From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
these arent new or noteworthy features for a bethesda title? Even morrowind had housing and jail
Hyping up old features as if they're groundbreaking is a proud Bethesda tradition. I still remember laughing at their pre-release hype around the Radiant quest randomizer in Skyrim, which is virtually identical to the quest randomizer that Daggerfall had been built around fifteen years prior.
I guess you are right. But a Bethesda fan might be looking for these features. So it's not meant to sell novelty, but familiarity instead.
The novelty is in the space setting already.
'I love to buy Skyrim a twentieth time with a space reskin!'
This but like, unironically
Exactly. I've been playing Bethesda games for ages, news like this makes me happy they're keeping the stuff that works.
Fallout series doesn't have jail though, every conflict is solve with fight to the death, so this indicate it's more like ES than FO.
It's a Q&A. People asked about shit they know about from other games.
Not only hyping a features they had for several games now, but I bet my left ovarie thats they all gonna be as broken as their earliest iteration
Yup, that.
Don't get me wrong, I love me some Bethesda games, but only 5 years after they've come out and with a 200 plugin modlist.
i like modding as much as the next gal but this type of relationship bethesda has with their fans is not good, at all, and i never see anyone ever mention it
It's not good that the games are broken and they are relying on modders to fix them. It would be totally fine if they released a fully functioning thematic sandbox for modders to play in though.
The thing about Bethesda games is that their modding tools are far and away from any other game, making serious improvements much more accessible. That's one of the major draws of them.
I just wish every game didn't have an unofficial patch requirement to keep it from crashing too often.
I'll be busy playing Baldur's Gate 3 anyway. Will look back when they finish fixing it after release.
Why are y'all so damn negative? Every thread I've seen on here about Starfield has been like this. It's not even out yet, god damn
Have you seen the state of AAA gaming right now? And Bethesda's past record? I would be surprised if it didn't turn out to be shit.
Am I taking crazy pills? Except for 76, an MMO, Bethesdas record has been pretty good for single-player games, no?
I've played all of their games since Morrowind on Launch and always had a blast.
Then you should know the content quality of their games have gone steadily down since Morrowind, as they have prioritized trend-chasing over, pretty much, everything else.
It culminated in 76's concept and I highly doubt they are done with it.
Their games have gotten wide as the ocean and shallow as a puddle. The mechanics and quest design are so simplified and shallow. Skyrim and Fallout 4 are more like action games with some light RPG elements. As noted by the comment below, they're chasing trends. Newer games can't compare to options you have in New Vegas or even Morrowind.
The studio has changed. Just because Fallout 4 wasn't a "true RPG" doesn't mean I didn't have nigh on 400 hours of novel joy with it, maybe even because it wasn't just another core Bethesda RPG but because it was something new, a new kind of looting and crafting experience in that same large, dynamic open world that Bethesda could bring through. Morrowind was over 20 years ago. Bethesda isn't the one making those kinds of games anymore.
Have the games gotten shallower as RPGs? Sure. Fucking pac man is shallow at this point, does that mean everyone should hate on it en masse? If you don't like the direction Bethesda is going that's completely understandable, but it just seems absurd that people come out of the woodwork in these threads to just poop on a game that isn't even out yet. Save that for when it releases and it does or doesn't meet your expectations, as of now it just sounds like everybody is trying to get as entrenched as possible in their prejudice.
Bethesda games are buggy, what an old meme. It's more of a meme than a true criticism now because most games have bugs, especially ones as large as Bethesda games, and even on launch I've played other Bethesda games and enjoyed myself just fine. It's good to be cautiously skeptical and not pre order, you should be skeptical, but swinging all the way past that to being hard-line negative is not the right answer either.
And I know you personally are not reflecting all of these views, your comment just comes off as supportive of both genuine and over the top memetic criticisms due to replying in a seemingly justifying manner to someone confused about the buggy game comments. When it comes to those sorts of comments I'm talking generally about what I've seen from people on this platform.
I'm not saying Starfield will be an old Bethesda return to form or bug free on release, I'm just saying be cautious, not completely pedal to the metal negative, and accept that Bethesda as it was is dead.
At the risk of sounding like a cynical bastard, I'm gonna address some of your points.
Just let me start off with: If you enjoy the games, great. More power to you.
The lack of depth isn't just reserved to the RPG mechanics. The story, the dialog, the characters... everything is lacking in depth. All the "Environmental Story Telling" in the world can't make up for the neglected writing.
And everything that has been added isn't new by any stretch of the imagination. It's all borrowed from other current franchises, then half-assed and shoveled in by Bethesda. The loot system being one of the few things that actually works as intended.
Pac-Man is old as balls and I haven't seen anyone trying to pass it off as something new. Hell, even The Legend of Zelda series still follow the exact same premise of the very first game on the NES. The sequels get bigger, smoother and more beautiful. But it's still the same game at it's core, because it actually works.
Next point: All games launch buggy. Yep, and it has become a bit of a meme with Bethesda for a reason. Their newest games still have the same game-breaking bugs in them as Morrowind did. Some have even gotten worse. The modding community are literally fixing the same stuff, every title. Which is amazing, as Beth keeps updating their crappy Engine, but at no point in 21 years did they take the time to iron this shit out.
I do agree that we shouldn't be shitting on a game before it comes out. But it's not like people have zero idea what they are in for. From what has been shown, Starfield just looks like Fallout 4 with a fresh coat of paint. And there is a bit of a track-record to back most of the assumptions up.
As i said: If you like the road they have been taking with their games and you enjoy them. Keep enjoying them.
I think there's just a general sense of disappointment from a lot of old players. And it builds up fast in the echo-chambers of the internet and can come off as aggressive even when it wasn't the intention. And it works both ways. Dear lord, have I met some angry people defending games, simply because they can't fathom the idea that they might just like playing a 'bad game.'
It's the circle of public gaming forums.
I understand your position as well, I think we just need to have more moderate discussions and less going to extremes.
I didn't address the writing and dialogue of the games because those are absolutely getting the short end of the stick in terms of what Bethesda is spending their resources on, but I found the systems that they put work into in Fallout 4 worthy enough of that time spent instead, and I think that says more about my preferences of what I like in a game than it really does about if Bethesda games are "better" or not this way.
I tend to prefer moment to moment gameplay and I found Fallout 4's complex interlocking loop of wanting to build a settlement and modify my equipment, leading to tracking down certain materials and identifying where they may be logically found, to going there on foot, to looting the place systematically and engaging the enemies with the weapons and armor I modified and have personal attachment to, to managing my inventory with an investment and thought that never mattered as much in previous Bethesda titles, etc.
That whole loop and set of mechanics that play into each other added an incredible wealth of what I consider more moment to moment gameplay depth than just enjoying the wider possibilities of dialogue options in past Bethesda titles.
Even at its best good old days Bethesda writing doesn't really compare to other games much more focused on writing (not going to mention New Vegas here because Obsidian is one of those devs better at writing than Bethesda). Bethesda games are always more than the sum of their parts.
My point about Pac Man is more that you don't dislike the game's lack of depth in certain areas just for its own sake, but because you're comparing it to the studio's past. When Pac Man Championship Edition and DX released, those
had favorable receptions because they took the arcadey roots of the franchise to their logical conclusion instead of swapping to more accessible gameplay trends as Bethesda did.
Not an invalid criticism, but not the only thing people should be mentioning in some of these comments as if that's what makes the game "bad".
And if you really think Starfield is going to be Fallout 4 with just a new coat of paint... That's just disingenuous. There's already more than enough changes in new mechanics and systems that didn't exist in FO4 aside from the entire new universe and premise that's more than simply a coat of paint.
I do hear what you're saying though and I appreciate acknowledging some of the parts people skip over thinking about just to hit the low hanging fruit that have been brought up in every thread about a Bethesda game since time immemorial, adding nothing new to the discussion.
That is all fair points.
In my personal opinion, I think what irks me the most is that all of Bethesdas missteps are fairly easily fixable. They just seem to refuse to do so for some reason.
A bit more focus on the overall writing would go a long way and wouldn't have to interfere with the gameplay in the least for people who don't care. It's an intricate part of world-building for those that do enjoy it and serves to drive the player forward. Also helps the 'suspension of disbelief' and all that.
They don't need to reach the heights of the old CRPG makers of the 90's. Just make sure your "Antagonist" has a proper response when you put in an option to ask him Why he's doing what he's doing, you know? Stuff like that. As well as maybe not retconning the timeline of the universe just to fit an inconsequential quest-line and then recon it again in the next game... Stick to the established lore.
Secondly: Better implementation of a few new/borrowed features, like base building, that might fit the game. Instead of haphazardly throwing everything currently trending at the wall in the hope that some of it sticks. Take one thing and do it proper, otherwise just don't do it at all.
Then there's the Radiant-Quests in F4. This is just a poor excuse so as to not bother with making actual side-quests. There is a limit to how far they can execute their motto of "Keep it simple, stupid." This is one of those limits.
There's probably a couple of other things I'm forgetting. But I feel these little changes would help elevate Beth' just a bit out of the meme-pit they're currently in.
Given how modern AAA games are and Bethesda's recent track history, it's not negative to be skeptical, it's smart.
Especially since despite Microsoft watching over them and helping them to have the most "bug free launch in history" it's still probably going to be a hot mess for weeks to a month after launch. I want to be pleasantly surprised, but I'm not getting my hopes up.
Plus, the recent release of Baldur's Gate 3 with no microtransactions or season passes, etc. has gotten peoples' standards up, and given that Microsoft paid a lot of money to buy Bethesda, we're aware that they're going to have to make that money back somehow, and will probably give into the temptation to do some really player unfriendly things to do it.
Bethesda's been going all in on surprisingly expensive microtransactions for really tiny amounts of content, like in Fallout 4 and 76, and it wouldn't be shocking for them to continue in that direction. People aren't being mindlessly negative, they're looking at current and past trends and making an educated guess about the future.
Bethesda's been going all in on surprisingly expensive microtransactions for really tiny amounts of content, like in Fallout 4 and 76, and it wouldn't be shocking for them to continue in that direction.
This isn't even new. Bethesda literally set the standard for overpriced MTX with the god damn horse armor in Oblivion for $7.50. That was the first time in history the microtransaction was used and it garnered much the same response as they do now.
Experience. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me, uh, you can't get fooled again!
Because - and this is the only real answer you'll get - Starfield is "cool" and "normies" are looking forward to it. Therefore, the "real gamers" must hate it, ESPECIALLY before actually playing it.
Same shit you see in any niche community. Buncha nerds hating on anything too big or popular.
I'm not hyped for the game but I'm still curious to play it down the road once the inevitable and glaring bugs from the launch are patched.
Remember: "It just works."
Never pre-order, never have hope.
Hope is the mind killer
its gonna be so completely average
It probably will be just like every big bethesda launch title and you bet it's going to be buggy too, but guess what, I don't mind because I'm going to mod that sucker until it's good enough for me.
That's the beauty of Bethesda titles.
That isn't a beauty, it's a deficiency. Why do players need to fix Bethesda's damn game?
I could not disagree harder. Bethesda puts a ton of work into making their games as extensible as possible and I think that's not a deficiency at all.
And it still going to sell like crazy because there is no other "average" bethesda-like game on the market, especially not spaceship/SF-flavored. I wish there was cuz I know I'll be annoyed by usual bethesda issues and I don't have faith in the modding scene to fix it properly (since they never did it for me for FO4 or skyrim), but its still going to be without competition so ¯\(ツ)/¯
I don't have faith in the modding scene to fix it properly (since they never did it for me for FO4 or skyrim)
Sounds like you need to learn how to make your own. The toolset isn't very difficult to learn and can do practically everything you'd want to do mechanically to the game. Most of the mods I use are self made, because stuff I can download generally isn't perfect. They do too much or not enough and it's very rare that I find something that is perfectly what I want. So I make it myself.
I have dabbled in modding actually but only enough to know that I don't have the time or patience to make the big mods that I'd like to see, or that people with thousands of more hours of experience modding these games haven't managed to complete.
For example, no matter how much modding effort you put into combat, it's still only ever going to be classic floaty bethesda combat. No matter how much you try to improve magic, it's never going to become Dragons Dogma or Kingdoms of Amalur, ya know. No matter how many settlement overhaul or custom NPCs I add to fallout, it's still going to feel soulless and pointless to me, and no matter how many tents or frostbite effects you add to skyrim, it won't become as immersive as Outward.
Mods can improve what is already there but in my experience, they can never replace or rework core foundations of games, either because the modders don't have enough time and experience to do it (resulting in janky or unbalanced messes), or because the engine/API doesn't support it.
Every new piece of info I see about this game just tells me exactly what I was expecting. Skyrim/Fallout but with a new coat of paint. The only thing actually new and has me excited beyond knowing they generally make fun games is the space combat shit. And frankly, I'm more inclined to think it's going to be the jankiest, most broken part of the game considering it's still on the creation engine and vehicles have never been very good on it. But I would love to be wrong.
I can't bring myself to care after Fallout 4 being mid, and BG3 being amazing.
I really enjoyed FO4. It didn't live up to Fo3 or NV for me, but I still had a blast playing through multiple times.
You know, BG3 is a great experience overall, but I don't think it's a great gaming experience. I've experienced at least a handful of softlocks that forced me to rewind a decent amount of playtime... and I don't really think I'm playing in a way that should break the game.
After Redfall I am really not looking forward to games from this publisher
Bethesda Games Studio is entirely different from Bethesda the publisher, so I wouldn't be too worried
I guess the only thing is to wait and see what its like.
But the fact that its single player and seems to be geared toward customization/unique backstories (actual rpg stuff) sounds very promising.
It just feels like other empty promises, can’t wait for the 25go day-1 patch guys