173
Todd Howard wants Elder Scrolls 6 to be ‘the ultimate fantasy-world simulator’
(www.videogameschronicle.com)
this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
173 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
30573 readers
325 users here now
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think it would be very funny if the game came out and was good. Like Bg3 level good. Just the irony of everybody going "not Todd doing his bullshit again" and it turns out to be a perfect game or something.
And for the record I'm not a huge Bethesda fan.
Edit: I'm astonished I even have to say this, but this is just a stupid joke comment. I'm not trying to make comparisons between baldurs gate 3 and a game that hasn't even come out yet. Don't dig that deep.
I'm not into fantasy at all, but it's would be so funny seeing people cope about the game being good. But let's be real, if it's still on creation engine, it won't be.
The engine's name has very little to do with the tech in it, much less the quality of the game. It might well suck but it won't be because of this.
I agree the name means nothing. Which is why when people go gaga over Creation, I have to remind them it's still GameBryo, but with more graphical features tacked on to it. The foundation of shit that is GameBryo is still at the heart of the tech driving their games. If Bethesda's games were buildings, they all build them on a foundation of sand.
I also agree it's not the reason why their games suck (their games in and of themselves tend to not suck), but it will be the reason why it performs like shit or has the same technical issues that have existed since they started using GameBryo. Unless even after all the time they've spent using the engine they still suck at using it, and that's the reason they have so many problems.
The only other company and series of games I see having the same stuff holding back making better products because of the engine used is Bohemia with ARMA. They have just kept piling stuff on top of Virtual Battle System and all the problems stemming from VBS are present in the current iteration of the engine. Even the devs themselves hate it, but it would be way more work to make an entirely new engine.
from what ive seen, most of the issues with the engine folks have are in fact not issues with the engine
They are on creation engine 2 with starfield and honestly, we'll see how much of an improvement it is. I was saying back in fo4 that if they don't upgrade the engine it would be a flop but it apparently was one of the best selling games at the time.
The worst part is that it wouldn't be that hard to "up" the level of Bethesda games. More focus on the writing, both story and characters would go a long way.
Dropping the whole "It's one big world, no transitions." goal. Make cities huge, with transitions and fill them with stuff and people. More "inhabited biomes" so to speak.
Choice & Consequence. Having different paths the players can go down. Locking players out of certain content and areas because of their choice, isn't a bad thing. It just encourages multiple playthroughs. As well as adding multiple ways to dealing with a problem.
Not forcing motivation or character upon the player. The "chasing after a loved one" motivation in Fallout is terrible. And being a 'shiny superman' in both TES and Fallout is boring. We need more grey-area to move around in.
There's clearly more that could be added to the list. But these four points alone would elevate their games to a more passable grade.
But this is just my personal opinion.
BG3 is a gem in this current age, but if you look at it as an open world game and specifically look at that only, then it's not even good. (honestly even compared to BG1, the open world aspect is very limited)
If you look at BG3 as an open world game, I have to question what you think an open world actually is, because BG3 is not an open world game.
I'm not sure why that's relevant
BG3 is a different genre game than TES. Neither tries that hard to be like the other. They're just both are set in fantasy worlds
I'm not trying to argue that? I'm just making a dumb comment, dude.