Bethesda....What Happened Since Fallout 3? : V - Skyrim

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:06 am

In a nutshell, Todd happened. See my sig, it extends to the Fallout series as well. Don't get me wrong, I love Skyrim as a game, but as TES and an actual RPG? It leaves a bit to be desired.

EDIT: Grammer.

I don't think you understand how long Todd Howard has been a key player in Bethesda. Maybe you just like piling judgment on people :blink:

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 9:29 am

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:18 am

I don't think you understand how long Todd Howard has been a key player in Bethesda. Maybe you just like piling judgment on people :blink:

I think the information on Todd needs to be straightend out since Ken rolsten is (or rather advertisemants) claiming he was project lead for Morrowind and Oblivion.....as far as I was concerned Todd was just the face of Beth. the guy you see the most, the PR dude. but now theres conflicting info since both are stated to be leads for Morrowind and Oblivion even though they were co designers. nevermind that Todd didn't start or is even the brains behind TES.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 10:38 pm

Exactly, fallout NV was incredibly linear, invisible barriers covered half the map. In the most ridiculous spots. fallout 3 was good, NV, not so much, in fact, in my opinion, and lots of other peoples opinions, NV was an absolute disaster.

fallout 3 was way more linear when it came to quests and choices though, atleast i new vegas there was many ways to do things and the characters had way more depth in them. New vegas also had allot more weapons, cooler companions, no level scaling, cool bossen, fun dlc's and more humor. In fact the only thing fallout 3 did better was the gameworld, but then again Obsidian made som awesome places in their dlc's. Overall I find new vegas to be way better than fallout 3 and skyrim.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:33 pm

Skyrim needs karma. I thought reputation in FONV was pretty lame, because karma essentially became useless.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:53 pm

That is a completely bogus claim. most people on here have completed Skryim several times over by this time in less time than that.

I have 160 hours into skyrim and i have done the main quest three times now with different archetype characters along with the guild quests and all the side quests a couple of times that I could find in every city and town i discovered. Im sure i missed some here or there but at most that might add an extra few hours or so. In fact i was pretty much done with the game 120 hours in and that includes alot of just random dungeon diving and collecting loot, my last 40 some hours is mostly just messing around with cheat characters and trying to figure out what i want to change with mods.

I failed to see how you can reach 81 level, complete every non-repeating quest, talked to every NPC, collect every uniquely named item, collect every book, master every shout, acquire every spell, find every POI, get every enchantment effect and get every ingredient effect within a 160 hour playthough on a single character. Nevermind doing it over 3 characters.

Do you TCL and movetoqt all the way?

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:17 am

Could the feelings towards past games have anything to do with some sort of hazy nostalgia? I loved Oblivion to death. I really liked Fallout 3 a lot, but not as much. At this point I like Skyrim, but not as much as those two. Maybe in a couple years when Fallout 4 comes out I'll be waxing nostalgically about how I liked Skyrim better.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 10:01 pm

I totally disagree. FO3 was incredibly shallow imho. Tenpenny Tower was a very basic quest with 2 outcomes.... whoop dee do. And then? No more quests - nada. The game only had 17 quests! 17!

Oooh, go find nuka cola bottles...... rig an election of 6 people in 10 minutes..... wow, what game content.

I'll take Skyrim's mixed types of quests (with tons and tons of them) over FO3 any day!

I agree that FONV is the standard - so if Bethesda would just let Obsidian do the dialogue/quests/factions while they make everything pretty we'd have a win-win.

But FO3 was a cool survival game with some decent story..... but its quests were anemic and sad overall.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:05 pm

fallout 3 was way more linear when it came to quests and choices though, atleast i new vegas there was many ways to do things and the characters had way more depth in them. New vegas also had allot more weapons, cooler companions, no level scaling, cool bossen, fun dlc's and more humor. In fact the only thing fallout 3 did better was the gameworld, but then again Obsidian made som awesome places in their dlc's. Overall I find new vegas to be way better than fallout 3 and skyrim.

This, In my opinion, NV beats both FO3 and Skyrim.
And like another guy pointed out before me in this topic, quality over quantity.
I would rather spend 100 hours of quality fun in NV than 300 hours doing repetitive kill and fetch quests in Skyrim.

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:40 am

And yet, it feels bigger than Skyrim. I guess that's what shallow NPCs and guilds does to a game.

No it doesn't. NV felt very small. It felt more like an expansion to FO3 than a stand alone game. Skyrim is huge by comparison especially when you take all the dungeons and caves into consideration. And the variety of the interior locations in Skyrim makes the ones in NV look pathetic. Blackreach alone is probably half the size of NV lol.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:35 pm

This, In my opinion, NV beats both FO3 and Skyrim.
And like another guy pointed out before me in this topic, quality over quantity.
I would rather spend 100 hours of quality fun in NV than 300 hours doing repetitive kill and fetch quests in Skyrim.

NV was a joke. It was a piece of **** game that Bethesda let Obsidian take control of. It is not nearly as polished of a game as FO3 and Skyrim. Open your eyes. Sure NV has more content, however, it lacks a decent story line and is cluttered with crap the game could have done without. Like you said "quality over quantity." FO3 and Skyrim out do NV by far. Not trying to be mean here, it is just that I hate how people honestly believe that NV was a decent game.

Alright, now back to the original thread on Skyrim ha ha.

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:54 am

NV was a joke. It was a piece of **** game that Bethesda let Obsidian take control of. It is not nearly as polished of a game as FO3 and Skyrim. Open your eyes.

Skyrim, polished? I think you've been drinking too much mead.

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 7:35 am

No it doesn't. NV felt very small. It felt more like an expansion to FO3 than a stand alone game. Skyrim is huge by comparison especially when you take all the dungeons and caves into consideration. And the variety of the interior locations in Skyrim makes the ones in NV look pathetic. Blackreach alone is probably half the size of NV lol.

Again, a smaller world with better quests and depth will always be better than a bigger shallow world.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:23 pm

NV was a joke. It was a piece of **** game that Bethesda let Obsidian take control of. It is not nearly as polished of a game as FO3 and Skyrim. Open your eyes.

New Vegas is deeper, better written, funner, and has more replayability than Skyrim ever thought of having.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:42 pm

I love skyrim. Its nearly as good as MW imo, but I do fear the direction TES is going in. I feel they will cut too many things out in the next one, and make it even more simple and it will be the straw where they go too far.

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 5:02 am

I love skyrim. Its nearly as good as MW imo, but I do fear the direction TES is going in. I feel they will cut too many things out in the next one, and make it even more simple and it will be the straw where they go too far.

For a moment there I thought you meant Modern Warfare.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:29 pm

New Vegas is deeper, better written, funner, and has more replayability than Skyrim ever thought of having.

I have not played Skyrim all the way through yet thus I can not compare the two games. From what I have experienced though Skyrim is much better. As for NV being better than FO3, that is just absurd.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:16 pm

I have not played Skyrim all the way through yet thus I can not compare the two games. From what I have experienced though Skyrim is much better. As for NV being better than FO3, that is just absurd.

Opinions, opinions.

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:51 am

NV was a joke. It was a piece of **** game that Bethesda let Obsidian take control of. It is not nearly as polished of a game as FO3 and Skyrim. Open your eyes. Sure NV has more content, however, it lacks a decent story line and is cluttered with crap the game could have done without. Like you said "quality over quantity." FO3 and Skyrim out do NV by far. Not trying to be mean here, it is just that I hate how people honestly believe that NV was a decent game.

Uhh... what? Even Bethesda disagrees with you there, they stated upfront that they went against having multi-outcome quests so that they could put in more basic quests during the lead-up. That is the very essence of "quantity over quality:" that they chose to spend less time overall fleshing out the quests so that they could make more.

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:33 am

New Vegas is deeper, better written, funner, and has more replayability than Skyrim ever thought of having.

Subjectivity on your part. I've put 2 1/2 times the hours into Skyrim as I did FO NV already and am starting on a third character. With FO NV I "finished" one character, made it about 50 hours on a second (never finished the main quest with that one) and never felt the impetus to purchase the DLCs. Basically, YMMV with any game.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 11:47 pm

The best quests I've seen in Skyrim have all been the Daedric quests with choices that have consequences. There's a lesson there somewhere.

» Fri Jun 08, 2012 9:23 am

It makes me wonder why Fallout 3's PC dialogue options was better than any of the previous TES games, but Skyrim makes Morrowind dialogue look like the best parts of New Vegas. Did they fire the writers or something? Even the awesome quest design skills of Emil Pagliarulo couldn't save Skyrim for me.

I remember how frustrating it was to do the Pale Pass quest in Oblivion, and how my honorable knight or research minded mage could only say "I only care about the reward" to the countess. Nonsense like this is the norm in Skyrim, maybe even more common.

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:48 pm

It makes me wonder why Fallout 3's PC dialogue options was better than any of the previous TES games, but Skyrim makes Morrowind dialogue look like the best parts of New Vegas. Did they fire the writers or something? Even the awesome quest design skills of Emil Pagliarulo couldn't save Skyrim for me.

I remember how frustrating it was to do the Pale Pass quest in Oblivion, and how my honorable knight or research minded mage could only say "I only care about the reward" to the countess. Nonsense like this is the norm in Skyrim, maybe even more common.

What writers? :biggrin:

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:59 pm

What writers? :biggrin:

You know, that room full of chimpanzees?

» Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:08 pm

You know, that room full of chimpanzees?

It's said they'll eventually write the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Not this time. :confused: