The lead designer of The Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim has discussed the difference in design philosophy between Bethesda games and Larian’s Baldur’s Gate 3.
It’s worth noting that this guy is talking not of old Bethesda but modern Bethesda. The writing team behind Morrowind and half of Oblivion absolutely cared about the details that only 1% of people might see. Morrowind especially is a world built around you exploring the world building. It’s not about levelling up (wowee I can miss the flying fuckheads 2% less now), it was about exploring the politics and cultures in the world.
At some point, Bethesda games became about the mechanical exploration, about going over there because that looks like it might be interesting, oh it’s just a cave with combat in it oh well maybe over there will be interesting.
Skyrim is a great game… for its time. Todd Howard is the blight on the games industry for putting so many resources toward so many Skyrim remasters/re-releases/money grabs. Even if he outsourced all that work, those are dev houses he could have spent their time helping Bethesda actually fill their huge open worlds and perhaps get the same feeling of “every decision actually matters” that Larion did.
It’s good in some ways. I was disappointed in the removal of attributes and how the equipment stats were kind of simplified and boring. The lack of proper stat scaling, since there’s no stats.
I was also sad to see spellmaking go.
There’s still plenty of good in it, don’t get me wrong.
No. Dragon Age: Inquisition, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, and Baldur’s Gate 3 all draw influence from Skyrim. I think open world games are better because of Skyrim.
Dragon Age: Inquisition and Witcher 3 both began development in the same year Skyrim released. I don’t know if I can really say they were influenced by Skyrim because of the timing, but I haven’t played either.
Baldur’s Gate 3 drawing influence from Skyrim I will have to vehemently disagree with. That assertion just makes no sense at all.
FWIW, one of the lead developers of Dragon Age Inquisition confirmed that a lot of decisions around that game were EA wanting them to make Skyrim (for instance, the addition of mounts) Source: https://youtu.be/4Q5_RsII_Ho?si=a9CTmyHpEpgfuPTe
I don’t think Skyrim was a bad game, but I think it set a bad precedence for Bethesda. Oblivion wasn’t terribly good, but with the success of Skyrim it showed they could simply reskin an older game and be profitable. Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, Fallout 4, Fallout: New Vegas, and Starfield are all the same game reskinned.
To say Elder Scrolls, Fallout, and Starfield don’t have a place in Video Gaming is pretty absurd. I don’t love any of them, but they aren’t harmful and predatory like some other titles.
I think you’re the only one who said anything about not having a place in gaming. I can’t find anyone else mentioning it, so you’re either just arguing against your own comment or stating a non-point.
Also, Elder Scrolls was one of the first games to introduce predatory microtransactions with the Horse Armor DLC in 2006. They have even been credited with being the grandfather of the concept. I would argue that seems pretty harmful.
It’s worth noting that this guy is talking not of old Bethesda but modern Bethesda. The writing team behind Morrowind and half of Oblivion absolutely cared about the details that only 1% of people might see. Morrowind especially is a world built around you exploring the world building. It’s not about levelling up (wowee I can miss the flying fuckheads 2% less now), it was about exploring the politics and cultures in the world.
At some point, Bethesda games became about the mechanical exploration, about going over there because that looks like it might be interesting, oh it’s just a cave with combat in it oh well maybe over there will be interesting.
Skyrim was a blight on the games industry.
Skyrim is a great game… for its time. Todd Howard is the blight on the games industry for putting so many resources toward so many Skyrim remasters/re-releases/money grabs. Even if he outsourced all that work, those are dev houses he could have spent their time helping Bethesda actually fill their huge open worlds and perhaps get the same feeling of “every decision actually matters” that Larion did.
It’s good in some ways. I was disappointed in the removal of attributes and how the equipment stats were kind of simplified and boring. The lack of proper stat scaling, since there’s no stats.
I was also sad to see spellmaking go.
There’s still plenty of good in it, don’t get me wrong.
Skyrim is great if you want to be a stealth archer.
Is there any other way to play?
every build is viable. the stealth archer meme seems a bit overdone to me.
No. That’s why it’s the only time Skyrim is a good game.
Skyrim is twelve years old.
And the stagnation it caused in the genre is evident, no?
deleted by creator
No. Dragon Age: Inquisition, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, and Baldur’s Gate 3 all draw influence from Skyrim. I think open world games are better because of Skyrim.
Dragon Age: Inquisition and Witcher 3 both began development in the same year Skyrim released. I don’t know if I can really say they were influenced by Skyrim because of the timing, but I haven’t played either.
Baldur’s Gate 3 drawing influence from Skyrim I will have to vehemently disagree with. That assertion just makes no sense at all.
Dungeons and Dragons is literally just a Skyrim knockoff that uses dice.
That one was tough without /s, but ha ha. :)
FWIW, one of the lead developers of Dragon Age Inquisition confirmed that a lot of decisions around that game were EA wanting them to make Skyrim (for instance, the addition of mounts) Source: https://youtu.be/4Q5_RsII_Ho?si=a9CTmyHpEpgfuPTe
Are you saying none of the developers played Skyrim? Even if you’re designing to not be Skyrim, you’re still influenced by it.
Are you saying none of the Skyrim’s developers played Baldur’s Gate 1 and 2? Did you?
Did RPG game developers play an RPG before developing an RPG? Yes. That’s how influences work. I didn’t play BG1 or BG2 because I was a child.
Howso?
So many games wanted to be the next Skyrim, and so they brought over a lot of its systems and design choices. Including the bad ones.
The flood of games going open world, reliance on mods, and marketing through memes.
I can’t think of many games that do that. I can’t really think of anyone that tries to be like Bethesda games in the bad ways.
I don’t think Skyrim was a bad game, but I think it set a bad precedence for Bethesda. Oblivion wasn’t terribly good, but with the success of Skyrim it showed they could simply reskin an older game and be profitable. Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, Fallout 4, Fallout: New Vegas, and Starfield are all the same game reskinned.
To say Elder Scrolls, Fallout, and Starfield don’t have a place in Video Gaming is pretty absurd. I don’t love any of them, but they aren’t harmful and predatory like some other titles.
I think you’re the only one who said anything about not having a place in gaming. I can’t find anyone else mentioning it, so you’re either just arguing against your own comment or stating a non-point.
Also, Elder Scrolls was one of the first games to introduce predatory microtransactions with the Horse Armor DLC in 2006. They have even been credited with being the grandfather of the concept. I would argue that seems pretty harmful.
Sure bud.
People enjoy shitting on things and loudly, hyperbolicly saying that they are objectively bad and the worst thing ever. Especially Skyrim.
It’s ok to not like the game or even hate it. Doesn’t make it objectively bad or somehow the downfall of video games.
I was very disappointed with the lack of cities. I wish i had oblivion in skyrim.
Eh, let op make the point before jumping on it like this.
deleted by creator