Morrowind “Oral History”

Not about OpenMW? Just about Morrowind in general? Have some random babble? Kindly direct it here.
User avatar
sirherrbatka
Posts: 2157
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 17:21

Re: Morrowind “Oral History”

Post by sirherrbatka » 31 Mar 2019, 16:25

Main issue with Bethesda games is that they are not the only one doing open world RPGs anymore. Back in the 2002, you had your Morrowind and low budget Gothic. Nowadays every game is sort-of RPG and the open world while Bethesda continues to be dirt cheap.

User avatar
Jemolk
Posts: 194
Joined: 20 Mar 2017, 02:12
Location: Sadrith Mora

Re: Morrowind “Oral History”

Post by Jemolk » 31 Mar 2019, 18:43

sirherrbatka wrote:
31 Mar 2019, 16:25
Main issue with Bethesda games is that they are not the only one doing open world RPGs anymore. Back in the 2002, you had your Morrowind and low budget Gothic. Nowadays every game is sort-of RPG and the open world while Bethesda continues to be dirt cheap.
And of course that Bethesda games are getting less and less RPG-ish, losing what made them distinct. What I took from this history is that Todd is great at certain things, but where the magic comes in is having a variety of people with a variety of skills doing what they were good at without coprorate breathing down their necks and micromanaging what goes into the game. But of course, I already believed that. Still, look at the contributions listed and try telling me Morrowind would be half the game it is with even one of the major minds missing, let alone all but one.

Chris
Posts: 1562
Joined: 04 Sep 2011, 08:33

Re: Morrowind “Oral History”

Post by Chris » 31 Mar 2019, 18:56

sirherrbatka wrote:
31 Mar 2019, 16:25
Main issue with Bethesda games is that they are not the only one doing open world RPGs anymore. Back in the 2002, you had your Morrowind and low budget Gothic. Nowadays every game is sort-of RPG and the open world while Bethesda continues to be dirt cheap.
I can't really think of one that gives the same experience that Bethesda's do. The Witcher doesn't, as it's a fixed protagonist in a fixed story, and the world isn't designed for free exploration (fixed enemy/quest levels creating a largely linear path, quests that lock off other quests, etc). Most other open world games tend to be 3rd person urban or sci-fi, with less focus on world design (generally don't have much in the way of towns full of people you can talk to and homes you can enter and find their stuff). I can't think of anything that gives the same sense of 'live another life in another world' type game, especially in a high fantasy setting.

The troubling thing is, even Bethesda themselves seem to have trouble holding on to that style. Their games have been getting more railroad-y, more story-focused, restricting the character the player wants to play. If they keep down that path, they will be swallowed up by others who do more story-focused games better. That's the main threat I see -- not someone else bettering Bethesda, but Bethesda worsening themselves.

User avatar
AnyOldName3
Posts: 1598
Joined: 26 Nov 2015, 03:25

Re: Morrowind “Oral History”

Post by AnyOldName3 » 01 Apr 2019, 00:02

Yeah, Fallout 4 tried to go in the Witchery kind of direction, just without the necessary talent to make a witchery game. That said, Fallout 3 (which I've not actually played yet) diverged from its Interplay predecessors quite significantly, and I imagine that was made early enough that Bethesda still had most of the people who made Morrowind special around.
AnyOldName3, Master of Shadows

ClrkStin
Posts: 1
Joined: 29 Jun 2019, 13:48

Re: Morrowind “Oral History”

Post by ClrkStin » 14 Nov 2019, 11:57

Chris wrote:
28 Mar 2019, 16:05
psi29a wrote:
28 Mar 2019, 14:53
And yet people still buy their buggy games...
Because of their other reputation of the games being fun regardless. However, given Fallout 4 and Fallout 76, that reputation has floundered as they've been using up all the good will they've built up. Personally, with as much as I like the TES games, their post-Skyrim behavior has left me very soured on them as a developer and publisher (even Skyrim's forced online DRM sat very negative with me), and I'm no longer really interested in Starfield and TES6 like I want to be. The developers don't seem to understand what made their games fun, and their publishing arm acts like spoiled bullies, and that's not something I can support in good conscience.
If it was really that bad, then people would stop paying Bethesda and buying their buggy games.
By the sounds of it, no one really is buying Fallout 76 with how eager shops are to heavily discount it or give it away for free (despite Bethesda's insistence that it's not going free-to-play). You can't use Fallout 76 as a measuring stick when it's what caused (and continues to cause) the largest turn in peoples' perception of Bethesda. Though it doesn't help that the name Bethesda is mired in confusion about who you're talking about... Bethesda the publisher, Bethesda the developer, and Bethesda the developer-that's-not-Todd's-team. But maybe that's part of the plan, keep people confused about who exactly to be mad at so they don't hold the right group accountable and make it easier forgive a group for something they weren't responsible for.
What I'm suggesting is that the situation is blown out of proportion by people with megaphones. It gets a lot of attention and yet people keep buying and playing.
False correlation. Just because people keep buying and playing doesn't mean there isn't a serious problem, it just means people can't help themselves. People keep buying and playing games with Murr Point/lootboxes and invasive micro-transactions too, doesn't mean that's not a problem.
So they obviously have something that works for them and sadly the only motivation is sales/money. Until that changes then they wont either.
Which is why the specter of government regulation is looming. Companies act greedy at the expense of consumers, companies refuse to properly self-regulate their problematic behavior because it's making them money, and the government has to step in. You can't rely on consumer behavior as an indication for the company's right or wrongfulness.

I am pleased that you have such a broad opinion about the thinking of other people. But you understand that everyone has their own thoughts on this topic. I partially agree with you, but I would like to Express my opinion about the motivation of people. money and sales. Agree, before money began to exist, the main value for people was life and food. In our time, without money, you can not get food. therefore, money is the main motivation. and sales-the usual manipulation, in order to get all the same money. So these are normal things, and personally I very much doubt that ever this system will be voluntarily destroyed. Rather, there must be some kind of disaster that people would be able to move this type of thinking and system

Post Reply