Fallout 76 announced!

Arnust said:
It wasn't as much as malicious intent as putting them against the wall for adquidition, in some cases more clearly than others. And if course needles to say it's not *really* Bethesda Softworks but Zenimax tampering that.
Click to expand...
Intentional or not, what they did is still malicious. Yes, good for business, but was it humanly acceptable?

Arnust said:
Wait... You're saying it's actually a battle Royale? You know the main source on that are literally just memes, right? :rofl:
Click to expand...
I don't know, I was merely replying to TerminallyChill's post there, especially this bit:
Zenimax saw green after discovering that Fortnite and PUBG were essentially printing money for their studios, and decided to put its boys to work building a brand new gravy train of its own. Seems like Blizzardvision had the same idea since this year's Call of Duty is going battle royale as well.
Click to expand...
Of course, I might be misinterpreting TC's post and he didn't actually mean Bethesda's literally cooking a battle royale. And even if he did, I was merely participating in the discussion based on what I see in the surface. I honestly don't care enough to know if 76 is actually going to be a battle-royale or not, because that's not exactly my point.
 
I'm probably being loose with the definition of the genre. Credible sources have compared the game to DayZ, which in my mind is the same thing as PUBG. Sorry if that's incorrect. I haven't played online games since the days of Halo 3.
 
TerminallyChill said:
I haven't played online games since the days of Halo 3.
Click to expand...
Well, that was a great console multiplayer. I was sick at MLG and Swat in Halo 3. There's a Halo 3 like game on PC now.

I could say a lot about the market and battle royale trends but apparently my thought process on it is very wrong and that's not how any of it works.
 
Black Angel said:
Yeah, I think at this point Bethesda doesn't really have any beef with other developers, although there is the fact of them maliciously treating smaller developers
Click to expand...
I have to point out that the "malicious Bethesda" is Bethesda Softworks, the publisher. Not Bethesda Game Studios. They are different and have different people as their presidents and higher-ups.
Arnust said:
It wasn't as much as malicious intent as putting them against the wall for adquidition, in some cases more clearly than others. And if course needles to say it's not *really* Bethesda Softworks but Zenimax tampering that.
Click to expand...
In some cases it was definitely malicious intent. Like not paying what they own to studios for their work. They flat out deny to pay. After getting the game on their hands, they refuse to pay what they own, sell the game and don't pay any royalties to the devs (royalties that were stipulated on the contract). One example I can recall from the top of my head is the case with MADia and the Echelon game.

Also, Bethesda Softworks and Zenimax are owned by pretty much the same people (for example, Bethesda Softworks President is Vlatko Andonov, guess who is the Senior Vice President of Strategic Planning on Zenimax :V).
 
Risewild said:
In some cases it was definitely malicious intent. Like not paying what they own to studios for their work. They flat out deny to pay. After getting the game on their hands, they refuse to pay what they own, sell the game and don't pay any royalties to the devs (royalties that were stipulated on the contract). One example I can recall from the top of my head is the case with MADia and the Echelon game.

Also, Bethesda Softworks and Zenimax are owned by pretty much the same people (for example, Bethesda Softworks President is Vlatko Andonov, guess who is the Senior Vice President of Strategic Planning on Zenimax :V).
Click to expand...

Didn't they muscle out the original Prey developers with hostile takeover tactics as well?
 
I'm fine with Fallout 76 having multiplayer (to an extent). My problem is that Bethesda hasn't made a worthy Fallout game yet that warrants deviation from the roots of the series. They already deviated in terms of lore, gameplay, and RPG elements. I want them to make an actual RPG first, then I'm much more okay with them experimenting with other gameplay elements. Maybe they may prove me wrong come E3, but I just want a roleplaying game.
 
I'd put forth the notion that they tried to do the same with Obsidian and FNV, but Chris Avellone would have probably blew the whistle hard if that had happened.
 
It will be interesting to see how Beth tries to weasel out of all the FO3 retcons that will inevitably happen by having a settlement heavy game set like 100 miles away from the barren wasteland that DC is 170 years after FO76. Probably something like the Enclave hiking over with a nice peoper death squad to show those filthy muties their place.
 
Black Angel said:
Yeah, at this point it's no surprise really, statement or no statement.

It's like saying things like, "I always loved being a prisoner. Probably every TES we do you'll be a prisoner. I like the part where it's kinky."
Click to expand...

It's one thing to subconsciously follow a stale trend out of habit, but to be self-aware to the point where you can articulate on it in a fucking documentary is just absurd. Based on interviews and gameplay, it's apparent to me now that Howard directs his games largely around random whims and momentary impulses as opposed to any sort of method, logic, or planning. And he is totally ok with that.
 
TerminallyChill said:


Only a close-minded fool would write themselves into a box like that.
Click to expand...

I mean it's not really surprising given that every few years family members of Bethesda writers casually go either missing or doing some time.

Now that I think about it, a missing daughter who winds up being imprisoned by [insert bad guy's name here] would be kinda funny. Or go full Stalker and look for your sibling just to find out it was you all along...
 
I should clarify that while I love to blame Todd on everything that goes wrong with Bethesda's creative direction, he is honestly just the company's figurehead. I can't imagine all the horrible decisions getting passed down from corporate this poor man has to deal with on a daily basis, knowing he will ultimately take the flak for it. I actually don't blame him for not giving a shit about Fallout, I wouldn't either at this point.
 
I always loved the Vaults. Probably every Fallout we do you'll be coming out of a Vault. I like the emerging into the world.
Click to expand...
Thanks Todd Howard, for now putting a permanent seal on my "i won't touch any future Bethesda Fallout games ever".

Coming up with new ways to start the game like Fallout 2 and New Vegas? Nah, let's do it like Fallout 1, except really, really fucking bad.
 
Jogre said:
Not to mention that there are literally only 122 Vaults in Fallout lore, so it is utterly shortsighted.

If Todd insists on every game having multiple vaults, we're going to run out of possible Vaults very quickly.
Click to expand...
Run out? After a full DLC where the Sole Survivor builds a Vault for absolutely no reason?
They have already shown over and over that they don't care about previous established lore. I can easily see them say with a straight face that there are 1000's of Vaults.
 
Risewild said:
They have already shown over and over that they don't care about previous established lore. I can easily see them say with a straight face that there are 1000's of Vaults.
Click to expand...

[Bethesda Lobotomite]: <<< Detecting negative Fallout string - Keyword Triggers: ["Vaults", "Established", "Lore"] >>>

[Bethesda Lobotomite]: <<< Constructing appropriate response...complete. Outputting Response... >>>

[Bethesda Lobotomite]: "As far as Fallout lore goes, it's Bethesda's Fallout now and they can whatever they like with it - previous lore be damned!"

[Bethesda Lobotomite]: <<< Response submitted; anti-Fallout string credibility reduced by approximately 0.0000005%. Initiating return protocol to Bethesda docking bay >>>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top