Poll: Who Do You Think is Best RPGs Between Bioware, Square Enix, and Bethesda?

[ChupathingyX]

When I think about choice I think about how do I want to play the game. Games must tell stories, you know, and while I agree having multiple choices is a thing that everyone loves, you can't deny that no matter who you are gonna choose to ally with in New Vegas, everything is gonna be the same except maybe a couple missions and the final battle.

You see, the thought of freedom is artificial. It is not really there. You ARE following a storyline that you can't decide by yourself. The only thing changing when you choose to go with Caesar's Legion instead of the NCR is what armor the enemies in the main quest missions are gonna wear.

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

If you are asking yourself these questions while playing a game, you've got yourself a really open world free game. Of course it's gonna have a main quest line. It has to end at some point, and the game has got to tell a story after all, because if not it wouldn't be a game, it would be a map editor with roleplaying elements.

No, in New Vegas depending on who you fight for you change the entire story, the actual journey is very similar, however, the end result is very different.

New Vegas while under the command of the NCR is going to be very different compared to Caesar, or even the Legate for that matter.

Also about your other points, things like "should I kill this guy", "should I attack him this way" or "am I going to got there". If that is a defining aspect then Crash Bandicoot is an RPG, Mortal Kombat is an RPG, Tetris is an RPG.

All of those games can play differently depending on simple choices you make, what seperates those games from actual RPGs is the fact that in an RPG you define your character, you decide their role in a grand scale (or not), you make decisions that will have major consequences. In Crash Bandicoot if I jump over that crab instead of killing it there will barely be any difference.

 

[LiraelG]

I don't think you can really compare these producers... The games they produce appeal to slightly different markets, and each game aims to provide a slightly different experience.

I have more experience with Square Enix (I've played Final Fantasy, Valkyrie Profile, a bit of Dragon Quest, a bit of Star Ocean), but I believe games produced by Bioware (e.g. Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic) and Bethesda (e.g. Morrowind, Fallout 3, and Skyrim) are extremely good.

Square Enix seem more keen to provide a story, whereas the games developed by Bethesda offer the gamer freedom and provide them with a world to explore. Both are important elements, and difficult to combine effectively; it would take years to develop a game which provided the gamer with a clear, well-structured story AND an extensive world with the freedom of choice.

 

[Brandiferous]

Can I vote for Atlus? Yeah, I vote for Atlus.

 

[Kahunaburger]

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

By that definition, TF2 blows every RPG I've played out of the water in terms of player freedom.

EDIT: The point is that freedom in RPGs is defined by choice and consequences, not just choice. The problem with Bethesada RPGs is a massive lack of consequence for everything you do.

 

[King Toasty]

Yeah, still saying Bethesda. Not putting the others down, of course. Mass Effect 2 was a masterpiece of a game, and Kingdom Hearts is my favorite Disney-FF crossover. Ol' Bethy just has more MASSIVE games.

 

[Defense]

Square Enix against Bioware and Bethesda? *bursts out laughing* Oh wait you were serious..i'll laugh even harder. *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!*

That's just going by their latest 'masterpeices'. If we're going by body of work then yeah...it's more of a fair fight...kinda.

Edit: Incase I wasn't being clear the upper comments are both directed at Square.

Boring empty monotone open world-but-still-linear game versus mediocre "nonlinear" space opera third person shooter/mediocre "nonlinear" grimdark hack and slash?

Shit, Square Enix has some serious competition.

At least the Main character isn't a copy pasted self doubting emo git.

At least Square Enix games manage to be

Spoiler

fun.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[sergnb]

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

By that definition, TF2 blows every RPG I've played out of the water in terms of player freedom.

EDIT: The point is that freedom in RPGs is defined by choice and consequences, not just choice. The problem with Bethesada RPGs is a massive lack of consequence for everything you do.

Herp derp, I take these words and put them totally out of context and I instantly win the conversation, I'm such a genius.

You know what my point was, don't try to tergiversate

 

[Kahunaburger]

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

By that definition, TF2 blows every RPG I've played out of the water in terms of player freedom.

EDIT: The point is that freedom in RPGs is defined by choice and consequences, not just choice. The problem with Bethesada RPGs is a massive lack of consequence for everything you do.

Herp derp, I take these words and put them totally out of context and I instantly win the conversation, I'm such a genius.

You know what my point was, don't try to tergiversate

Did you read the edit? The point I was making was about consequences. Bethesada RPGs offer basically nothing in the way of consequences. You can choose a bunch of different character builds, but you can do that in basically any game these days.

 

[prince_xedar]

i have to say bioware for Dat mass effect and Dat Dragon age origins plus Baldors gate and KOTOR

 

[prince_xedar]

Square Enix against Bioware and Bethesda? *bursts out laughing* Oh wait you were serious..i'll laugh even harder. *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!*

That's just going by their latest 'masterpeices'. If we're going by body of work then yeah...it's more of a fair fight...kinda.

Edit: Incase I wasn't being clear the upper comments are both directed at Square.

Boring empty monotone open world-but-still-linear game versus mediocre "nonlinear" space opera third person shooter/mediocre "nonlinear" grimdark hack and slash?

Shit, Square Enix has some serious competition.

At least the Main character isn't a copy pasted self doubting emo git.

At least Square Enix games manage to be

Spoiler

fun.

But that's just my opinion.

mashing X(Or A for Xbox) is your idea of fun?
FFXIII was horrible

 

[thePyro_13]

Square for me, i prefer JRPG's, as they tend to hold my attention better than the sandbox style games(the repetition and lack or direction just doesn't work for me). Dragon Quest for the win!

I'd give Bioware second place, due to never-winter nights and mass effect. I feel NWN is the only real attempt to make a good PC DnD game(due to the actual GM features in multiplayer) and I just enjoyed Mass effect(it was somewhat free roam, but it had good direction so I never felt like I was just spinning my wheels as far as the plot goes).

I hate oblivion with a passion(it represents everything that is wrong with RPG games(IMO), so boo on Bethesda.

 

[sergnb]

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

By that definition, TF2 blows every RPG I've played out of the water in terms of player freedom.

EDIT: The point is that freedom in RPGs is defined by choice and consequences, not just choice. The problem with Bethesada RPGs is a massive lack of consequence for everything you do.

Herp derp, I take these words and put them totally out of context and I instantly win the conversation, I'm such a genius.

You know what my point was, don't try to tergiversate

Did you read the edit? The point I was making was about consequences. Bethesada RPGs offer basically nothing in the way of consequences. You can choose a bunch of different character builds, but you can do that in basically any game these days.

Well I do agree with that, the story was pretty much rigged. The freedom relied on wether or not you would explore the world, and that did have indeed consequences. Consequences in equipment, character development, knowledge of the world, experience (that's granted tho), exploration and the subsequent rewards that you got from it...

You can't really say that from many games. I certainly haven't been so "free" in a game except with Oblivion and Morrowind. And maybe San Andreas and just cause 2 too. And all of those games had a clearly determined path that you had to follow, no matter what you did or not did during the the time inbetween main quest missions.

 

[bob1052]

Bioware and SE haven't made a decent game in years.

 

[Arsen]

Square is good for the younger crowd. Their games get you into the concept of RPG's without making you dive too deeply in. However, they've been constantly going downhill since '97. Can't think of a single title beyond Tactics, Vagrant Story, and Parasite Eve that's worthy of mention.

Bioware has some of the best games in memory. I love how they make you choose in the KotoR games. Your character will never be overpowered. You have to figure out just the right balance in developing your skills otherwise you end up making bad choices that effect your ability to play. Makes you really consider them in depth.

Bethesda gets my vote in the end. The open world gameplay, innovative options, weapons, classes, etc. make it all worthwhile for me. Bring on Skyrim!

 

[Polaris19]

Some Spoilers may be ahead, most are years old so I'm not wrapping them in tags, just avoid them if possible if you haven't played Knights of the Old Republic or The Elder Scrolls games or Mass Effect

These days I don't even know if Square Enix is even relevant anymore. I haven't really heard anything super positive about Final Fantasy or any other Square developed games for awhile. And after the past two games (13 and 14) it is clear they have some things to make up for.

So that leaves Bioware and Bethesda and honestly it comes down to preference between these two. Bethesda is essentially the king of the open world. They have made their RPG's around the ability to go anywhere and do anything you feel like doing, and they have gotten really good at giving you incredibly detailed worlds to do it in. Bioware has always been about epic stories and moments that blow us away. Your character turning out to be a former Sith in KotOR, The Normandy's destruction in the opening moments of Mass Effect 2. Those are just two of millions of moments that I remember.

Bioware and Bethesda are both very good at building detailed worlds with lots of back story. The Elder Scrolls has books and lore that you can read, and Mass Effect and Dragon Age have the Codex which functions much the same.

So pretty much, story or open world to do whatever in.

I like my stories, and Bioware has only once disappointed me in nearly 15 years. Bethesda has never truly disappointed me, but there are some things I wish they'd fix in their games or do differently.

So Bioware for me.

 

[Kahunaburger]

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

By that definition, TF2 blows every RPG I've played out of the water in terms of player freedom.

EDIT: The point is that freedom in RPGs is defined by choice and consequences, not just choice. The problem with Bethesada RPGs is a massive lack of consequence for everything you do.

Herp derp, I take these words and put them totally out of context and I instantly win the conversation, I'm such a genius.

You know what my point was, don't try to tergiversate

Did you read the edit? The point I was making was about consequences. Bethesada RPGs offer basically nothing in the way of consequences. You can choose a bunch of different character builds, but you can do that in basically any game these days.

Well I do agree with that, the story was pretty much rigged. The freedom relied on wether or not you would explore the world, and that did have indeed consequences. Consequences in equipment, character development, knowledge of the world, experience (that's granted tho), exploration and the subsequent rewards that you got from it...

You can't really say that from many games. I certainly haven't been so "free" in a game except with Oblivion and Morrowind. And maybe San Andreas and just cause 2 too. And all of those games had a clearly determined path that you had to follow, no matter what you did or not did during the the time inbetween main quest missions.

Those aren't really "consequences," in the same sense that your choices in something like Planescape: Torment has consequences. Going back to the TF2 example, it offers pretty much everything you listed.

Equipment? The achievements you unlock dictate what equipment you unlock, as does crafting, so check.
Character development? Your character and build are things I'd categorize as more of a choice, and a choice that TF2 offers in spades.
Knowledge of the world? That's a consequence that every game offers.
Experience? Once again, TF2 has this through the achievement = stuff mechanic.
Exploration? TF2 actually has more consequence in terms of your ability to explore the world than Oblivion does.

The point here isn't that TF2 is a marvel of choice and consequence, because it isn't. The point here is to demonstrate that pretty much every consequence that Oblivion offers is offered by many games that we wouldn't remotely consider RPGs.

 

[AngryBritishAce]

I choose Bethesda, but I'm not annoyed BioWare got more votes. They both make awesome games at the end of the day, it was a hard descision to make.

 

[Defense]

Square Enix against Bioware and Bethesda? *bursts out laughing* Oh wait you were serious..i'll laugh even harder. *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!*

That's just going by their latest 'masterpeices'. If we're going by body of work then yeah...it's more of a fair fight...kinda.

Edit: Incase I wasn't being clear the upper comments are both directed at Square.

Boring empty monotone open world-but-still-linear game versus mediocre "nonlinear" space opera third person shooter/mediocre "nonlinear" grimdark hack and slash?

Shit, Square Enix has some serious competition.

At least the Main character isn't a copy pasted self doubting emo git.

At least Square Enix games manage to be

Spoiler

fun.

But that's just my opinion.

mashing X(Or A for Xbox) is your idea of fun?
FFXIII was horrible

Make poor argument
Give opinion

Congratulations, you're a quality poster. No, I actually didn't use Auto-Battle because I wasn't a lazy bastard, and I had much more fun with it because I was pressured to choose my choices quickly and manage my team.

In any case, my experience was certainly more engaging than holding down RT.