I would go and say the expected "Fans of Skyrim make up the dumbest shit", but that's their MO since the game's release.
You know, Emil did confirm in an interview that story in Bethesda games is made so the players themselves make up their own stories, because that's what the players will do, no matter what:
Even Emil Pagliarulo, the lead writer in Bethesda, stated that ‘the player will take any stories Bethesda writes, rip the pages out and make paper airplanes, and that the most important story is the player’s story, and they are ok with that’ (the implication seems to be here that what the writers come up with does not matter as all/most of it will be ignored by the player).
Here's the source of that quote:
https://medium.com/@orucdim/the-unconcsious-effect-of-writing-in-games-why-bethesdas-lead-writer-emil-pagliarulo-is-wrong-a64e3e8e537b
EDIT: Thanks for the tip Gizmojunk
The only objectivity that matters for games in the real world is sales and how many people are trying to copy it. Bethesda games outsell any crpg, hell, Skyrim alone my outsell ALL crpgs. Also, everyone is trying to copy Bethesda's open world formula, not crpgs. Even Zelda did.
May as well have called it The Zelda Scrolls ffs.
Like I've said before, they took Fallout and threw out nearly everything that "made it great" and turned it into a globally recognized empire by just making a re-skinned Oblivion. That's how much better their system is objectively.
The only other metrics I could think of for objectivity is brand recognition, hours spent, influence and community activity. Guess who has those as well? I mean, this place lives off of Bethesda releases. Show some gratitude maybe?
Summary:
Objectively, Bethesda makes better games. Be honest, if you had 1 million dollars are you going to invest it in Van Buren, or Fallout 5/TES 6? Which will yield the largest return investment?
You have to concede this.
I win.
I have to disagree. To me the only objectivity that matters for games in the real world is the player's opinion. It doesn't matter if a game sold as hot cakes, if the players don't like it then the game is not a very good game. Gaming is a hobby, and like any hobby it's the opinion of the hobbyists that counts.
For example, Aliens: Colonial Marines sold a lot when it was released, but it's considered the worst game of the last decade or even more.
A serious fallacy exists in comparing sales of games to see if they are better than others or not. Skyrim (for example) was launched three times (it has several different versions Oldrim, S:SE, VR), and was also launched on many platforms:
- Oldrim was launched on PC, PS3 and XBox 360
- VR was launched on PC and PS4
- S:SE was launched on PC, PS4, Switch and XBox One
Morrowind (for example) was launched twice (Morrowind and Morrowind GOTY) and launched on just two platforms:
- Morrowind was launched on PC and XBox
- Morrowind GOTY was launched on PC and XBox
It's obvious that if you sell 3 versions of the same game and on so many platforms (6 vs 2), you will have a much higher sales number. Also, when Morrowind was released, it didn't receive much publicity, compared to Skyrim that not only it was advertised everywhere, it was already being advertised and hyped years before it was released.
Another thing about comparing sale numbers between newer games and older games, you also have to consider how players could buy the games. Morrowind could only be bought in stores back in the day, while Skyrim could be bought from the comfort of your home on pretty much all platforms. Also, in the old days it was common for players to buy the game and then buy the expansions when they were being released, while then skipping the GOTY edition of games (since they already owned all the content), these days players buy the game and the expansions, but many players later still buy the GOTY edition because it's super cheap on sale on Steam or any other online storefront.
With old games, there was also the possibility of buying them second hand, which wouldn't appear in the official sales statistics. My first Morrowind + Expansions were second hand. They came with my first desktop I ever bought (also second hand) from my rich friend.
It's pretty much impossible to buy second hand games for most platforms these days.
More stuff to consider. The number of gamers have increased exponentially since Morrowind was released to when Skyrim was released
Another thing about comparing older games with newer based on sales it's where the launch happens. For example Morrowind was only released in North America and Europe, while Skyrim was released worldwide. This includes South America, Australia, Asia, etc.
Here is a little insight about the number of players that a game that's released in the Asia-Pacific area can access:
Figures in 2020 showed that there were almost 1.5 billion gamers in the Asia Pacific region, making it the largest region for video gaming worldwide. In total, there were an estimated 2.7 billion gamers across the globe in 2020.
As you can see, just in this region there are more than half the total number of gamers on the planet. Morrowind didn't have access to this market (and other ones either), while Skyrim did.
Not to mention people who buy several versions of the same game, it's common with newer Bethesda games, people buy a console version and then later buy the same game on PC, so they can mod it much more than on console. This is very common these days.
There are still other important factors to consider. Morrowind was a physical game only for many years, which means that the number of copies available for sale was limited, while Skyrim was a digital game since the start, which means that there's a virtually infinite number of copies available at all times. This also contributes to sales.
Also, The Legend of Zelda games were always open world. And, if you check
this article about the roots and origins of open world games, you will notice that no Bethesda game is even mentioned.
I could keep ranting about this, but I ran out of time... As usual...
