For those also waiting on the next Bethesda open-world game...

[GODSPEED]

While I have my fair share of criticisms of Bethesda games, they do create unique worlds that can really draw me in and keep me immersed for hours upon hours.

 

I am looking forward to Starfield while we wait for the next Elder Scrolls title.

Got this e-mail today.

 

[Wigen]

Is it the only thing here that smells like the Citadel from Mass Effect? 🤔

[GODSPEED]

3 hours ago, Wigen said:

Is it the only thing here that smells like the Citadel from Mass Effect? 🤔

One of the displayed artwork gives that vibe!

I'm really curious/anxious to see more about this game..
..it'll be interesting to see the advancement in their game engine and how they implement the Bethesda we know so well into a game dealing with space and worlds.

[Vee2003]

It sounds cool and all but it doesn't really tell me that much about it. Honestly from the trailer it kinda feels like it's going to be what I've already been doing for like... 7 years in Elite: Dangerous.

[GODSPEED]

On 11/12/2021 at 3:12 PM, Vee2003 said:

It sounds cool and all but it doesn't really tell me that much about it. Honestly from the trailer it kinda feels like it's going to be what I've already been doing for like... 7 years in Elite: Dangerous.

I've been under the impression it will be sci-fi "skyrim", or something similar to a Mass Effect/Elder Scrolls fusion.

 

While I got the impression there would be some sort of space flight, I was thinking less flight sim and more transport to another city/location.

 

But maybe there will be more space flight than I thought of.

[Hendrix]

On 10/20/2021 at 9:10 PM, GODSPEED said:

While I have my fair share of criticisms of Bethesda games, they do create unique worlds that can really draw me in and keep me immersed for hours upon hours.

Agreed, it is always that; "what lies beyond that next hill?"

In my opinion, Bethesda's greatest flaws are the story telling (I find them poor at getting the story and quests feeling important) and bland NPC interaction.

16 hours ago, GODSPEED said:

I've been under the impression it will be sci-fi "skyrim", or something similar to a Mass Effect/Elder Scrolls fusion.

Yupp, exactly what I need! Another huge open world rpg sitting unfinished on my to-play-list. 😂

How I miss university when you could study by day, play games all night and go partying on the weekends, and get about 8 hours of sleep per week.

When the hell did I get old?!

[Hendrix]

Speaking of open world rpgs.

Obsidian is developing one in the Pillars of Eternity universe called Avowed. To my knowledge, there is only a short trailer for the game so far and no gameplay.

[GODSPEED]

6 hours ago, Hendrix said:

Yupp, exactly what I need! Another huge open world rpg sitting unfinished on my to-play-list. 😂

When the hell did I get old?!

I probably spend as much time maintaining my Steam Wishlist to bring myself back down to earth as I do thinking of the games I'd like to try.

 

And I still have installed games I planned on playing... 4-5 years ago.

 

I just don't have the same mental fortitude as I used to; so I often end up stretching out games that I could have finished (in a long weekend) over a month or so.

[Hendrix]

5 hours ago, GODSPEED said:

I just don't have the same mental fortitude as I used to; so I often end up stretching out games that I could have finished (in a long weekend) over a month or so.

Sounds familiar. I am somewhat of a completeionist (is that a word?) when it comes to games. I want to play trough every quest etc. So games often takes me a great deal of time to get trough. Plus I simply do not have a lot of spare time to spend on games anymore.

[GODSPEED]

On 3/19/2023 at 11:25 PM, anon474 said:

Im actually not looking forward to another bethesda title because ever since morrowind the systems have been getting simpler and simpler and simpler, to the point where skyrim, despite being very fun, is practically devoid of any kind of complex or interesting mechanics.

If I'm going to get another bethesda title it won't be because I'm looking forward to the complex systems in it.

Every fiber in me wants to agree.

 

...but, I've recently watched some super-long reviews of Morrowind & Oblivion.

 

To be honest, as much as those games have left a solid imoression on me, they were full of clunky and broken mechanics as well.

At the time, those were amazing games, and at that age, you are so amazed that your brain filters out the super crap parts.

Vivec is a perfect example of HORRIBLE design. Not to mention, the amount stupid quests you undertake as a "messiah" and keep having to run back in forth to Vivec and other locations.

 

Don't forget that everytime you clicked your mouse, you we're rolling dice to know if you hit or not.

 

Skyrim may not have the highest level of fancy writing. Quests and story might be a little basic. But, the is way less clunkyness to it as well. The world is beautiful and FUN to explore. The mechanics are maybe a little lacking though, I agree.

 

 

Oh, and I DO NOT miss the whole trying to charm or intimidate npcs with money in Morrowind. 🤣

Edited March 31, 2023 by GODSPEED

[Solaris_Wave]

I like open world RPGs but it seems that there are so many of them now and they all have so much content because the developers want you to really enjoy living in the world they have created. Much of the time spent in the game isn't the quests, side quests, combat or goals you have created for yourself. A lot of the time can be spent travelling from A to B, and the developers decided to create as much distance between A and B as possible, with the extra pleasure of not having you travel in a straight line but instead forcing you to go round bendy roads, loaded with hostile animals that normally hate each other but have decided to work together for the first time in history just to kill you, bandits who have identical transport to yours but are somehow faster, and quest giving NPCs that have decided that you and you alone are their new delivery man.

"You are the Chosen One, are you not? You have come to save us and free us from the tyranny we have suffered for years and years!"

"I am."

"Great. Now can you go over to Mrs. Miggin's Bakery and get me a loaf of bread. Here's 5 gold. Don't be long as I'm hungry."

[Solaris_Wave]

I never played Morrowind or Skyrim as I had too many other games to play at the time. My friend bought Oblivion and he instantly put me off that game as soon as he told me there was enemy level scaling. Bandits that are supposedly poor and preying on easy targets out in the wilderness would eventually be wearing top of the range armour and wielding high class weapons. Wolves would simply get stronger with your own level progression. What is the point of levelling up if you never feel the satisfaction of defeating enemies that you used to fear? If they are always your equal, it sounds pointless.

An earlier game in the Elder Scrolls series, Daggerfall had a little bit of enemy level scaling, I think. For the most part though, you would get better and better. Those lower enemies that were a challenge became fodder for your blade as you gained levels. You felt powerful because you could despatch them with ease. At the same time, the game was not shy in letting you encounter an enemy that was vastly more powerful than you, even if you were still a low level character. You could instantly die and it created a fear of that enemy. It taught you to be careful. If you saw one of those enemies, or heard them, you got out of there fast. There were so many dungeons, side quests and enemy randomisation, that fleeing didn't stop game progress. Then, when you were finally powerful enough to face those nastier foes, the feeling of accomplishment and the realisation that you were now truly kick-ass was immense.

Other than being a much newer game, Skyrim sounds similar to Daggerfall with regards to weapon and armour progression. You start off with Iron weapons, then Steel starts to appear, then Silver, Elven, Dwarven, etc. There were different weapons but other than damage and speed attributed to that weapon type, the metal quality was the only real damage enhancer, unless the weapon was magically enchanted. You could visit the Mage's Guild and provided you had enough money and skill, you could take a basic item or weapon and give it magical abilities. I don't know whether Skyrim was like that but it sounds as if you progress so quickly in weapon quality and skills, that you never really get to truly appreciate getting something.

Baldur's Gate 2 did an excellent job with finding decent gear. When you got something nice, it lasted a long time, maybe the entire game. One such weapon was the unique Paladin's sword called Carsomyr a.k.a. The Holy Avenger. It was a very powerful sword that you had to fight a tough battle to get. It was one of the best weapons in the game and you could also upgrade it to become even greater. Like Carsomyr, there were lots of named weapons that had histories attached to them. They felt like a reward rather than something that was just there to get you by until the next, more shiny weapon appeared.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Solaris_Wave

[Solaris_Wave]

I remember playing Icewind Dale 1. It is generally similar to Baldur's Gate but far less in terms of plot development, character development and side quests. It is more of a general progression RPG that just looks like Baldur's Gate. You could return to areas you had fought through previously and some enemies would respawn. However, you couldn't really use those old areas to repeatedly gain the same level of XP. Once your characters had levelled up enough, no matter how many enemies there were, the total amount of XP gained was not worth the fight. Loot would always be standard items and carrying all the weapons and armour wouldn't be worth the gold you got for them. The game was constantly encouraging you to move forward as opposed to being a standard RPG where you were able to just do what you want.

Baldur's Gate 2 was the fully fledged RPG where you could explore everywhere and sometimes redo certain areas. I don't know how much it level scaled the enemies but there were certain areas or enemies that you are able to encounter at any time. You could encounter some truly powerful enemies that are way beyond your party's levels. The game didn't prevent you from fighting them but you either won but at a serious cost or you needed to reload your saved game and give that area/enemy a wide berth for the time being.

Fallout 1, 2, Fallout: Tactics, 3 and New Vegas (those being the games I played) are similar. Some level scaling and some high threat areas/enemies that you should avoid until you were strong enough. The weapons were all very nicely done as well. Some weapons lasted a long time in their usefulness. Even ones that didn't, still had plenty of identity and time to enjoy them.

Compare that with constant loot dropping games where each weapon just has incremental bonuses of a small percentage but otherwise looks and handles the same. There is no real joy of ownership with those.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Solaris_Wave

[GODSPEED]

On 3/31/2023 at 3:56 AM, anon474 said:

Like Skyrim has AN UNBELIEVABLE potential for INSANE rpg mechanics and systems. But they squandered it all. Imagine a game like Skyrim that doesn't just have "oh I learned the damage shout. It just does ranged damage." These people spent all the time laughing and talking about how the first shout you learn makes all NPCs get ragdoll physics and talking about the physics bugs instead of creating really interesting systems, like maybe shout damage is a unique damage type and it is one of the only things that hurt a certain class of enemy, maybe giants are also a unique class of enemy that can only be hurt by a specific weapon type.

But instead of that skyrim is just like "find steel sword, replace iron sword, get more damage. ez."

Yet, numbers speak for themselves.

Skyrim getting an anniversary pack. People buy it!

Fallout 4 getting a next-gen upgrade this year. Numbers speak. Our wallets do the talking.


Do I think they are the most clever titles. Nope!
Do I think the games are deep and "strategic"? Nope!
Do I have fun roaming the world, discovering small stories? Yes
Have I ever spent as many hours in Skyrim or Fallout 4 as any other games over the past decade? No!

You end up liking small things in the Bethesda worlds. You are able to put aside the shallow mechanics, because the games aren't about mechanics. They are simply about discovery, exploration, finding.. small hidden "easter eggs", funny little stories unrelated to anything else. You can almost play a 1000 hours of Skyrim/Fallout 4.. come back a year later for a new game, and find new things.

THOSE are the things that make me love Bethesda games. These are similar but also very different from Fallout 1 & 2... remember how many little hidden gems you could find out of nowhere while roaming the wasteland. Fallout and Skyrim are like that.

I also have a deep respect for them as a games dev. They stick to their games. Fallout 76 was a pure utter disaster at release. I couldn't even play it. A few years down the line, they are still working on it, still putting effort in it. I am able to play it and enjoy it.

They stick to it while most devs see a slight hurdle and shut it down because $$$.

[GODSPEED]

can't delete post

Edited April 1, 2023 by GODSPEED
error

[Solaris_Wave]

I don't buy sports games, except in vary rare cases, but those sell very well every year, despite being pretty much identical to the year before. I have watched Angry Joe on YouTube complain about the John Madden games and while it is his 'thing' to get angry, one video I saw of him talking about a Madden game from this year or last, saw his face turn so red, I thought he was going to explode.

The bottom line with that is that you can't always vote with your wallet. Games can sell wonderfully and yet still be unoriginal, poorly made junk. Likewise, movies can be blockbusters as everybody goes to see the film, unaware that it isn't all that great as it was well marketed. Other films can sell poorly on release, only to be highly regarded cult films later in the years that people talk about and go to conventions for, just to get a chance to see and chat to the actors.

[GODSPEED]

3 hours ago, anon474 said:

I don't think skyrim would've generated more money or much more money than it did already by implementing correct gameplay mechanics and RPG depth.

2 hours ago, Solaris_Wave said:

The bottom line with that is that you can't always vote with your wallet. Games can sell wonderfully and yet still be unoriginal, poorly made junk.

Yes. I agree 120%.

But we're not talking about some yearly refresh like a sports games, or like a new CoD title. Those have a faithful following because they are sports fan and don't seem to care that much that the game is trash year after year and they pay for a roster update.


I'm talking about Skyrim. A game that came out in 2011.

TODAY (2023-04-01), it has 29 000 players playing it. The last 30 day average is 20 000 players (per day).
https://steamcharts.com/search/?q=skyrim

Ever see the size of the modding community for it? Very few games could even compare in sheer variety and scope of modding. From total makeovers that actually complete new games, to projects that have been worked on for more than 8 years.

That is NOT something to brush off.

Why?

Simply because the game isn't so much an rpg, it's more of a first-person adventure. It's a sandbox where you can simply decide to explore, fool around in or quest in.


Bethesda wouldn't have poured money and effort in refreshing the engine for 64 bit systems years and years ago. They wouldn't work on a major update to actually unlock framerate caps from the Creation Engine if they didn't think people were still playing it. The game has gone through 2 FULL console generations and is still among greatly played games.


My brother was the same as "you" in terms of resisting it because he felt it looked too "streamlined". A couple years ago, during Covid, he gave in. He never looked back, doesn't miss Morrowind, nor Oblivion. Why? The curiosity of exploring. Skyrim is an interesting virtual "place". Lots of beautiful virtual landscape for those time you just want to feel like you're in another world.

[Solaris_Wave]

The reason I never played Skyrim is because I have enough games to play and I know it would be a time sink. I know that I would spend a lot of time playing and exploring, leaving the main quest completion as long as possible. Also, the other reason I haven't bothered with it is because of the multiple editions that have come out and its vibrant modding scene. I love how games can be modded to improve games but would I have to spend a long time figuring out which mods I want and then a long time installing them in the right order? I have read how some people have given up replaying Skyrim because of the lengthy setup of the mods.

Edited April 3, 2023 by Solaris_Wave

[Hendrix]

I have lost count on the number of times I have modded Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, 4 and NV beyond salvation and had to restart from scratch because of broken/corrupted save files. Out of those games I belive I have only finished Oblivion's main quest.

Can't wait to repeat it in Starfield! 😂

Jokes aside, I belive that Bethesda's success in games is ease of access and that they are (relatively) thrilling to explore, what's beyond that next hill? / I wonder what I'll find in this dungeon?

You can approach them at any level of difficulty that suits you, story/casual to hardcore.

You can focus on the aspects that suits you, play trough the story, focus on side/faction quest, just explore sites, investigate lore, fool around, etc. You are never punished for ignoring stuff because they simply wait for you to come back later.

And if there is some aspect of the game is missing for you or you want it to work differently, check out the mods at Nexus for a solution.

You do not have to be super invested in the game and many people simply want to play a game at a level that is some casual fun for them. I myself starting to become one of them out of 2 reason.

1. Nowadays I lack the amount of free time to be super invested in games. I normaly have 2 - 3 hours a week to play, and maybe 4 hours every other/third weekend playing multiplayer/coop with friends for an evening. So a 100 hour game would take me a year to finish.

2. Nowadays I lack the amount of energy I required to be super invested in games. My work consists of solving problems, correcting other peoples work from a technical aspect and keeping track of how things depend on or affect other aspects of my area of expertise. So a lot of days after work I just do not have the cognitive energy for a game I really have to focus on. Instead prefearing to play games on a casual level or games I already know the mechanical aspects of by heart.

Most of my friends, whom are around 40, who still play games say the same thing. They tend to focus on 1 or 2 games they play in their free time.

I think there are many games out there alot more interesting when it comes to story/game mechanics etc.  than whatever Bethesda's next release will be, but damn me I must say they are easy to just pick up an play.

[Solaris_Wave]

For me, it makes me wonder what might deter me from playing a big game when it never used to. I don't think it is necessarily lack of free time or that getting older makes me less capable. I think that, when I was younger, games were smaller in content and there were less big games that would take so many hours to play. I could go faster and complete them quicker if I wanted to, but I was happy to take my time with them and explore and appreciate what had been made. Nowadays, so many games are huge, lengthy affairs with lots of travelling, quests and side quests, plus DLC to lengthen it even further. That is great if you are really enjoying the game and don't have others waiting to be played.

The only thing I can say about getting older is that it can sap your tolerance. You are not 'too old' to do it. It is just that you have already done this sort of thing more than once before. Take Ubisoft's games…they are nearly always open world now. Far Cry is a big game every time and similar with each sequel: travel long distances, kill and skin animals, kill bad guys and take out their outposts, climb a high location to scout and reveal more locations. Assassin's Creed is much the same thing. Then other publishers have their huge games. You know before you even start that it will take a long time to play and even though development on a game can take years, they somehow manage to make more games faster than you can play and finish them.

[Hendrix]

15 hours ago, anon474 said:

I don't disagree that bethesda titles have somthing going for them, but I do think they could reliably improve the way their progression works, and make other mechanical changes.

Skyrim was so simple progression wise. You may as well have 1 weapon type, and you simply unlock the next tier of weapons and then you're done. I feel like they tried to move away from that in Fallout 4 and made gear more complicated with different arm/shoulder/chest items, something I think is entirely unnecessary. But the weapons were still too few, stats were too squished, and there were no special stats or things like chance to critical hit (maybe there was can't remember, but not much more than that), no different damage types, no resistances. Very very barebones.

I agree with you on a personal level, my post was merely a my own beliefs of what has made Bethesda's games so successful to a broad audience. I know several people whom never even looked at rpgs of any kind before, who then played Skyrim and/or Fallout 4 feverishly.