I don’t really get how people’s problem with Bethesda is bugs and glitches, which are completely solvable, and not the writing that makes you want to remove some brain tissue from your skull so that it doesn’t bother you that much
I don’t think anyone really plays a Bethesda game for the story, it’s more about the open world experience that almost no other game can scratch the itch.
I get that, maybe I simply don’t have that itch to scratch.
For me at least, an open world is almost pointless if there is no meaningful storytelling of some kind. Meaningful storytelling doesn’t necessarily equals to good writing. BOTW to me has an awesome storytelling because of the way its game and narrative design make your journey the story. Just wondering around in Hyrule creates a story without needing complex quests and NPCs. New Vegas on the other hand puts you in a world with several factions you can interact with and NPCs with awesomely written quests you can approach in different subtle ways that impact how the quest goes, and while you do so it shows you how it all impacts the lives of normal people living in the wasteland.
Skyrim just doesn’t do that, and it’s ok. If I wanted to find cool loot, level up and fight big monsters, that would be the perfect game but it’s just not for me. To each their own I guess, there’s plenty of games for everyone to enjoy!
Their quest/story writing has definitely fallen off a cliff but I think it’s done to serve their bad game design. Or it goes hand in hand. Frankly I just don’t think Skyrim or FO4 were particularly good examples of the genre and probably won’t buy more Bethesda RPGs, but we’ll see.
I guess I’m biased as someone who started on Skyrim, but that’s my point of comparison for games anymore. Fallout 3 was awesome, but honestly when FO4 came out, going back to play FO3 was hard due to how clunky it was in comparison. I know FO4 fell flat with it’s character decisions and voiced protagonist but it really didn’t ruin the game like it did for lots of people.
Disclosure: I never finished the earlier TES games, because Skyrim coddled me I guess. lol
I’m biased in the opposite way since I started with Fallout New Vegas, but to me FO3 wasn’t THAT good either. It’s a good game, but its narrative design is still mediocre. FO4 was a really good upgrade in terms of gunplay, but I hated the story, side quests and the changes to the perks system.
To me, Bethesda games feel like big worlds with lots of quests and items, but completely flat narratively and thematically/philosophically.
Id guess that 76 was a big catalyst in that.
Since it was an online game you couldn’t load community patches,
so people where kinda forced to stare it in the face.
In addition to that, the perception of AAA games kinda shifted in general.
From Blockbusters with incredible production value, to overhyped and unfinished bug ridden messes.
So Bethesda gets lot more flak now for having so many bugs, even tho almost none are game breaking
I don’t really get how people’s problem with Bethesda is bugs and glitches, which are completely solvable, and not the writing that makes you want to remove some brain tissue from your skull so that it doesn’t bother you that much
You can patch bugs but a buggy game will never be like Factorio. Also, fanmade fixes tend to introduce some wonkyness.
I don’t think anyone really plays a Bethesda game for the story, it’s more about the open world experience that almost no other game can scratch the itch.
I get that, maybe I simply don’t have that itch to scratch.
For me at least, an open world is almost pointless if there is no meaningful storytelling of some kind. Meaningful storytelling doesn’t necessarily equals to good writing. BOTW to me has an awesome storytelling because of the way its game and narrative design make your journey the story. Just wondering around in Hyrule creates a story without needing complex quests and NPCs. New Vegas on the other hand puts you in a world with several factions you can interact with and NPCs with awesomely written quests you can approach in different subtle ways that impact how the quest goes, and while you do so it shows you how it all impacts the lives of normal people living in the wasteland.
Skyrim just doesn’t do that, and it’s ok. If I wanted to find cool loot, level up and fight big monsters, that would be the perfect game but it’s just not for me. To each their own I guess, there’s plenty of games for everyone to enjoy!
Their quest/story writing has definitely fallen off a cliff but I think it’s done to serve their bad game design. Or it goes hand in hand. Frankly I just don’t think Skyrim or FO4 were particularly good examples of the genre and probably won’t buy more Bethesda RPGs, but we’ll see.
I guess I’m biased as someone who started on Skyrim, but that’s my point of comparison for games anymore. Fallout 3 was awesome, but honestly when FO4 came out, going back to play FO3 was hard due to how clunky it was in comparison. I know FO4 fell flat with it’s character decisions and voiced protagonist but it really didn’t ruin the game like it did for lots of people.
Disclosure: I never finished the earlier TES games, because Skyrim coddled me I guess. lol
I’m biased in the opposite way since I started with Fallout New Vegas, but to me FO3 wasn’t THAT good either. It’s a good game, but its narrative design is still mediocre. FO4 was a really good upgrade in terms of gunplay, but I hated the story, side quests and the changes to the perks system.
To me, Bethesda games feel like big worlds with lots of quests and items, but completely flat narratively and thematically/philosophically.
Id guess that 76 was a big catalyst in that.
Since it was an online game you couldn’t load community patches,
so people where kinda forced to stare it in the face.
In addition to that, the perception of AAA games kinda shifted in general.
From Blockbusters with incredible production value, to overhyped and unfinished bug ridden messes.
So Bethesda gets lot more flak now for having so many bugs, even tho almost none are game breaking