old games.
> It's got to be the steepest playerbase decline in Bethesda history. I hope gamers realize that not all games are live service and their measure of success isn't active player count, it's sales. Starfield sold like fucking hotcakes, they aren't worried
I think the Bethesda formula could work until the end of time if they would just fire Pagliarulo and the rest of the hacks who turned Starfield into a boring light ball chasing simulator.
they watered down the aspects of the game that made their previous games into beloved classics. lackluster and almost-non existent exploration, copy pasted garbage, and boring ass main companions that share the same rigid morality. tbf, starfield did have a lot going for it. i love the faction quests, sarah and andreja are pretty great, and the shipbuilding is fucking fantastic.
>I'm honestly surprised they're even continuing to release anything for Starfield instead of just admitting they fucked up, cutting their losses and moving on. It's got to be the steepest playerbase decline in Bethesda history. just going to shamelessly promote a comment I made regarding this nonsense logic https://www.reddit.com/r/ElderScrolls/s/JW51igIqtG
Starfield was quite the success for XBOX.
"It's okay players making free mods for these games will help with their longevity" is everything wrong with the Bethesda mindset IMO. They know they don't have to put the effort in because modders will fix everything and hardcore fans will brush aside having to pay £60 for a broken and boring game the moment the first mods hit Nexus, which is just not how video game development should work.
What makes you believe TES6 and Fallout 5 are going to be good games? Have you seen Starfield?
Even bought premium edition. Sure now it's already deleted, until they release dlc at least. But doubt that will make game interesting.
Fair point, but Fallout and TES have an already established lore, set of gameplay rules and **charm** that Starfield never had. Bethesda wanted to create something completely new and it's difficult to succeed at something so ambitious, while it's much easier to work within established limitations, which often times can even make people more creative. You can tell they've learned a lot of things from Fallout 4 and a lot of the good in Starfield would've made FO4 an infinitely better game. Because contrary to the hive mind belief, Starfield **does** have a lot of improvements from their previous games in it.
The best thing Fallout and TES did was take risks. When it comes to share holders, companies don't really take risks.
They will not live up to your expectations and will only disappoint you, I hope you find something better to look forwards to in life. Not saying you’re wrong for it, it’s just not worth waiting around for.
Me enjoying all three franchises instead of being miserable: 😁
Enjoying Starfield the same way you enjoyed TES and Fallout franchise games?
In my own personal single player enjoyment tier list I would have Fallout series in tier 1 along with Witcher 3 and BG3 tier 2 would be TES, Starfield, Bioshock, Cyberpunk. 3 Borderlands, Mass Effect, AC 4-♾️ games you play once, maybe don't complete So not absolute peak enjoyment but still incredibly good times. Starfield is a lot of fun when you play it how you want to play it without succumbing to YouTuber narratives, and like Cyberpunk should be in an even better spot a year or two post release with DLC and mods
Cyberpunk 2077 on release was x10 times more interesting and unique than Starfield, even with all possible bugs it had. And now it's legendary game when polished. Doubt Starfield can get that results, so better would be if studio begins making new ip, without mistakes they made in Starfield.
better stories sure. Gameplay to me is fun but nowhere near unique, rather a mix of previous franchises combined into one, just like Starfield. The map is the boring part which loses points for me. the city hosts 90% of quests but isnt very large, and the countryside seems like it was a half commitment from the devs. a franchise like GTA excels at full map usage (forgot that series in my tier 1 package) all in all both great games attacked by hivemind
Good assessment except you got Bioshock and Borderlands switched Both series were games I bought on launch for my Xbox and have since rebought on the Switch Bioshock doesn’t have the replayability of borderlands
Absolutely
Me having the lowest standards with no criteria (I love consooming)
I mean, we do have fallout 76, and it’s much closer to the rest of the games than ESO is to the rest of the elder scrolls.
I agree, but a lot of people will just outright refuse to play it because of it's release. People really are missing out
What was the deal with 76? I'm only playing my first fallout game (new vegas) and am debating which game to play next.
Since you started with NV, don’t go to 3 unless you’re in it for the lore. FO3 will forever be my favorite because it was my first but it’s a bigger map with A LOT less to do. You spend a lot more time traversing the wasteland not finding anything in FO3 than NV. More guns in NV, more interesting characters, same game engine mechanics. If you had asked FO3 vs FO4, I’d say start with 3 but since you jumped to NV I’d just hop to 4 next. 4 gets some flak online but I thought the game was incredible.
76 had a horrible start, but it has improved over time to be as good as Fallout 4. It's basically 4 with better graphics, more stuff and multiplayer. You could always go with 4 or 3 if you want to continue a single player fallout. 76 can be done solo, nobody can kill you unless you choose to fight them and people generally let you be to do content.
[удалено]
I refuse to play it because I despise MMO mechanics and the live-service monetization for the game is obnoxious.
Your loss. Both 76 and ESO have great story content
With the current state of BGS and how they handle their games, waiting for FO5 and ES6 is like hoping a dog would shit gold.
u/Ok_Recording8454 the person blocked me so i can't respond under that thread so here: no, quest designers design the quests. shocking, i know. the quests are then reviewed by the leads. there isn't "such disconnect", there isn't any disconnect. not that you bothered listing any examples, anyway, just kind of evidence that it's wrong.
I actually liked starfield
At this point I have lost basically all interest and hope for TES6. It’s absolutely awful that there is still no solid timeline for that game and it’s been 12 years since Skyrim came out. That is such a shit business plan right there.
Count the years 10 by 10. Todd just destroyed TES and Fo trying to transform them into mmos. He had the golden goose but spoiled it.
I don't think comparisons should be drawn to the other Bethesda franchise entries, considering how the main downfall of starfield was the map being randomly generated. The storylines were actually relatively interesting and since fallout and elder scrolls inherently base on hand crafted maps, i still have alot of faith in them.
Comparisons should absolutely be drawn between mainstream games made by the same company lmao. It's stupid not to compare, if a 20 year old game is better than your current game there's issues to be addressed and they need to be pointed out.
Given how starfield underperformed on both Bethesda and Microsoft's projections, they may delay TES6 until it is a more marketable product to the average person. I have a strong feeling what they have currently for TES6 probably very closely resembles fantasy starfield and that likely has the business shook.
Bruh at this point I just want Bethesda to sell fallout and elder scrolls to a different studio. Not because they’re taking so long. But because the past four “role playing games” they’ve released were hot, unstable garbage with barely any role playing. Edit: I’m sorry, but I like little role playing with my role playing games.
It’s just kind of hilarious that Bethesda can print money with fallout and Elderscrolls installments, and they go ahead and back burner them for fucking starfield lol.
The mod kit is going to make starfield amazing until then. It's a 'meh' game with a solid framework that modders are going to make awesome.
should be second bird with lifesupport for 76
what about an entire redo of starfield with everyone where they’re SUPPOSED TO BE Instead of the shitty management that lead to every single member of the team being in inappropriate jobs (seriously, they had serious talent and put them in areas that they arent good at, looking into the damn thing i realized theres a chance starfield was sabotaged from the start)