Elder Scrolls VI

Colonel Sanders

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 26, 2001
Messages
4,512
Isn't the "A" team at Bethesda still currently working on that Starfield game, which we haven't even seen gameplay of yet? I guess they're big enough now that they could be moving full speed on development of ES6 with a separate team, but it seems unlikely. I think we're looking at 4+ years for ES6.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
19,240
Isn't the "A" team at Bethesda still currently working on that Starfield game, which we haven't even seen gameplay of yet? I guess they're big enough now that they could be moving full speed on development of ES6 with a separate team, but it seems unlikely. I think we're looking at 4+ years for ES6.

it's been 2.5 years since the first teaser for ES6 came out so I'm hoping they are much further along now...another 4 years seems crazy...I say late 2022...that would give them 2 years into the new console cycle
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
842
Your opinion of a good game or just a good game in general? There are too many definitions of a "Good Game".

All the Elderscrolls games have been good, some better others.
Mine, of course. The jankiness of the engine, the litany of bugs, their apparent philosophy of leaving it up to modders to make the games shine, the mediocrity of the writing. Etc.
Playing something like Witcher 3 (GOTY edition...I hear it was initially a mess upon release) and Disco Elysium sets a bar for RPGs that no Bethesda games I've played have reached.
 

DogsofJune

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
3,861
Oh, they can make a decent game, it just depends on the 50+gig day one patch that fixes two items of the three page list of things to fix, or just one.

Skyrim was enjoyable and the modding support added to that.
Fallout NV had some issues right out the gate, but fun when it settled down
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
16,898
Mine, of course. The jankiness of the engine, the litany of bugs, their apparent philosophy of leaving it up to modders to make the games shine, the mediocrity of the writing. Etc.
Playing something like Witcher 3 (GOTY edition...I hear it was initially a mess upon release) and Disco Elysium sets a bar for RPGs that no Bethesda games I've played have reached.
The Witcher 3 sets the bar for RPG's. If you haven't played it. You should.

I guess at this point, some of us have learned to embrace their games, I always look forward to modding Bethesda games, since Oblivion. It kind of makes a game of a game. I'm actually glad there is a community dedicated enough to want to fix problems with a game, unlike most games we have now where they go unchecked or take months , even years to address. The Bethesda modding community is fantastic!
 

silentsod

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
253
Oh, they can make a decent game, it just depends on the 50+gig day one patch that fixes two items of the three page list of things to fix, or just one.

Skyrim was enjoyable and the modding support added to that.
Fallout NV had some issues right out the gate, but fun when it settled down
FONV was Obsidian Entertainment developed.

Bethesda is so-so as a development house to my eyes. We get highs like Morrowind and Skyrim and lows like Oblivion and their FO games.
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
16,898
FONV was Obsidian Entertainment developed.

Bethesda is so-so as a development house to my eyes. We get highs like Morrowind and Skyrim and lows like Oblivion and their FO games.

Oblivion was miles better than Skyrim. I hated the cookie cutter storyline in Skyrim, although the expansions were better.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,638
FONV was Obsidian Entertainment developed.

Bethesda is so-so as a development house to my eyes. We get highs like Morrowind and Skyrim and lows like Oblivion and their FO games.
Fallout 3 < Skyrim < Fallout 4 < Oblivion

So your "low" is my high.
 

silentsod

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
253
In other words, they're so-so any way you cut it depending on preferences.
Fallout 3 < Skyrim < Fallout 4 < Oblivion

So your "low" is my high.
Morrowind >> Skyrim > Oblivion > FO3 >> FO4

I spit on the Bethesda FO games.

I am not holding my breath for a stellar RPG out of Bethesda any more. If they make one, great, I'll buy it half off after most of the issues have been resolved. If not, I can skip their output and not miss much in the way of story, writing, or decisions these days.

I used to be on board the Bethesda fan boy train and the modern studio has not been putting out products I find particularly appealing.
 
Last edited:

braamer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 28, 2004
Messages
1,566
I'm different. Couldn't stand Witcher 3 (only one in series I tried) but I love Skyrim (Didn't care much for the others). Everyone has their likes and dislikes which is okay.
I love The Witcher 3 and Skyrim, thought FO3 was great, FO4 ok, and didn't care for Oblivion or FO: NV.
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
16,898
I love The Witcher 3 and Skyrim, thought FO3 was great, FO4 ok, and didn't care for Oblivion or FO: NV.
Didn't like NV but you thought FO4 was ok? Weird. Did you ever play the original Fallout games?
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,638
I can skip their output and not miss much in the way of story, writing, or decisions these days.
LOL, what do you mean? Which one of their games was worth playing for story writing or decisions? None since I've been playing their games.
 

braamer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 28, 2004
Messages
1,566
Didn't like NV but you thought FO4 was ok? Weird. Did you ever play the original Fallout games?
I got rid of the settlement building with mods, so the rest of the game-play was ok. Something about FO:NV never grabbed me, I've tried multiple times.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
6,876
I'm with the crew that feels that Bethesda is a Tier 2 dev at best. They ruined the Fallout series, and Skyrim wasn't even worth completing for me. Skyrim was a world devoid of consequence and meaning. You can do anything, too bad doing anything doesn't matter. Kill an entire town? Makes no difference in the story world.

Now that all of these studios are under Microsoft's banner, I kind of hope that Chris Avellone can make Bethesda's games better and Chris Avellone and Brian Fargo can take Fallout back.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
18,879
NV was weird. I liked it, but I could see how you might not. The game basically forced you a long a pretty specific path because the enemies outside that path would annihilate you. It also forced you to choose a side and stick with it. In the other games (including the TES games) you could team up with all of the sides at once. With NV, you had to start all over or have branching saves if you wanted to explore everything. Beyond those things, it was mostly the same as 3 and 4. The casino and Vegas aesthetic was surprisingly not that big of a part of the game. It was mostly isolated to the downtown area. Everywhere else could have been any random city west of of the Rockies.
 

silentsod

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
253
LOL, what do you mean? Which one of their games was worth playing for story writing or decisions? None since I've been playing their games.
I was thinking primarily of the contrast between the original FO games which had strong story, writing, and decision making and whatever bastardized open world shooter pseudo-RPG they're calling FO these days. I completed FO4 late last month which has it fresh in my mind and is the frame I'm occupying with Bethesda. Perfectly OKish shooter mechanics are the only reason I was able to get through the game.

Morrowind had a story which was serviceable and lore I enjoyed and enough little decisions and seemingly complex interactions with guilds and individuals to make the game a rose-tinted memory. Skyrim had a world I enjoyed exploring and the writing was fine and not atrocious for most of it and I recall liking the DLC Dragonborn for it's plot and writing at the time. Oblivion I remember being exceedingly bored by both the story and the moment to moment gameplay. I ground the game out because back then I had to play the games I had and couldn't drop one and pick up any of 100 other titles waiting for me. I suppose all I really want are some memorable writing moments, a few decisions that feel meaningful and have some nuance, and compelling world design out of a TES game which is not what I want from their other major product line. Unfortunately, their other major product line is the only thing that has seen recent releases and gives recency bias to how I'm thinking about their output.

Two hits and a miss for me from their TES series. Zero hits for their FO series makes them 2/5 in the past two decades and firmly places them in the "wait and see" camp.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,638
Story and writing wise all games were forgettable to me, especially the newer ones. I only played skyrim and fo4 to explore the world and to play around with mods. And as you said FO4 was an OK shooter, so I enjoyed shooting my way through it. Unfortunately the exploration bit was less interesting in it than FO3, or Skyrim, or even Oblivion. So so far Fallout4 is the game I've spent the least time with from their lineup. But that still means over 100 hours. So if either starfield or tesvi is just that "bad". It's still more than worth having them for me.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
842
Bethesda are like the McDonald's of video games. Hugely popular and ubiquitous, but creating content that lacks any kind of artistic value. It's reliable and average, and they support it with massive hype and advertising, which ensures a lot of (IMO) non-discerning casual gamers buy their games because the marketing shoves it down their throats. And a few nutters (I used to be one) will go to great lengths to elevate their mediocre games to something beyond that by doing crazy mod installs like STEP. I spent dozens of hours tweaking to get that to run. It was pretty cool but in the end it was a bit like polishing a turd. Much better to just play legitimately great RPGs made with some care, skill, and maybe even passion. For me, those were the STALKER series, Witcher 3, Disco Elysium, etc. Basically, Bethesda's RPGs from the last 10+ years are not that far above being trash and I don't know why intelligent/discerning gamers even bother with them.
 

Viper87227

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
17,921
it's been 2.5 years since the first teaser for ES6 came out so I'm hoping they are much further along now...another 4 years seems crazy...I say late 2022...that would give them 2 years into the new console cycle

Six months ago, I would have agreed with him all day long, for exactly the same reason. Remember that Starfield was first teased the same night TES6 was. Nothing more than a simple trailer for both and not a whiff of information on either since, other than Starfield was coming first. Bethesda seems to have a major release every 3-4 years. If they maintain that, with FO76 in 2018 that means Starfield in 21-22 and TES6 in 24-26.

Today, I'm less convinced we'll see that timeline. Microsoft threw a colossal amount of money at Bethesda. While that acquisition brought a lot of IPs under Microsoft's wing, the most lucrative is no doubt TES. It's undeniably a system seller, likely one of the biggest Microsoft will ever have. I don't see them wanting to have a game capable of moving tons of consoles releasing ~5 years into the current generation. They want that game to pull people into their ecosystem ASAP. I have no problem believing that MS would throw tons of money and resources as Bethesda and turn them from a single-project studio to a multi-project studio so that they can ship both Starfield and TES6 quickly. My bet is that we see Starfield released holiday of this year, and TES6 holiday 2023.

I hope, anyway. I don't know what the fuck Bethesda was thinking announcing two huge projects like that so early. They announced Skyrim less than a year from it's release date. I don't know why they felt the need to announce TES6 5-6 years (or more) before they intended to ship it. That has never, in the history of video games, been well received.
 

Viper87227

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
17,921
Bethesda are like the McDonald's of video games. Hugely popular and ubiquitous, but creating content that lacks any kind of artistic value. It's reliable and average, and they support it with massive hype and advertising, which ensures a lot of (IMO) non-discerning casual gamers buy their games because the marketing shoves it down their throats. And a few nutters (I used to be one) will go to great lengths to elevate their mediocre games to something beyond that by doing crazy mod installs like STEP. I spent dozens of hours tweaking to get that to run. It was pretty cool but in the end it was a bit like polishing a turd. Much better to just play legitimately great RPGs made with some care, skill, and maybe even passion. For me, those were the STALKER series, Witcher 3, Disco Elysium, etc. Basically, Bethesda's RPGs from the last 10+ years are not that far above being trash and I don't know why intelligent/discerning gamers even bother with them.

This is how I feel about basically anything Ubisoft releases. At least Bethesda has the decency to not push out TES and Fallout annually. I have a soft spot for their games (well, TES anyways, Fallout I don't get nearly as jazzed about). They certainly aren't the peak of RPG perfection, but I like them for what they are. There's really very little in the way of medieval fantasy games in first person. Their games are janky as fuck and have glairing low spots (like voice acting), but the world and the lore are genuinely good. Thankfully, there is a massive modding community that does a fantastic job fixing many of the things Bethesda does poorly, and the end result, with enough effort, is something pretty special IMO. I've never not felt like I got my monies worth out of a BGS title, and that's not something I can say about many developers.
 
Top