I don't understand the purpose behind this whole comparison between the two companies. I mean, what's the point?
Bethesda: Why 90% of the community is misinformed
- Thread starter Omnific One
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Why argue over which is better when they're both producing worthwhile games. Why not throw Capcom in the mix and see how the B* games do.
That's not why I think Bethesda is mediocre.Omnific One said:
I don't think Beth is putting out too many games.
Elder Scrolls have a huge quantity of in-game text. However, this is mostly very badly written text, pointless text and useless text. Even if it were good, that still doesn't change the fact that they can't do a basic storyline to save their lives or write two lines of dialogue that aren't complete rubbish. And to go back to the huge mountains of "lore" they crammed in their game, Quality > Quantity, and that's why Mass Effect codex > Tons of Elder Scrolls in-game books.
Also, there are tons of other reasons why I think Beth needs to get their act together.
However, I also think that they did get their act together somewhat with Fallout 3, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. If they don't screw up Skyrim like they did with Oblivion, they'll be back in my good graces.
Fact: Oblivion and Fallout 3 are pretty bland and boring games.Omnific One said:
I couldn't care less how many or few games they make. I will add this though: NV is an actual Fallout game. It is also a LOT better than Fallout 3.
Fluff is not the same as a well written story. Oblivion, well, I don't rightly know what the story is as I was never able to play more than 6 hours in before quitting due to boredom and frustration. But I did find this out though: the main story did not interest me.
Bethesda has another problem though: they are not very good at making worlds. In any of their games, and this goes for NV as well, the world feels dead. Nothing is happening without the player. People and animals have no lives of their own.
Compare that to STALKER (any of them) and you'll see why that would be bothersome. In STALKER you might be trekking across the swamp when you run into another stalker, chat him up and barter a bit. Over the course of the game you make quite a few passing acquaintances and all of a sudden you find yourself running to their aid if you see them in trouble. And they do the same. Or you run into them at an outpost sleeping in a bunk and you think: 'Hey, that's that dude.'
Then there is the wildlife, the dynamic weather, the varying landscapes and the monsters. STALKER does a great job of creating a living world where it seems all the other people have goals, dreams and lives of their own and you just happen to be one more person in the Zone.
Compared to that Bethesdas games feels like they are just filled with talking dolls places there to advance the plot or serve as encounters in the field. It's all so static and never changing.
Myth: There is a reason to argue about something as subjective and variable as which game company is "better".
Fact: The more you argue about it, the less likely you are to ever get laid.
Fact: The more you argue about it, the less likely you are to ever get laid.
Dunno, who does?Lucifron said:
I walked right through a wall on Mass Effect 2 a couple days back and Shepards head is still trying to look at people he talked to 5 minutes ago when he's running off.
OT: I like both companys, anyone who feels the need to hate one because they like the other is stupid.
The only thing I don't like about Bethesda games are the RPG elements... which seem to be the only part other people are not complaining about. By RPG elements I mean of course the levelling system, character classes, abilities/skills, items weapons etc...
plus of course the fact that the monsters/enemies level up with you, which leave us in the ridiculous situation where in Oblivion you're actually better off not leveling up at all in some circumstances.
Other than that i've always loved their games, there is something about having a big slice of a fantasy world simulated for you that tickles the gamer in me.
Now of course FO3 wasn't quite so bad in the RPG department but that was only because they radically overhauled it to bear some resemblance to the fallout original system.. even then they didn't really get all that close to getting it right.
plus of course the fact that the monsters/enemies level up with you, which leave us in the ridiculous situation where in Oblivion you're actually better off not leveling up at all in some circumstances.
Other than that i've always loved their games, there is something about having a big slice of a fantasy world simulated for you that tickles the gamer in me.
Now of course FO3 wasn't quite so bad in the RPG department but that was only because they radically overhauled it to bear some resemblance to the fallout original system.. even then they didn't really get all that close to getting it right.
I haven't personally seen anybody believe that those first two are true, and I don't either. It's simple to discern between a developer and a publisher, and even when a developer only has limited oversight over a game, like I believe Bethesda did over Obsidian's development of NV.Omnific One said:As everyone has inevitably seen, there is a massive Bio vs Beth poll running. And, as usual, everyone is attacking Bethesda with misinformation. So here we go:
Myth: Bethesda made all those terrible (and they are) games like WET, Rogue Warrior, etc.
Fact: Bethesda Game Studios has only made TES and FO3 in recent years. So those terrible games are published by Zenimax, the publishing arm masquerading under the Bethesda name. That's like saying Bioware is terrible because they "made" Spore (EA published it).
Myth: Bethesda's pumping out too many games lately. They are all going to be awful.
Fact: Bethesda (BGS)didn't make NV, and isn't making Hunted, Rage, or Brink.
Myth: Bethesda's games don't have a backstory/story and have no depth.
Fact: The Elder Scrolls games have an insane amount of lore. Their lore people can't even keep track of everything. See the Imperial Library: http://www.imperial-library.info/
That's about it right now. I just can't stand misinformation but I still adore Bioware, so don't take this as an attack
The third point stands though. It doesn't matter how much lore you've got locked away on an internet page, or in the minds of the creative directors, if I'm not being exposed to it in the game - if I don't get to experience that immense lore through gameplay, then it matters for very little. Bioware wins out here, I believe. Playing through Oblivion I was aware of that places other than Cyrodil existed. That was about it.
It's of little matter though, both developers do fantastic games, and I'm equally looking forward to Skyrim and ME3 this year.
The only thing this thread (and the Bioware v Betehesda thread) proves is that a vast majority of escapist user's are bitchy fanboys/girls that can't accept a different opinion from theirs exists.
the thing is is that when they got bought out they gave them the lore book like fallout and said "You work from this and don't contradict it we will find find you torture and send you into a sex slave racket" just like bungie is doing to 343 studios now* *(not 100% true)
Myth: Bethesda's pumping out too many games lately. They are all going to be awful.
Fact: Bethesda (BGS)didn't make NV, and isn't making Hunted, Rage, or Brink.
Hunted, Rage, and Brink all look awesome. And I liked WET as well.
So....I'm not really gonna bother reading the rest of the topic.
Fact: Bethesda (BGS)didn't make NV, and isn't making Hunted, Rage, or Brink.
Hunted, Rage, and Brink all look awesome. And I liked WET as well.
So....I'm not really gonna bother reading the rest of the topic.
Wait people actually thought that their games had no back story? If it's a sequel then by default it has to have some back story, also I do realize they only just acquired the Fallout IP but Fallout has a metricton of lore behind it, coupled with TeS's nearly endless lore so how can people think that Bethesda doesn't have lore? D:
Interesting, I felt I was completely and utterly alone in STALKER. I barely noticed the NPCs because they were so much like statues. That game had me bored in 10 minutes. Must be personal preference.teh_gunslinger said:
Didn't I note I adore Bioware? Yes, I did. I can't vote on the infamous poll because both are incredible. However, everyone saddles Bethesda with misinformation.NickCooley said:
I have much love for both companies. Neither is particularly adept at producing games that are mechanically interesting of course but where Bioware tells a good story, Bethesda gives you a world and lets you tell your own story.