So, what does bethesda need to do to go bankrupt?

Ediros

Ediros

Water Chip? Been There, Done That
Now that we know of Skyrim remaster, all the dlcs and their reaction to farcryout 4, I thought it would make a nice discussion.

I mean bethesda has already made some terrible choices like raising the price of season pass, mod theft, bethesda.aids, taking a questline from mod, etc.

That said it seems like there are many people who still like them. My question is what will it take to make them suffer a lot.

Fallout 5, TES 6?
 
Even if they don't improve with their next game, there's no way they will go bankrupt just like that. It would take something extreme. Even if Fallout 4 wasn't their highest rated game ever, you can bet your ass it made them helluva lot of money and they are still one of the most popular developers out there. If, say, the next 2-3 games are all total failures, then maybe things will start looking shitty for them. But they're still niche enough that I don't think that's gonna happen. People buy Bethesda games because they're Bethesda games, pretty much. It'd take some serious fucking up before they'd find themselves in economic trouble.
 
Nuclear bomb buried in the cellar of BGS' HQ being activated by A-Team of mercenaries. Literally nothing other than nuclear devastation since they made a whopping 1.3 billion $$$s out of Skyrim alone and words on the net that they made 750 millions on Fallout 4 alone day one.
 
Ediros said:
That said it seems like there are many people who still like them. My question is what will it take to make them suffer a lot.
Click to expand...

We're talking about a company that was able to get away with THIS
horsearmoroblivion.jpg

I think we should just accept that Bethesda is invincible at this point.
 
When they finally add microtransactions to the game and start having pre-order specific bonuses like the ability to play as a race when it comes to TES or different crafting parts for weapons or playhouse assets for settlement building in Fallout. I'm sure even then you'll have tards like the ones playing Nu-Deus Ex saying that you don't have to buy anything which I find stupid because you already paid $50-60 for it so why should there be microtransactions in the damn game?
 
Their games are pretty good and are occupying a spot in the industry that is not exactly brimming with similar games, plus they have very good brand recognition. I suspect they would go bankrupt once their expenses got so big that not even their huge sales numbers could cover them, but at least from what i have heard it does not seem to be the case:

http://fortune.com/2015/11/16/fallout4-is-quiet-best-seller/
 
I don't really want to see Bethesda go bankrupt, that's a number of jobs on the line who just want a decent wage.
Also, as much as I dislike Fallout 4, The Elder Scrolls games have all been pretty good (well, the one's I've put a fair amount of time into anyway).

So instead I'm going to list a bunch of things that Bethesda should improve on if they want to both make a success and have a legit good game.

So you could say this is a wish list for both Elder Scrolls VI and Fallout 5, in fact, I'll do exactly that.

BOTH GAMES
1. No Voiced Protagonist- Bethesda should write this off as an experiment that didn't work for them. It cuts the dialogue options down and takes away from the imagination of the player. Money spent on a VP could be better spent in other parts of the game, like hiring people for branching paths, bigger maps, more varied content etc.

2. Cut down on Radiant Quests- Skyrim wasn't so bad with this as a lot of the time, it would feel more natural (read a book and then do Quest A or so) but with Fallout 4, this is where things got really lazy. I'm not a fan of them either, but if done right, they can feel apart of the game World instead of another game mechanic, and I understand they sell well to the consumers. So here's my suggestion, cut them out so there's only a couple of places which hand out these quests. Let them be there for the people who actively seek them out. These can be good for say the Assassin's guide where each time, you have a new target, maybe make them named in a random name generator as to make it all feel less gamey. Put them in books/terminals, but don't force the player onto them and vary them up a bit. Like how one quest for the assassin's guild is to gain a sword which a top assassin has and has stolen from them, so you have to get it by any means possible. Kill the guy or just steal it. Something like that or so.

3. Less time creating a story, and more time telling a story- so one of the issues that Bethesda seems to have is that they have this problem where they try and tell small stories throughout the World. Some of these can be good, and some of these can be pretty bad. In Fallout 4's case, these were mostly nonsensical and just plain stupid. Yet the main stories themselves are pretty bad. Even going back to Arena. Admittedly, the Elder Scrolls games are more about the journey and less about the destination. But in a world where Witcher 3 is able to do both and Fallout 4 was bashed by just about everyone for being a retread of the same ideas and narrative from Fallout 3, it's time Bethesda really upped their game a bit. I'm sure Emil has some kind of talent there somewhere, he can't be completely talentless. Bethesda really have to release something amazing next in terms of narrative or their core fanbase will grow tired of them.

4. Understand Lore- Bethesda have a pretty bad record of understanding the canon of their own games, Fallout 4 just throws out half the stuff that Fallout 3 told us and the Elder Scrolls is a mess of things. So I think by now, Bethesda should understand the lore of their own games. If it's minor, fine, but the whole kid in a fridge incident is something that should never happen again.

5. Make Dialogue Complex Again- This doesn't really need saying, but in this day and age, we should have games where an entire Town is effected with the Player's Relationship with its people. New Vegas managed to do this, but with six more years passed, this could be a bigger thing. We could have games where if the King is a friend/enemy, it effects how the citizens view the player as well as bringing back the "like" system from TES III&IV.

FALLOUT 5

6. Pre-made Backstories- Stop it! Just stop! We don't need details on our character's past, we can do that ourselves.

7. Joining Smaller Factions- Let us be a Raider or a Merc, like how we can be an assassin or a thief in TES, these could be decent little side quests that could also effect the outcome of the game.

8. Make the Games episodic- So this is kind of a complicated one to really explain. One of my issues with Fallout 3&4 is how different they feel from the rest of the series in terms of the progression of side quests and locations. I will use New Vegas as an example.
The whole map feels like one big connected community, the residents will talk about events that happen in another Town leading to a more episodic feel of gameplay. Each Town has varies quests for the Player to complete, all being topped off with more understanding of the overall story arch. Some of the side quests, while disconnected, feel like one piece of a larger puzzle. It feels like I'm the main character of my own TV show and I'm helping people about with their lives. It's been this way since the first fallout. Yet with Fallout 3&4, they just feel disconnected. The map doesn't feel like one big community, the side quests don't really feel like a small piece of a larger puzzle. The Cabbot House quest will be forgotten about once it's done, it doesn't fit into the overall continuity of the game, it feels like a crappy episode of a really bad TV series.
I hope this made sense anyway.

9. Make the Endings Great Again- This doesn't really need to be said, why don't my actions have consequences? What happened to Oasis if I killed Harold?

Elder Scrolls VI
10. Explore the map- Let the main story explore the map, allow us to get lost and have to ask people for directions, allow more than one path to our goal, or more than one goal for that matter. This also applies to Fallout as well, but it seems they improved with Fallout 4.

And finally, one for both, 11. NO MORE SHIT DLC!!!


I get there are possibly more things I could have added, but that's all I could think of right now. If Bethesda do at least half the things here by the end of the console generation, then I guess I'll be somewhat happier.
Lets hope they learn from their mistakes with Fallout 4.
 
Millim said:
6. Pre-made Backstories- Stop it! Just stop! We don't need details on our character's past, we can do that ourselves.
Click to expand...
Why? Fallout had three default characters as option, and so did Fallout 2; why the hell shouldn't FO3 and FO4, and FO5?

*I generally loath so-called RPGs with no backstory for the characters. It's a cop-out, offering "Roleplaying" games with no roles to play. Nothing to sink one's teeth into; RPG gruel.

When there is a complete blank slate character, one plays an infant adult with no past, no acquaintances, and seemingly no means of having survived to their present age... One's character must have fallen out of a hole in the sky, as a cosmic joke.


Developers inherently cannot write to a totally amorphous player character, there have to be at least some constants in their lives, or you get... Elderscrolls instead of Witcher & Planescape caliber RPGs. :(

Customization is generally good, but it should be like detailing on the car, not an assembly of user-randomized car parts. RPGS are more about player restriction than freedom; once the player is entirely free to do whatever the hell they want as whomever they want... there is no longer any point to playing ~aside from puerile power fantasy ~and that's not roleplaying, that's player substitution of the PC; it's then no longer "What would/ or could the character do in a situation"; it's "what would the player do in their place?". That's a simulator.

Whether one is playing a Wizard or a Warrior PC in some game, it should be assumed that the character has spent the last several years in intense study and training to perfect (or even grasp) their craft. During that time they would have studied under teachers, possibly with other students; unless they sought out epiphany in a cave. If a PC starts the game at twenty years old, where did they live when they were ten? Consider the three default Fallout characters; they lived their entire lives [up to that point] in an institutionalized environment under conditions akin to that of a Submarine crew at Sea.... and their first step out of the vault is like their first step off of the sub ~having been born in it. That should affect the character's mental state, and their behavior towards others; else they [player or dev] are not accounting for their character's history... and TES [as example] gives no history at all, save the PC being fresh off the boat (or cart, as the case may be). If they spent years on the run or in prison, then someone spent time with them ~even if it was just a guard... They would have a history, possibly friends; certainly enemies, and a few 'frenemies'... and SKILLS. One wouldn't come out as a first level character.

**This BTW is what character classes are for [aside from being drapery for game mechanics]; they reflect the character's previous life choices and the commitments they took prior to the start of the game. It's why they can start out as a competent Soldier/Thief/Ranger/Priest/Diplomat/Merchant, and why they lack affinity for unrelated skill sets. A life long accountant is not going to turn over a new leaf in a week, and become a Ninja for hire... and this is ignored by players lamenting their PC class prevents them from learning swords and martial arts. It's simply contrary to the role.

A blank slate PC is the worst form of lazy design ~unless the developers support intelligent parsing of a user created biography, and integrate that into the story; nothing does that, and only a few even come close. Arcanum comes close. The flipside is Geralt of Rivia [Witcher 1] ~RPG taken to opposite extreme, and done well. Characters in the world have pre-existing acquaintance or friendship with Geralt, and recognize him; (even if he doesn't recognize them). This happens in Planescape as well. The middle ground is Baldur's Gate, where the PC has a fixed origin, and established relationships (as with Fallout 1&2, and FO3), but in their case, they are adopted, and a lot of customization remains plausible . The blank slate PC is good for MMOs, but not for RPGs.
 
Last edited:
Gizmojunk said:
Why? Fallout had three default characters as option, and so did Fallout 2; why the hell shouldn't FO3 and FO4, and FO5?

*I generally loath so-called RPGs with no backstory for the characters. It's a cop-out, offering "Roleplaying" games with no roles to play. Nothing to sink one's teeth into; RPG gruel.

When there is a complete blank slate character, one plays an infant adult with no past, no acquaintances, and seemingly no means of having survived to their present age... One's character must have fallen out of a hole in the sky, as a cosmic joke.


Developers inherently cannot write to a totally amorphous player character, there have to be at least some constants in their lives, or you get... Elderscrolls instead of Witcher & Planescape caliber RPGs. :(

Customization is generally good, but it should be like detailing on the car, not an assembly of user-randomized car parts. RPGS are more about player restriction than freedom; once the player is entirely free to do whatever the hell they want as whomever they want... there is no longer any point to playing ~aside from puerile power fantasy ~and that's not roleplaying, that's player substitution of the PC; it's then no longer "What would/ or could the character do in a situation"; it's "what would the player do in their place?". That's a simulator.

Whether one is playing a Wizard or a Warrior PC in some game, it should be assumed that the character has spent the last several years in intense study and training to perfect (or even grasp) their craft. During that time they would have studied under teachers, possibly with other students; unless they sought out epiphany in a cave. If a PC starts the game at twenty years old, where did they live when they were ten? Consider the three default Fallout characters; they lived their entire lives [up to that point] in an institutionalized environment under conditions akin to that of a Submarine crew at Sea.... and their first step out of the vault is like their first step off of the sub ~having been born in it. That should affect the character's mental state, and their behavior towards others; else they [player or dev] are not accounting for their character's history... and TES [as example] gives no history at all, save the PC being fresh off the boat (or cart, as the case may be). If they spent years on the run or in prison, then someone spent time with them ~even if it was just a guard... They would have a history, possibly friends; certainly enemies, and a few 'frenemies'... and SKILLS. One wouldn't come out as a first level character.

**This BTW is what character classes are for [aside from being drapery for game mechanics]; they reflect the character's previous life choices and the commitments they took prior to the start of the game. It's why they can start out as a competent Soldier/Thief/Ranger/Priest/Diplomat/Merchant, and why they lack affinity for unrelated skill sets. A life long accountant is not going to turn over a new leaf in a week, and become a Ninja for hire... and this is ignored by players lamenting their PC class prevents them from learning swords and martial arts. It's simply contrary to the role.

A blank slate PC is the worst form of lazy design ~unless the developers support intelligent parsing of a user created biography, and integrate that into the story; nothing does that, and only a few even come close. Arcanum comes close. The flipside is Geralt of Rivia [Witcher 1] ~RPG taken to opposite extreme, and done well. Characters in the world have pre-existing acquaintance or friendship with Geralt, and recognize him; (even if he doesn't recognize them). This happens in Planescape as well. The middle ground is Baldur's Gate, where the PC has a fixed origin, and established relationships (as with Fallout 1&2, and FO3), but in their case, they are adopted, and a lot of customization remains plausible . The blank slate PC is good for MMOs, but not for RPGs.
Click to expand...

I disagree about the whole blank slate character thing. For me, a blank checkbook allows me to RP as the character I want to be playing. This really adds to the replayability of a game. It could be seen as lazy, but it really does enhance the experience for people who can and want to stick to a character of their own design. I am a big fan of the alternate start mods because they also make this easier. I get tired of playing the same person over and over again when I substitute my own character in, so I create a new character and imagine a background and personality traits to play by. For example, I am natively inclined to make a guns/lockpick/repair character that is a goody two-shoes, so I create a character, let's say a melee/hacking/barter character who doesn't give a shit, to roleplay as so that I start going down different paths.

Surely I'm not the only Fallout fan capable of headcanoning a character, especially when New Vegas makes it so easy. Yes, there are established things that have happened to the player character, but the writers came up with a way to turn a slightly established character into a blank canvas that you can superimpose whatever kind of personality or additional background you want onto. I feel like this is how it should be.

Perhaps it would be nice for there to be predetermined characters, including a blank slate, to choose from in order to fulfill both desires?
 
Bethesda is owned by Zenimax, so even if the studio itself completely screwed the pooch (which is highly unlikely as their sales are extremely good and only seem to be rising with each release), Zenimax would just close the studio and reboot their franchises with someone else. Or just fire some people and rebuild the studio. Many of the "unpopular" decisions could be dictated from the parent company too.
Zenimax as a whole has a bunch of extremely popular franchises to work with these days. Barring a complete meltdown of the entire video game market, I don't see them doing poorly in the foreseeable future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top