Jim "NMA should shut up about Bethesda" Sterling hates 76

Oh boy, if he still thinks like that i kind of lost a lot of respect for Jim reading that article. He's using the tired "fans just don't like change" argument that needs to burn in the deepest pits of hell. Change in itself is not automatically good, change can be good or bad.

The changes in Fallout 3 were not good. The changes dumbed down the gameplay, the story, the characters, the writing, the rpg elements, all things that matter to Fallout. We don't want another Fallout 1, people just want a Fallout game that has the elements that made the first two work and hardly any of them are in Fallout 3.

I know it's an 8 year old article and we don't even know if he thinks like this anymore, but people need to be aware of that change is not automatically good.



And in case of Fallout 76, change is also not automatically good.
 
I follow Jim. He's funny. He's entertaining. He can make some very good points. But he definitely still has this mindset. The only time he doesn't is if it's something he personally finds distasteful.

But he continues to view disliking a fundamental change in a series in and of itself as "childish" and "entitled".
 
That honestly kind of sucks to know because to me it's one of the absolute worst mentalities you can have. I do admit that sometimes some complaints can be pretty petty if they are small potatoes compared to everything else, but if it's stuff like dumbing down major systems from previous games, that's going too far.

All Fallout 4 did was make the perk system worse. Instead of having the majority of the perks have unique effects, like in the previous games, the removal skill points means perks have to pick up the slack. And that means wasting a bunch of perk slots on boring ass damage increases. They basically shoved in the Skyrim's perk system into a Fallout game, you have some perks that do cool shit but then you have damage increases because stats like strength and intelligence were removed.
 
Last edited:
L.M.Valentine said:
Of course, I find it ironic that the author of this:
https://www.destructoid.com/videogame-fans-need-to-shut-up-about-everything-164476.phtml

Is complaining about Bethesda changing things.

It's entirely people like him's fault.
Click to expand...
Not really. We can't fault Jim for not knowing the depths Bethesda does with retcons. He's a busy guy after all. Some of the stuff we bring up regarding lore retcons and the like only really become apparent if we dig into it. Jim and most average joes don't have time for that. Without digging deep, the game looks very Fallout but looks can be deceiving.

And you could say, "he shouldn't of said that if he didn't dig deep", and maybe you have a point. On the other hand, how many times have we said a game was alright whereas others elsewhere hated it with a passion with their own reasons. I think a few folks here on NMA enjoy GTA Online, but me and several other GTA fans hate it so much as it's everything wrong with the franchise.
 
To me personally, people that have no clue why people hate a change have no right to call anyone "childish" and "entitled". You come off as arrogant and ignorant if you do so, like you are somehow above anyone.
 
Norzan said:
To me personally, people that have no clue why people hate a change have no right to call anyone "childish" and "entitled". You come off as arrogant and ignorant, like you are somehow above anyone.
Click to expand...
Certainly, the key part is though Jim's job. He's probably seen this kind of vitriol before elsewhere for more petty reasons, god knows gaming culture can be extremely petty. I won't say his article was right, but for him to know Bethesda's Fallout the way NMA does, he'd need to dig deeper, even deeper than he usually does. I'd say even reading a couple threads here on the site wouldn't be enough since it'd look like nitpicking. They'd need to read A TON of threads here to understand why NMA thinks so low of Bethesda but nobody besides us really have the time for such an endeavor.
 
Jim's a funny dude and I like his content even though he flat out strawmans people when it's convenient to do so:

In fact, that's exactly what one man, No Mutants Allowed's Vince Weller, declared when Fallout 3 came out: "It's not a Fallout game. It's not even a game inspired by Fallout, as I had hoped. It's a game that contains a loose assortment of familiar Fallout concepts and names ... Electricity, pre-war electronic equipment, powered and still working computers (just think about that for a second), working cola & snack machines, weapons, ammo, scrap metal (needed by many), and even unlooted first aid boxes are everywhere."

Because the game did not adhere 100% to this one man's vision of what Fallout was, the game was no longer a Fallout game. Because various concessions were made to the loot and environment in order to keep the game playable and fun, it was a betrayal. Oh no, unlooted first aid boxes! No, it wouldn't make sense for such things to survive in Fallout's world, but it's a videogame, and it has to function like one, which is something that these so-called fans seem to forget.

...

Fact is, this was the first Fallout game in years, and most people loved it. So, these people were complaining about a new game for their favorite franchise that was pretty good by all accounts and made a lot of money, ensuring future Fallout games for quite some time. Yet, had these guys had their way, I doubt we'd even be talking about Fallout DLC, or New Vegas, or anything Fallout-related right now. Had these guys had their way, we'd have a game that looked, sounded, and played like something from 1997, and it would have sold to a small group who would then have likely complained that it hadn't changed enough.
Click to expand...

Wew

LwEWwmG.gif
 
I read the article, and was honestly confounded by Mr. Sterling's position in relation to Fallout and Diablo.

The article also illuminated a very grave detail of ignorance.
Jim Sterling doesn't understand the concept of brand obfuscation, and genericism. It seems as though his grasp on intellectual property rights is limited.

If Mr. Sterling had his way any such IP would be required to change core facets of it's inherent basis of design for no justified reason. It's like asking Coca-Cola to turn their flagship beverage into a flat fruit drink that smells faintly like Coca-Cola Classic. Then market the new beverage as Coca-Cola Classic.

Does that sound like a reasonable course of action to anyone?

I don't know if he was in a rush to write this article, or what I think is much more likely maybe didn't think very critically of the details involved. Plus slandering an entire group in the same manner in which developers that Jim Sterling engaged in legal proceedings with (Digital Homicide) is a rather surreal 180.

Therefore the only question I can think of is; What the fuck happened to Jim Sterling?
 
This article feels like something that could be written by Kotaku or any of the other mainstream gaming journalist sites today. Just slandering an entire group of people while coming to defense of AAA companies.

Which makes it really ironic when currently, and for a while now, he criticizes the mainstream gaming journalist sites for doing just that. He has every right to do so because those sites do so much dumb defenses to current monetary and DLC practices, but he still comes off as an hypocrite because of that article.


I mean, i agree he's a funny guy and i actually follow him on Youtube and he has a lot of videos where he has a lot of good points. So, what the hell happened here?
 
Last edited:
Heh, Kotaku. I'm trying to wrap my head around Jason Schreier going to bat for Bethesda about their engine:

The term “engine” is thrown around often among video game fans and pundits, mostly in a derogatory way. When a game looks or runs badly, people blame the engine, whether it’s through insulting comments about Unity or hackneyed adjectives like “creaky.” Wrote the Forbes article: “It feels like every month we achieve some new level of detail and beauty with a new release, and yet something like Fallout 76 comes along and it’s just noticeably worse than everything else with an engine that feels like it’s about to crumble into dust, despite bolting on new parts and upgrades to try to keep it going.”

To understand why this trend is so silly, let’s run a quick refresher on what a video game engine actually is.
Click to expand...

I can hear @Einhanderc7's brows furrowing in disgust.
 
A broken clock is right every once and awhile. Sterling is mildly amusing and he has all the safe options on issues, but it's not surprising he has a low opinion of NMA. Change isn't it self a good thing and the promised change is usually worse than whatever one is use to.

Lmao. Bethesda's Engine IS garbage. It really isn't even debatable. They use it cause it's fast and easy to make games on.
 
I think the real problem is they're either incapable or too lazy to fix most of those engine bugs and refused to acquire the license of newest version of gamebryo that supposedly is much more bug free than the version they using since Morrowind.
 
Last edited:
Tbf, even Mister Caption hates NMA and we looked up to him for a while.
Face it, we are a sight of degenerates and bitter depressed assholes.
Yet we love it really.
 
BigGuyCIA said:
I can hear @Einhanderc7's brows furrowing in disgust.
Click to expand...

1C77643987B024838C5F26FD2F3DDAC892505D9B

Believe me @BigGuyCIA you have no earthly idea how much Mr. Sterling's vapid statement rustles my jimmies. The article is like asking a 1st. grader how a space toilet works, they don't have a remote idea. Then ask them to provide a rational description of it's technical application.

What Mr. Sterling fails to comprehend is the rather obvious fact that there is a direct correlation between the engine, the developer's use of the engine, and the graphical fidelity presented to the player.

Here's my opinion of Mr. Sterling's article; Mr. Sterling does not know how to make a game, nor the effort required to produce such products. Not only is he incredibly ignorant to the processes that facilitate the development of such a product; he also fails to comprehend the basic details that even a grade school student could piece together.

Basically Mr. Sterling posted an article that made himself look like an incompetent fool, then doubled down by insulting his readers. It's like shoving a steel toe boot into one's mouth and asking for nearby spectators to help push it in ankle deep. It's moronic, and to be honest I have no further interest in any of Mr. Sterling's future content. What a fucking dumbass.
 
"People hate change" is the most braindead argument one can come up with to defend Bethesda's games against any and all criticism.

Especially because one could make the SAME argument to accuse players of being "manchildren": revert back Fallout to its isometric roots, and everyone who doesn't like that is being a manchildren who hates change.

They'd rather that games never evolve, and that 1996 remain the last year a new game was ever made. Nobody typifies this more than Fallout fanboys, who threw a fitful tantrum over Fallout 3. Their problem? The fact that it wasn't 100% exactly like the original Fallout.
Click to expand...

This isn't even the criticism leveled about the game. The actual criticism was:

- It replaced turn-based RPG combat for an action-based shooter combat with RPG elements tacked on.
- The engine was clunky and everything looked awful. Fallout 3 is an eyesore compared to the classic titles.
- The writing was simply bad and it shows in every aspect of the game: NPCs, quests, main quest.

Because RPGs are defined by their combat and their writing, you have an RPG that plays poorly and that has pretty nonsensical roleplaying options.

Even the "something like the original Fallout wouldn't make any money nowadays" isn't an argument, because it implies people want a Fallout game that sells billions and makes bank accordingly, when that couldn't be farther away from the truth. You can most definitely profit from a cRPG, as Larian Studios has shown. Of course it won't make as much money as something like Fallout 4, but ask a cRPG fan which game they would rather play.

The best part of his article is this, where he appeals to a fantasy world where we actually got a proper Fallout game but people complain it didn't change enough:

Had these guys had their way, we'd have a game that looked, sounded, and played like something from 1997, and it would have sold to a small group who would then have likely complained that it hadn't changed enough.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I wish actual Internet debates were a thing. You have these people writing articles, but they never engage in proper discussion.
 
Last edited:
So Jim defended the stupid in Fallout 3 without realizing it reached critical mass, continued defending the stupid in Fallout 4 without realizing the chain reaction of stupid accelerated exponentially, only to see incredible amount of stupid exploding through the offtake 76 covering him from toes to ears? Good, good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top