Is there anything wrong with Bethesda softworks?
- Thread starter slipknot4
- Start date
Recommended Videos
i personaly hat turn based RPGS (my friend still thinks that it stand for rocket propelled grened)mabey it does but i think bethesda is great for there not turned based RPGS.
I have yet to see any real reason for the bandwagon oblivion/bethesda hate. Yea I get that people might not like the game, but when people point out things like "omg I once over heard someone say something about mudcrabs" and "people don't move when you talk to them!" for reasons the game sucks it baffles the mind. It's like hating Super Mario 1 for using the same sprite for the clouds and bushes
Many people feel that Bethesda create huge expansive worlds but don't give you suffecient reward for exploring their creation
Its because people love taking down any sort of sucess and jump on the "I hate everything" bandwaggon that has become oh so popular
The problem with Bethesda's recent games (Oblivion and Fallout 3) is that they both heavily relied upon having huge worlds to compensate for the fact that there is often nothing to do in them. It doesn't matter that there's hundreds of in-game miles of land to explore with interesting little nooks and crannies if I have no motivation to explore (I personally don't buy the excuse of 'make your own story', that's just lazy writing).
Sometimes I don't want to just wander about doing this or that, sometimes I want a clear objective or goal that's set in stone from the begining (something that Bethesda seem to have a problem with).
Sometimes I don't want to just wander about doing this or that, sometimes I want a clear objective or goal that's set in stone from the begining (something that Bethesda seem to have a problem with).
I wouldn't say better, though personally I enjoyed Morrowind more, I think I found it a little more lawless.slipknot4 said:
Both grand games IMO. If someone you've spoken too doesn't like Bethesda games, that's all good, it's like music, all about preference and personal experience...
Who thinks Morrowind is better than Oblivion?! that's ridiculous...
as for Bethesda, they make great games and anyone who says otherwise is... well, stupid. Even if you don't like their games, Bethesda still makes games that sell and should be recognized.
just because a game isn't your type of game, doesn't mean its a bad game. I won't say Gran Turismo is a terrible game just because i don't like racing games (at least not those which the focus isn't on blazing high speeds and/or crashing [shout out to Destruction Derby and Burnout!])
as for Bethesda, they make great games and anyone who says otherwise is... well, stupid. Even if you don't like their games, Bethesda still makes games that sell and should be recognized.
just because a game isn't your type of game, doesn't mean its a bad game. I won't say Gran Turismo is a terrible game just because i don't like racing games (at least not those which the focus isn't on blazing high speeds and/or crashing [shout out to Destruction Derby and Burnout!])
The games are hit and miss. It kinda feels like the developers make the engine, then send the programmers on there one to make random places to explore. The gameplay isn't bad, although not revolutionary. What they do have coming for them is good stories, I have yet to find a significantly bad main plot on one of the games.
I really do think they should just get together and make a good teamplay MMO. If there is one thing hardcore MMOers like is being able to take advantage of every possibility, and teams only magnify that. Overall all the games arn't bad though.
I really do think they should just get together and make a good teamplay MMO. If there is one thing hardcore MMOers like is being able to take advantage of every possibility, and teams only magnify that. Overall all the games arn't bad though.
Bethesda are not terrible, but their writers suck. The two most recent games (which i both own) are, whilst being very nice to look at, lacking in the depth an rpg game deserves. Fallout 3 was a good game, no bout, but many elements were disappointing, leaving me with the feeling that there's a palpable laziness in their game design.
Things like: the child city (no choice, highly unbelievable); the terrible ending which effectively negates your so called character development that you've at least developed in your mind as you play; the perks designed for use in one specific moment in the plot; the number of broken quests; the bugs; the weird way all the characters stare vacantly as you talk to them; the only real moral choice in the game being megaton; the 7 word dialogue responses in font size 72 to fill the space;
Also level-scaling in rpgs totally sucks and the Enclave should not be so easy to kill.
Overall FO3 is an ok game, not great. I just wish it wasn't called 'Fallout: 3'.
Things like: the child city (no choice, highly unbelievable); the terrible ending which effectively negates your so called character development that you've at least developed in your mind as you play; the perks designed for use in one specific moment in the plot; the number of broken quests; the bugs; the weird way all the characters stare vacantly as you talk to them; the only real moral choice in the game being megaton; the 7 word dialogue responses in font size 72 to fill the space;
Also level-scaling in rpgs totally sucks and the Enclave should not be so easy to kill.
Wrong. I think you'll find we're angry at the severe lack of real choice in character creation, the poor dialogue, the small map, the lack of humour, the lack of innovation in the (very short) story, lack of character specialisation, the out of canon and extremely poorly explained elements of the setting (such as supermutants on the east coast) and the way the enclave have changed ideology (doesn't it strike you as lazy to just use the bad guy from fo2? only this time around they are less evil - and they have the 'emperor' from the fo2 Shi faction as their leader).Sgt Doom said:
Overall FO3 is an ok game, not great. I just wish it wasn't called 'Fallout: 3'.
Morrowind is said to be better because it was bigger, longer and more elaborate with its features. but honestly i cant find anything wrong wit Bethesda
I was actually fortunate enough to play the first Fallout 1 a week before I got Fallout 3, and I have to say that I liked F1 better than F3. You see, long ago, I had read an article about Fallout 3 in GameInformer. I was left with the impression that this would have to be a world where I would be forced to survive, and morality would be second hand. Sadly, this was not the case. I was pleased when I played F1 that it was like this.Sgt Doom said:
I have to agree with him. I really liked Fallout 1 a lot better than Fallout 3, for reasons that are detailed in my other post.edinflames said: