Bethesda's Track Record (Split from FO3)

[Ratty Sr.]

Now, I can see why this would make you worried about the future of the Fallout franchise, but really, do you think that the RPG division of Bethesda, which has proven itself SO adept at crafting immense and detailed worlds, is going to overlook the fundamentals of the Fallout experience? The consequence-based system, the dark humor, the cynicism?

They have also proven themselves adept at skullfucking their own intellectual property, as anyone even moderately observant can see a *huge* decline in quality after Daggerfall. Even if you discount the crappy spin-offs like Redguard, there is still the rather good, but severely overrated Morrowind and, of course, Oblivion, which is just too pathetic for words.

I have much more faith in them than that, but faith is obviously not a big part of your relationship with Bethesda.

Whatever faith I once had in Bethesda has long since molten away. And this is coming from a former hardcore TES fan (and I mean *hardcore* - I still remember being 14, playing Daggerfall to the death and writing hundreds of pages of crappy fan fiction). However, Battlespire, Redguard, Moronwind and Dumblivion turned me from an avid Bethesda fan into a vitriolic detractor, and nowadays I consider Bethesda the embodiment of everything wrong with modern CRPG production.

 

[Sander]

Dude, TES III and IV might not be the TYPE of RPG that you like, but they are pretty incredible games nonetheless.

I'm not arguing they're poor games, I'm arguing they're poor RPGs, or at least the type of RPG that Fallout is.

I'm not gonna lay out all the reasons I think they're amazing because it's obvious you've already decided what you think about them, so I'll just stick with my main argument. They may be different from Fallout, but they are not crap. They're just not for you.

Sure, but since they're completely different from Fallout, I can't understand how you can possibly see it as any kind of positive promise for Fallout.

Now, I can see why this would make you worried about the future of the Fallout franchise, but really, do you think that the RPG division of Bethesda, which has proven itself SO adept at crafting immense and detailed worlds, is going to overlook the fundamentals of the Fallout experience? The consequence-based system, the dark humor, the cynicism?

I have much more faith in them than that, but faith is obviously not a big part of your relationship with Bethesda. So have fun being pessimistic! I'll have fun looking forward to some kickass gaming, and run the risk of being disappointed.

Now where did I say I was pessimistic? What I've been saying for about a year now is that outright throwing Bethesda out the window and being confident that they're going to make a crap game is silly and completely unfounded.

BUT, I've also said that both Oblivion and Morrowind didn't bode well. Specifically because they're completely different from Fallout, because they largely ignored the established series with those games and because the setting was bland and the atmosphere never gripped me, or anyone I've ever spoken to, this was mainly due to the shitty dialogue and characters that were all the same.

 

[DoomMunky]

Well said, well said, all of it.

You bring up some good points too, about the differences between TES games and Fallout.

I think the sticking point is that Fallout has always had a much more direct, focussed story than TES, and as such, NEEDED all those personalized NPCs. Morrowind and Oblivion are trying to do something much different than the Fallouts tried to (Oblivion especially), and as such it's hard to justify the kind of time and detail that making every single NPC unique and interesting would require, especially on top of all the other assets that they're having to create to fill out the incredibly expansive, seemingly limitless gameworld they're trying to create.

Fallout wasn't trying to do that, and needed to personalize everyone and make the dialogue interesting because it helped tell the story they were trying to tell.

That's a starting point, at least, for talking about fundamental differences between the franchises. (I'm also new to this board, as you can see, and haven't been a part of this discussion since the beginning, so forgive me if I'm rehashing old arguments)

 

[Sander]

No, that's really not true.

Look, first of all, Fallout didn't personalize every NPC, there were a shitload of NPCs that said nothing, or just had some floats. It has nothing to do with the story, the story in Fallout was just a bit more important than it was in Morrowind and Oblivion, the focus was much more on the world in all those games.

Look, what Morrowind and Oblivion did was give some kind of possibly meaningful conversation to *everyone* in the entire game, and then they made up a wiki-logue system which takes out any and all personality out of any NPC and removes any sense of having an actual conversation.

Fallout, on the other hand, only gave people that were relevant something to say, but when they gave them something to say, they made it feel like a true conversation, with a decent system behind it. The few talking heads then added a lot to the atmosphere, and a lot of them were given to people who had pretty much nothing to do with the storyline. Places like Shady Sands and Junktown were irrelevant to the story, but still had multiple talking heads and conversations.

 

[zioburosky13]

Given that Bethesda is screwing their own intellectual property
(that would be The Elder Scroll), I don't think they will make a Fallout game without dumbing it down. In-fact, Boredvilion is the most BORING elder scroll game. (Yeah I spent my last 2 months playing it and realise it's nothing ground breaking)