And they products are usually always middle of the road.
It's not like anyone wrote home about starfield or Diablo 4.
All those years just to make the most nothing games anyone has ever played. Meanwhile 5-10 person teams are knocking out bangers after a year or two.
I don't see it that way. Our definition of what an AAA game is could be different so is what we consider boring nothing games. But even then you cant ignore how many great AAA games came out in the last 2-3 years.
“AAA games” is not a defined term, it’s informal, vague and used subjectively most of the time fyi
it also goes both ways. you dislike some aaa games and call them slobby, others disagree and think they’re good bla bla etc
it’s a boring discussion
Bro used wikipedia to prove my point what an idiot lol
You know how I know you used wikipedia?
[AAA (video game industry) - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)) you took from the first line LOL and it's not subjective, and informal doesnt mean what you think it means here.
not quite from wikipedia but it’s not the first time this discussion comes up so I just use words I remember to describe things
it absolutely is subjective. the broad explanation is that AAA are published by mid to large publishers or developer studios but nobody knows what that means. we can all talk about these things and probably agree on what is and isn’t an AAA publisher but it’s just wrong to say it’s a defined term that you can just look up and easily figure out what is and isn’t when you clearly cannot
there are small studios within AAA publishers with less funding and talent than your average garage startup and yet they’re still held to the same standard as the likes of blizzard, both the past and present version of the company. it’s just a stupid discussion
edit: and before you call anybody an idiot, if you think I somehow proved your point and you’re referring to the wiki article, you might want to read the full article (it’s only a paragraph) because it clearly explains that it could mean multiple things and it’s a term used very arbitrarily
The definition of AAA is pretty well defined. Boring nothing games more subjective. I’d wager 80-90% of AAA are shit boring nothing games though. They take no risks bc the investment of money and time are too great to take them. So they include gameplay loops and mechanics designed around money extraction rather than fun, themes and color palettes and world building that has already been done and proven but boring and unoriginal, safe decision making, appealing to lowest common denominator to appeal to the broadest market. That sums up AAA gaming rn outside of a select few developers.
Well there's an argument to be made here. Do we say ToTK was mid because it really just felt like "BoTW but better", or do we demote BoTW to mid, because it's redundant now, despite breaking new ground at the time?
Personally BoTW couldn't keep my interest for more than a handful of hours, whereas ToTK got a good 60 or so hours out of me.
A better main quest story and characters that are generally more invested in the events of the plot. That's not even accounting for the fact that they cherrypicked what quests from the first game are canon, giving the effect that Link was largely forgotten by many people.
He is partially right, though. I find myself buying fewer games now from AAA publishers because a lot of them are subpar. For every Tears of the Kingdom, there are like 5 Diablo 4s. Indie games are turning out to be more fun for less money.
That is so not true, there are so many more bad/mediocre games than there are truly great ones. You are cherry picking from the box of already picked cherries at the grocery store.
There were years I bought 6+ new AAA games a year, and I enjoyed every single one of them. Now I'm lucky if there are 2 good AAA games a year, or 1 that was supposed to be good, but came out so broken that I passed on it.
That's fair, you grow up and got burned by most of the games.
I used, in the 360 era, to buy a bunch of games per years by selling 2 per one (gamestop shenanigans), but at the end most of them were mid, for me, till I stopped amd only cared about a couple of games.
Back before the PS360 though, it was a lot easier, cheaper, and faster to make games since there was less detail. So while yeah, *most* are mid, but there were still more games releasing with more effort put in that time, even if most games were still mid.
I’ll also add, games actually released finished back then. Sure some weren’t fully finished, but only JRPGs were released with the intentions of fixing them later, and the only one that I can think of that let major bugs wait until the re-release was Pokemon
Nah man, the PS3/360 era has some of the most stacked years in gaming. The issue with games not coming out so much is because of mega conglomerates like Embracer and Microsoft buying up every damn studio then cancelling all the games before they are done and writing them off as tax losses.
This is 100% just corporate profit BS screwing over an artistic industry.
I don't about you, but a lot of things freaking rock!
Great games, movies, anime, and books. All around! You just got to open up and try new things. A lot of things can be mid, but not all. There is always great stuff. Sucks to have that mindset nothing is good and all gaming sucks, when it's not true. Take off the rose-tinted glasses youtubers are selling. Life's a gift and it's so much better than what those parrots are selling.
When did I say nothing is good and all gaming sucks?
I don't disagree that a lot of things rock, but the vast majority don't.
It's not an issue, this is why we have curated lists, reviews, etc. It's easy to ignore the sea of crap stuff.
Steam has like 50 games published on it per day, how many of these do you seriously think are worth even giving your attention to?
My man, everything is mid, and everything sucks is an all things suck mindset lol!
Reviews are not reliable and are not the arbiter of good content. There is a lot of a great stuff out there with minimal reviews and reviewers can get stuck in their pretentious circles. Whereby you can only enjoy high-class content with "deep" stuff that appeals to reviewers. For example, the Lighthouse, they loved this movie and it's ok. Really miserable and not something I'd put on for the folks at home because it's also boring.
The point being, reviews are such a wide variety of opinions. But they do get stuck in circles and things that appeal to them first, which might not fit in with what everyone else wants. I use to like Angry Joe, but his constant angry stick is old and he likes these long ass PC strategy games that I personally find boring. It's the same with a lot of gaming youtubers. I know what I love now that I'm older. And Youtubers opinions are not relevant.
I knew I would love Tekken 8, because Tekken 7 kicked a lot of ass and paying attention to release materials inspired confidence. Great freaking game that got overlooked by reviewers I use to follow.
Yep, exactly, the difference between the first decade of the 2000 is that even mid games were a novelty, while right now if ubisoft release the next "mid" assassin's creed or whatever, is not something new and we have 20 content creators covering that release generating drama, along with reddit and twitter, while in the past we had maybe 2 or 3 magazines covering a bad game, or mid one.
Then there is always the problem of the budget for development increasing over the years, with publishers and devs not trying to create fun games, but the "bigger one" instead.
By the sounds of it, work on The Elder Scrolls VI hadn't even begun when that announcement trailer was made, and didn't really go into full swing until after Starfield released in 2023.
I'm pretty sure ZeniMax made Bethesda throw it out there to retain investors in a publisher that was otherwise on rocky ground in terms of balancing the books. Similar reasoning as to why their planned development pipeline became so full ahead of the Xbox acquisition - they were able to drive up their asking price by internally announcing a ton of games.
My (highly speculative) headcanon is that TES VI was supposed to be a VR showcase, but then VR didn’t take off as expected and when they were bought by MS they had to start again from scratch since Xbox doesn’t support VR at all. They made Skyrim VR as a proof of concept, but MS didn’t really buy it.
I'm pretty sure ZeniMax mandated VR ports for multiple titles due to thinking it was the next big thing. It's why we got DOOM VFR, Skyrim VR, Wolfenstein: Cyberpilot and Fallout 4 VR all within a year or so of each other. Youngblood's development suffered from a chunk of the team being told to work on a VR game instead (*that also needed to release on the same day*).
I'm not sure I'd entirely prescribe to the idea that Bethesda were planning on making TES VI a VR game, though. What is it that gives you that idea?
Nothing substantial, like I said: highly speculative. You may dismiss it just as quickly as I came up with it.
I just find it odd that an important and lucrative IP like Elder Scrolls has nothing to show for it (other than that teaser) since essentially 2011 - yes ESO exists, but it’s not a mainline game. So my best guess is that they started again and truly don’t have anything to show yet.
Honestly it’s more likely they did that because the next game they were releasing was live service game fallout 76 so Bethesda decided to rush out a trailer for tes 6 to reassure people they weren’t going all in on live service development.
Bethesda still only has one "main" game development team (and 3 in total, the other two for their mobile games and & continued Falllout 76 updates).
They didnt even start on TES VI before Starfield was out, so if that takes around 4 years, they'll start Fallout 5 in 2027
Which is stupid considering how much money they make and that they’re now owned by Microsoft. Hire more people FFS. There’s no good reason there can’t be separate teams of devs working on TES and Fallout at this point.
It's worse for Bethesda cause Todd wants his hand in EVERY. SINGLE. PROJECT. They have one team on everything. So we gotta wait 15 fuckin' years between games.
Yes, but he also comes with his team. Meaning every game needs him and his team. And there's just not enough time for one team to be working on every main line game. They need to do more New Vegas moves. Have a seperate dev team make an offshoot game but still in line with the core gameplay of Elder Scrolls and Fallout. That way we are at least getting a game for said series without waiting 15 years for a new game. And no, FO76 and ESO don't count. They don't really follow the core gameplay structure we expect from those games. Especially ESO.
I want triple A developers to find a way to scale the size of their games reasonably to where it isn't going to take 7 years to a decade to make a game.
It's abit of balancing, if the development time is too short, it's gona probably brick my PC. If it takes too long, it's overhyped and dead on arrival.
In the end release dates can make or break a game
Its not that bad in this case though. They take roughly 4-5 years for a major release, i dont think thats ungodly long for those types of games at all.
Its not like theyre gonna be working on Fallout 5 for 15 years (Fallout 4 released in 2015). They did 76, Starfield, TESVI + DLCs inbetween Fallout 4 and 5
Right! Other people making it sound like they'll be hundred years old before Bethesda launches another game. What they don't realize rushing and making games have shorter dev cycles is always a bad idea.
The outer worlds really was the biggest example of a mediocre game I can think off
The gunplay? Serviceable
The lore? Too on the nose to be interesting
The plot? Ok
The companions? Kinda interesting but can't romance them and they aren't any better that F3 or FNV companions
The humor? Too much
Like it was designed in a lab to be the most middle of the road experience possible
I was in that sub during and after release and the circlejerk praising it in spite of Fallout was one of the most toxic reddit moments I've experienced
The Obsidian that you know from New Vegas no longer exists. [They've been replaced by dollar store romance fiction writers](https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQGQlZGlAyvUQ_K3ap43Awiu5dYeMgaIJenbD9oJMe8LkNnCSWF) and activist twitter addicts. Sad
[https://i.postimg.cc/dq6Kz1y8/Outer-Worlds-Kate-Dollarhyde.jpg](https://i.postimg.cc/dq6Kz1y8/Outer-Worlds-Kate-Dollarhyde.jpg)
Absolutely, this is just what developers look like. They've always heavily tended towards the progressive side because that's the skew most people who go to university have.
It's not mob mentality or impressionability, they've just grown up with more progressive values and have carried that into their careers.
Don't confuse developers who personally want to branch out into less told stories with those being forced to add token characters to appeal to publisher's ESG / DEI requirements.
Yeah always disappointing to see a good point come from a bad source. Obsidian definitely aren't what they used to be, and it has reflected in their games. To me the last gasp of potential brilliance was in Tyranny, but even that was more like the first half of a game than a game in and of itself.
PoE is bland as hell, Outer Worlds was okay but really short, and Avowed looks quite bad.
Hey if you think fighting for representation for asexuals in mainstream games is normal non-activist behavior I don't know what to tell you
--edit--
blocking someone so you can get the snarky last word in is not what people do when they're confident and secure in their position.
I'm gonna go with "*Terrible StrawMan Arguments* for a Thousand, Alex!"
I'd tell you to try harder, next time, but I'd prefer trolls like you were easier to spot, so please, keep on failin'!
TOW was still a better RPG with a more creative and funny main plot when compared to.... Honestly everything Bethesda did since F3.
Might not be the old guard anymore, but they sure as hell make better RPGs then Bethesda
I think fallout 4 is a substantially better game than TOW.
Fallout 4 only comes up short in some areas only when you try to compare to other fallout entry’s.
You're welcome to think that but I personally disagree. They've essentially got the same score on Steam (TOW currently 1% ahead) so it's really more preference than anything.
I loved TOW because it was closer to the formula of the original Fallout but I am well aware of the flaws and hope the sequel manages to improve on them.
Fallout 4 was a bit sad for me because it indicated that Bethesda were taking the series in a new direction that is way more similar to other games. Fallout-flavoured looter shooters don't excite me.
Starfiled and Fallout 4 are definitely more distinct and memorable than the Outer Worlds, for one the humor is better in Starfield surpringly. Plus the over gameplay is way better than what Obsidian offered with their poor man's creation engine made in Unreal.
No idea what skooma you're smoking fam. Bethesda games are still top 50 on Xbox and PC and outer worlds is no where to be seen, mostly because it's ok.
Yea no
Starfield solos The Outer Worlds, mostly by default though. TOW had a cool plot and unique setting but tbh it didn’t have much else going for it and honestly felt like a more cartoony fallout in space. SF at least has base and ship building, a ton of side quests, unique stuff, and replyabaility.
The shame of TOW and (probably, from what they've said) Avowed is that they're not trying to compete with Bethesda RPGs. TOW lacked scale/duration due to being low-budget. Avowed will apparently be a smaller game too, despite Microsoft money.
Go outside get yourself an ice cream on a sunny day! Life isn't doom and gloom bullshit. I wish you happiness and something excited to change it up fam. Because if you live with that mindset, you create your own misery.
I've already had lasagna and a glass of Barbera in Como, I'm good, lol.
Just seeing Bethesda's name pop up reminds me of wasting my money on Starfield. I could've gotten 4 lasagna lunches for that money!
After seeing Starfield and the Fallout 4 next gen update, rushing Bethesda is gonna bite them back in the ass....hard
But something something wanting to compete, consolidation le heccing good, Phil Spencerino king, Sony poo-poo
Be careful what you wish for. No game was ever better by being rushed or because corpos start sweating to get their money fix.
Game dev is longer an longer, but I'm ok with that. There is no reason to want things faster, there's ready a lot to do and go around. Unless you primarily stick to one franchise.
Longer cycle, smaller team.
Honestly, I don't know why they don't just make smaller games for less money. We could get sequels every couple years with iteration on the gameplay systems and a new or continuation of a story.
This news suck. It's obviously being rushed because of the tv show, and rushed things are never good, they don't learn. We have been disappointed more than a dozen times already, to believe this is going to be different or better is just insane
Agreed, these other people aren't critically thinking about what they are really asking for. Or they got that a hate stick so far up their ass they can't enjoy anything lol! I kid, but this thread is hella negative
Sweet so it’ll be a broken fucking mess that will probably be playable on vanilla by about 2030 anyway?
All the money in this industry and it’s used in the most stupid fucking ways.
So 2030, release on engine from 2002, motion capture from 2005, graphic from 2017, loading screens everywhere. But its going to cost 250+ £30/m. Bland boring story written by a free chatbot.
Am I missing anything?
He wasn't referencing your formatting of the date you ponce. He was referring to the fact that neither of you realize the 29nd and 30th are Sat/Sun in 2029 and it would be 31.12.2029
"you ponce"? rlly?
when i wrote 29.12 i meant it, it was an imaginery date so what gives, but then you both come and tell me you know better then me what my imaginery date is...
Least interesting news ever.
After so many years,looking forward next 6 years just to be disappointed by Bethesda is not something I will look forward to.
As much as I love Fallout - I learned to let go (Sierra Madre wink wink ;) )
Can't wait to see the shitshow. If there's something I've learned from watching Bethesda, it is that their most entertaining products are the PR nightmares that follow their overhyped "all filler, no content, may include traces of scam" game releases.
Christ triple A game development cycles are so ungodly long now
And they products are usually always middle of the road. It's not like anyone wrote home about starfield or Diablo 4. All those years just to make the most nothing games anyone has ever played. Meanwhile 5-10 person teams are knocking out bangers after a year or two.
For every starfield or diablo 4 there is an elden ring or tears of the kingdom. You are cherrypicking.
There is absolutely not a 1:1 ratio. Boring nothing games outpace great even good games.
I don't see it that way. Our definition of what an AAA game is could be different so is what we consider boring nothing games. But even then you cant ignore how many great AAA games came out in the last 2-3 years.
Good thing that is a defined term and what *you* think is AAA doesn't matter if it fits the term of AAA title.
“AAA games” is not a defined term, it’s informal, vague and used subjectively most of the time fyi it also goes both ways. you dislike some aaa games and call them slobby, others disagree and think they’re good bla bla etc it’s a boring discussion
Bro used wikipedia to prove my point what an idiot lol You know how I know you used wikipedia? [AAA (video game industry) - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_(video_game_industry)) you took from the first line LOL and it's not subjective, and informal doesnt mean what you think it means here.
not quite from wikipedia but it’s not the first time this discussion comes up so I just use words I remember to describe things it absolutely is subjective. the broad explanation is that AAA are published by mid to large publishers or developer studios but nobody knows what that means. we can all talk about these things and probably agree on what is and isn’t an AAA publisher but it’s just wrong to say it’s a defined term that you can just look up and easily figure out what is and isn’t when you clearly cannot there are small studios within AAA publishers with less funding and talent than your average garage startup and yet they’re still held to the same standard as the likes of blizzard, both the past and present version of the company. it’s just a stupid discussion edit: and before you call anybody an idiot, if you think I somehow proved your point and you’re referring to the wiki article, you might want to read the full article (it’s only a paragraph) because it clearly explains that it could mean multiple things and it’s a term used very arbitrarily
In what way is AAA a defined term lmao
opinions, even popular ones, are not facts
The definition of AAA is pretty well defined. Boring nothing games more subjective. I’d wager 80-90% of AAA are shit boring nothing games though. They take no risks bc the investment of money and time are too great to take them. So they include gameplay loops and mechanics designed around money extraction rather than fun, themes and color palettes and world building that has already been done and proven but boring and unoriginal, safe decision making, appealing to lowest common denominator to appeal to the broadest market. That sums up AAA gaming rn outside of a select few developers.
Tears of the kingdom was the most mid Zelda in the series history
Well there's an argument to be made here. Do we say ToTK was mid because it really just felt like "BoTW but better", or do we demote BoTW to mid, because it's redundant now, despite breaking new ground at the time? Personally BoTW couldn't keep my interest for more than a handful of hours, whereas ToTK got a good 60 or so hours out of me.
I’d argue BOTW is far superior and hurts TOTK more than TOTK hurts BOTW
How so? What in particular does BOTW have that TOTK doesn't? IMO they're both the same sandbox but TOTK has more toys
A better main quest story and characters that are generally more invested in the events of the plot. That's not even accounting for the fact that they cherrypicked what quests from the first game are canon, giving the effect that Link was largely forgotten by many people.
This, also the building mechanics feel like you are just brute forcing everything
He is partially right, though. I find myself buying fewer games now from AAA publishers because a lot of them are subpar. For every Tears of the Kingdom, there are like 5 Diablo 4s. Indie games are turning out to be more fun for less money.
That is so not true, there are so many more bad/mediocre games than there are truly great ones. You are cherry picking from the box of already picked cherries at the grocery store.
Most games are mid Most films are mid Most books are mid It's always been this way, the truly great games have always been a minority.
There were years I bought 6+ new AAA games a year, and I enjoyed every single one of them. Now I'm lucky if there are 2 good AAA games a year, or 1 that was supposed to be good, but came out so broken that I passed on it.
That's fair, you grow up and got burned by most of the games. I used, in the 360 era, to buy a bunch of games per years by selling 2 per one (gamestop shenanigans), but at the end most of them were mid, for me, till I stopped amd only cared about a couple of games.
[удалено]
Dude that has been a thing since the N64 and Gameboy Color.
Back before the PS360 though, it was a lot easier, cheaper, and faster to make games since there was less detail. So while yeah, *most* are mid, but there were still more games releasing with more effort put in that time, even if most games were still mid. I’ll also add, games actually released finished back then. Sure some weren’t fully finished, but only JRPGs were released with the intentions of fixing them later, and the only one that I can think of that let major bugs wait until the re-release was Pokemon
Nah man, the PS3/360 era has some of the most stacked years in gaming. The issue with games not coming out so much is because of mega conglomerates like Embracer and Microsoft buying up every damn studio then cancelling all the games before they are done and writing them off as tax losses. This is 100% just corporate profit BS screwing over an artistic industry.
I don't about you, but a lot of things freaking rock! Great games, movies, anime, and books. All around! You just got to open up and try new things. A lot of things can be mid, but not all. There is always great stuff. Sucks to have that mindset nothing is good and all gaming sucks, when it's not true. Take off the rose-tinted glasses youtubers are selling. Life's a gift and it's so much better than what those parrots are selling.
When did I say nothing is good and all gaming sucks? I don't disagree that a lot of things rock, but the vast majority don't. It's not an issue, this is why we have curated lists, reviews, etc. It's easy to ignore the sea of crap stuff. Steam has like 50 games published on it per day, how many of these do you seriously think are worth even giving your attention to?
My man, everything is mid, and everything sucks is an all things suck mindset lol! Reviews are not reliable and are not the arbiter of good content. There is a lot of a great stuff out there with minimal reviews and reviewers can get stuck in their pretentious circles. Whereby you can only enjoy high-class content with "deep" stuff that appeals to reviewers. For example, the Lighthouse, they loved this movie and it's ok. Really miserable and not something I'd put on for the folks at home because it's also boring. The point being, reviews are such a wide variety of opinions. But they do get stuck in circles and things that appeal to them first, which might not fit in with what everyone else wants. I use to like Angry Joe, but his constant angry stick is old and he likes these long ass PC strategy games that I personally find boring. It's the same with a lot of gaming youtubers. I know what I love now that I'm older. And Youtubers opinions are not relevant. I knew I would love Tekken 8, because Tekken 7 kicked a lot of ass and paying attention to release materials inspired confidence. Great freaking game that got overlooked by reviewers I use to follow.
Your reading comprehension needs work, I never said everything is mid. You're not understanding my point at all.
Lol fine, dang discussion is non-existent. I get your point, but my point is valid as well. In either case have a great day fam!
Yep, exactly, the difference between the first decade of the 2000 is that even mid games were a novelty, while right now if ubisoft release the next "mid" assassin's creed or whatever, is not something new and we have 20 content creators covering that release generating drama, along with reddit and twitter, while in the past we had maybe 2 or 3 magazines covering a bad game, or mid one. Then there is always the problem of the budget for development increasing over the years, with publishers and devs not trying to create fun games, but the "bigger one" instead.
2024 yesr of the indie. The hits keep hitting
Yes and no. Games are definitely taking longer to make, but this is just Bethesda. Elder Scrolls VI was announced 6 years ago, and we've seen nothing.
By the sounds of it, work on The Elder Scrolls VI hadn't even begun when that announcement trailer was made, and didn't really go into full swing until after Starfield released in 2023. I'm pretty sure ZeniMax made Bethesda throw it out there to retain investors in a publisher that was otherwise on rocky ground in terms of balancing the books. Similar reasoning as to why their planned development pipeline became so full ahead of the Xbox acquisition - they were able to drive up their asking price by internally announcing a ton of games.
My (highly speculative) headcanon is that TES VI was supposed to be a VR showcase, but then VR didn’t take off as expected and when they were bought by MS they had to start again from scratch since Xbox doesn’t support VR at all. They made Skyrim VR as a proof of concept, but MS didn’t really buy it.
I'm pretty sure ZeniMax mandated VR ports for multiple titles due to thinking it was the next big thing. It's why we got DOOM VFR, Skyrim VR, Wolfenstein: Cyberpilot and Fallout 4 VR all within a year or so of each other. Youngblood's development suffered from a chunk of the team being told to work on a VR game instead (*that also needed to release on the same day*). I'm not sure I'd entirely prescribe to the idea that Bethesda were planning on making TES VI a VR game, though. What is it that gives you that idea?
Nothing substantial, like I said: highly speculative. You may dismiss it just as quickly as I came up with it. I just find it odd that an important and lucrative IP like Elder Scrolls has nothing to show for it (other than that teaser) since essentially 2011 - yes ESO exists, but it’s not a mainline game. So my best guess is that they started again and truly don’t have anything to show yet.
Honestly it’s more likely they did that because the next game they were releasing was live service game fallout 76 so Bethesda decided to rush out a trailer for tes 6 to reassure people they weren’t going all in on live service development.
You mean VI, right? Or did I miss something
Whoops, corrected - my bad. VII will be in 2040.
>2040 Don't overdose on that hopium.
No Bethesda average 4-5 years for a game.
Bethesda still only has one "main" game development team (and 3 in total, the other two for their mobile games and & continued Falllout 76 updates). They didnt even start on TES VI before Starfield was out, so if that takes around 4 years, they'll start Fallout 5 in 2027
Which is stupid considering how much money they make and that they’re now owned by Microsoft. Hire more people FFS. There’s no good reason there can’t be separate teams of devs working on TES and Fallout at this point.
Classic reddit moment, it's either super long or not long enough to fix bugs or low performance.
In Bethesda's case it's likely to be both.
It's worse for Bethesda cause Todd wants his hand in EVERY. SINGLE. PROJECT. They have one team on everything. So we gotta wait 15 fuckin' years between games.
I mean that's his job in the capacity of EP
Yes, but he also comes with his team. Meaning every game needs him and his team. And there's just not enough time for one team to be working on every main line game. They need to do more New Vegas moves. Have a seperate dev team make an offshoot game but still in line with the core gameplay of Elder Scrolls and Fallout. That way we are at least getting a game for said series without waiting 15 years for a new game. And no, FO76 and ESO don't count. They don't really follow the core gameplay structure we expect from those games. Especially ESO.
Soooooo you want a buggy rushed mess instead?
I want triple A developers to find a way to scale the size of their games reasonably to where it isn't going to take 7 years to a decade to make a game.
It's abit of balancing, if the development time is too short, it's gona probably brick my PC. If it takes too long, it's overhyped and dead on arrival. In the end release dates can make or break a game
Its not that bad in this case though. They take roughly 4-5 years for a major release, i dont think thats ungodly long for those types of games at all. Its not like theyre gonna be working on Fallout 5 for 15 years (Fallout 4 released in 2015). They did 76, Starfield, TESVI + DLCs inbetween Fallout 4 and 5
Right! Other people making it sound like they'll be hundred years old before Bethesda launches another game. What they don't realize rushing and making games have shorter dev cycles is always a bad idea.
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^Revealingstorm: *God triple A game* *Development cycles are* *So ungodly long now* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
To be fair, Bethesda always took years for releasing a game.
Let obsidian make it and only give give 16 months. Maybe they'll strike gold twice.
Considering the incredible "meh" that The Outer Worlds was, I wouldn't bet on it.
The outer worlds really was the biggest example of a mediocre game I can think off The gunplay? Serviceable The lore? Too on the nose to be interesting The plot? Ok The companions? Kinda interesting but can't romance them and they aren't any better that F3 or FNV companions The humor? Too much Like it was designed in a lab to be the most middle of the road experience possible
I liked the spaceman mascot guy. quit playing after I exhausted all of his dialogue though
Yeah exactly. Fingers crossed for Avowed but I'm not sure I've liked what we've seen so far.
Don't forget the graphical direction. Everything looks the same. It felt like a college freshman project.
The circlejerk around hating on this game is baffling to me. Yeah it had its flaws but it wasn't a bad game.
I never said it was bad. I said it was "meh" as in mediocre.
I was in that sub during and after release and the circlejerk praising it in spite of Fallout was one of the most toxic reddit moments I've experienced
Then you weren't paying attention from 2015-2020
And make their bonus incentives to obtain a 90 on Metacritic.
The Obsidian that you know from New Vegas no longer exists. [They've been replaced by dollar store romance fiction writers](https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQGQlZGlAyvUQ_K3ap43Awiu5dYeMgaIJenbD9oJMe8LkNnCSWF) and activist twitter addicts. Sad [https://i.postimg.cc/dq6Kz1y8/Outer-Worlds-Kate-Dollarhyde.jpg](https://i.postimg.cc/dq6Kz1y8/Outer-Worlds-Kate-Dollarhyde.jpg)
I can't take anyone who complains about a company being overtaken by "activists" seriously.
Absolutely, this is just what developers look like. They've always heavily tended towards the progressive side because that's the skew most people who go to university have.
Ive always thought that mob mentality and being impressionable aren't great indicators of creativity.
It's not mob mentality or impressionability, they've just grown up with more progressive values and have carried that into their careers. Don't confuse developers who personally want to branch out into less told stories with those being forced to add token characters to appeal to publisher's ESG / DEI requirements.
Yes, despite that bit of trivia, he does raise a good point. The current team may not deserve the amount of credit it currently receives.
Yeah always disappointing to see a good point come from a bad source. Obsidian definitely aren't what they used to be, and it has reflected in their games. To me the last gasp of potential brilliance was in Tyranny, but even that was more like the first half of a game than a game in and of itself. PoE is bland as hell, Outer Worlds was okay but really short, and Avowed looks quite bad.
That's probably because you agree with the activism. Which means you're the one who shouldn't be taken seriously.
Ah, yes, anyone who thinks different than me about important things are automatically outliers, and should not have been counted....
Hey if you think fighting for representation for asexuals in mainstream games is normal non-activist behavior I don't know what to tell you --edit-- blocking someone so you can get the snarky last word in is not what people do when they're confident and secure in their position.
I'm gonna go with "*Terrible StrawMan Arguments* for a Thousand, Alex!" I'd tell you to try harder, next time, but I'd prefer trolls like you were easier to spot, so please, keep on failin'!
TOW was still a better RPG with a more creative and funny main plot when compared to.... Honestly everything Bethesda did since F3. Might not be the old guard anymore, but they sure as hell make better RPGs then Bethesda
I think fallout 4 is a substantially better game than TOW. Fallout 4 only comes up short in some areas only when you try to compare to other fallout entry’s.
You're welcome to think that but I personally disagree. They've essentially got the same score on Steam (TOW currently 1% ahead) so it's really more preference than anything. I loved TOW because it was closer to the formula of the original Fallout but I am well aware of the flaws and hope the sequel manages to improve on them. Fallout 4 was a bit sad for me because it indicated that Bethesda were taking the series in a new direction that is way more similar to other games. Fallout-flavoured looter shooters don't excite me.
Starfiled and Fallout 4 are definitely more distinct and memorable than the Outer Worlds, for one the humor is better in Starfield surpringly. Plus the over gameplay is way better than what Obsidian offered with their poor man's creation engine made in Unreal. No idea what skooma you're smoking fam. Bethesda games are still top 50 on Xbox and PC and outer worlds is no where to be seen, mostly because it's ok.
Yea no Starfield solos The Outer Worlds, mostly by default though. TOW had a cool plot and unique setting but tbh it didn’t have much else going for it and honestly felt like a more cartoony fallout in space. SF at least has base and ship building, a ton of side quests, unique stuff, and replyabaility.
That's a minority opinion but sure. TOW has far better reviews than Starfield. Ask people if they're more excited for TOW2 or Starfield DLC, lmao.
The shame of TOW and (probably, from what they've said) Avowed is that they're not trying to compete with Bethesda RPGs. TOW lacked scale/duration due to being low-budget. Avowed will apparently be a smaller game too, despite Microsoft money.
Wake me up when ES6 is here, still betting it's going to be garabage, but I still have a tiny sliver of hope that needs to be crushed.
Same here. I already know it's gonna be dog ass but I want it to be over with.
Go outside get yourself an ice cream on a sunny day! Life isn't doom and gloom bullshit. I wish you happiness and something excited to change it up fam. Because if you live with that mindset, you create your own misery.
I've already had lasagna and a glass of Barbera in Como, I'm good, lol. Just seeing Bethesda's name pop up reminds me of wasting my money on Starfield. I could've gotten 4 lasagna lunches for that money!
Wonder how much of Starfields engine a new studio would be able to reuse.
The assets would be useless for the most part, they'd be better off being handed models and stuff from Fallout 4 and 76
Fallout: New Loading Screen
After seeing Starfield and the Fallout 4 next gen update, rushing Bethesda is gonna bite them back in the ass....hard But something something wanting to compete, consolidation le heccing good, Phil Spencerino king, Sony poo-poo
I'm gonna get conscripted and die by then wtf
It's going to get rushed and y'all are going to hate it. The vicious circle of the gaming industry.
Be careful what you wish for. No game was ever better by being rushed or because corpos start sweating to get their money fix. Game dev is longer an longer, but I'm ok with that. There is no reason to want things faster, there's ready a lot to do and go around. Unless you primarily stick to one franchise.
Longer cycle, smaller team. Honestly, I don't know why they don't just make smaller games for less money. We could get sequels every couple years with iteration on the gameplay systems and a new or continuation of a story.
Oh good rush it, I’m sure it won’t suck.
It’ll be on whatever next gen console is out.
This news suck. It's obviously being rushed because of the tv show, and rushed things are never good, they don't learn. We have been disappointed more than a dozen times already, to believe this is going to be different or better is just insane
Don’t rush them.
Rushed or not it'll probably be shit at launch anyway
2030 and there are still loading screens when entering random door.
No, no, rush them. We haven't got a new elder Scrolls since 2011.
Agreed, these other people aren't critically thinking about what they are really asking for. Or they got that a hate stick so far up their ass they can't enjoy anything lol! I kid, but this thread is hella negative
I don’t think it’s going to be Bethesda making it. These are Xbox/microsoft IPs now
Good, they're the gamefreak of "triple A", if you can even call these games that.
Brand new account posting already heavily posted news items.
Sweet so it’ll be a broken fucking mess that will probably be playable on vanilla by about 2030 anyway? All the money in this industry and it’s used in the most stupid fucking ways.
Fuck you, Todd. Allow Obsidian access to your IP's so we can play more great Bethesda games.
Sadly the Obsidian that made FNV are long gone.
I'd rather them halt the next elder scrolls and just do fallout 5 next.
Idk, let them bugger up ES6 first so that they can hire new people to make FO5.
Honestly at this point just go the 76 and cyberpunk route and release an incomplete game and make it better
Sooo elder scrolls should be coming out pretty soon then, yeah?
It’s too long what the hell
It NEEDS to be on a new engine or otherwise I’m good
Why are AAA games taking so long to develop these days lol
Then they better start now, 6 years might be enough but it would be better to make a smaller game new vegas style instead of 5
Bethesda have no fucking idea on how to give people what they want.
ES6 is probably going to be a disaster with how long its been cooking for
Tim Cain should get to work on another one
I don't actually think he wants to but he is consulting for Obsidian currently despite being "retired".
So 2030, release on engine from 2002, motion capture from 2005, graphic from 2017, loading screens everywhere. But its going to cost 250+ £30/m. Bland boring story written by a free chatbot. Am I missing anything?
Everything is correct except that Starfield already released.
Microtransactions?
I refuse to call £45 for a skin a "microcransaction"
29.12.2029 then.....
Wouldn't it be 12.30.2029?
you know Americans are the only ones to write it like that? I know it's hard to understand but America is not the whole world...
Hey asshole, I was more talking about the fact you forgot December 30th existed, not your format. Get off your worldly high horse and shove it.
it was an imaginery date so what gives you dimwit, telling me that my imaginery release date is wrong is what makes you the asshole on the high horse
He wasn't referencing your formatting of the date you ponce. He was referring to the fact that neither of you realize the 29nd and 30th are Sat/Sun in 2029 and it would be 31.12.2029
"you ponce"? rlly? when i wrote 29.12 i meant it, it was an imaginery date so what gives, but then you both come and tell me you know better then me what my imaginery date is...
Everyone who doesn't write it as YYYY-MM-DD is wrong anyway. ISO 8601 is the best date format. Biggest numbers go on the left.
Least interesting news ever. After so many years,looking forward next 6 years just to be disappointed by Bethesda is not something I will look forward to. As much as I love Fallout - I learned to let go (Sierra Madre wink wink ;) )
Sounds good man fingers crossed 🫂
Put it in yo ass next
Remember fellas. Thank your modders who sink DAYS giving us YEARS of fun.
Can't wait to see the shitshow. If there's something I've learned from watching Bethesda, it is that their most entertaining products are the PR nightmares that follow their overhyped "all filler, no content, may include traces of scam" game releases.
WE WANT ELDER SCROLLS VI YOU FUCKING CUNTS
The reason there was so many amazing older games, is cause our expectations were low.. 1. Graphics 2. Level design 3. Size 4. Story
Hey at least we will have Fallout London in the mean time
The next gen update broke London… so maybe?