-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
How did Bioware and Bethesda, RPG masters a decade ago, fall so low?
- Thread starter Segafreak
- Start date
Yup. They tried to chase trends instead of playing to their strengths.
Yeah but the direction they took Fallout 4 in was already a step in the wrong direction. That game had so little choice it was unreal compared to the previous games. And endless radiant quests need to fuck off.
Yup.
It was received extremely well by the general consumer base.
The Era bubble is very misleading.
They took their eye off the ball, experimenting with modern trends.
Hopefully they'll return to focusing on and improving their respective core strengths, instead of sidestepping into weird territory very few people asked for (at least in the case of Fallout 76).
Hopefully they'll return to focusing on and improving their respective core strengths, instead of sidestepping into weird territory very few people asked for (at least in the case of Fallout 76).
Theor strength is in single player role playing games and for whatever reason they decided to move over to focus on online multiplayer. Couldn't be more opposite really.
And I agree, but I think they're still capable of producing quality role-playing experiences. Far Harbor was excellent, and the team that did Morrowind/Oblivion is still mostly there.
If you take a look at Fallout 76's credits you will notice that a lot of people from the main Maryland studio shifted from their usual positions. For example, the game wasn't directed by Todd Howard (most likely he's fully on board Starfield). Also Emil Pagliarulo doesn't seem to be writing anymore, but rather designing in-game mechanics and quests, which is more suited to his abilities (he was excellent doing so on Oblivion).
Shame what happened to BioWare but Bethesda are literally one of the most overrated RPG developers of all time.
Basically all of these things but especially the latter. Their publishers wanted to go for that GaaS money and handed it to developers who weren't right for it (EA basically gave the GaaS game to BioWare studio known for their narrative driven games and gave the narrative driven game to the BioWare studio known for making a good multiplayer component in ME3's multiplayer...should have been the other way around. And no, I don't buy that "this was our dream project" PR talk either when it comes to Anthem).
It's a good thing there's been such backlash since it might encourage them not to go in that direction again for the foreseeable and just work on their strengths.
Basically all of these things but especially the latter. Their publishers wanted to go for that GaaS money and handed it to developers who weren't right for it (EA basically gave the GaaS game to BioWare studio known for their narrative driven games and gave the narrative driven game to the BioWare studio known for making a good multiplayer component in ME3's multiplayer...should have been the other way around. And no, I don't buy that "this was our dream project" PR talk either when it comes to Anthem).
It's a good thing there's been such backlash since it might encourage them not to go in that direction again for the foreseeable and just work on their strengths.
Both Anthem and Fallout 76 seem to be games that don't take advantage of each studios respective strengths. Both studios generally tend to put out games with storytelling people like but mediocre to downright terrible gameplay . Take away the storytelling aspects and this is what you're left with.
With Bioware especially you can see how the talent just went away. Look at Banner Saga, which is made by Ex-Bioware devs. The same magic in character writing that was once a staple of Bioware can now be seen there.
There are still talented people at these studios, but I think there are generally two reasons a game can come to exist -- One is that someone really wanted to make it, and another is because it has to exist for shareholders or whatever. #1 is much much much much more likely to result in a great game than #2, and as these companies become huge their motivations become different
The insanity of people spending billions of dollars on a made up in-game economies happened. There is no restraint on either side of the coin. Most publishers can't resist cause investors demand a piece of the GaaS pie and the types of consumers unconcerned with its effects or weak to its psychological pressure made it so. These two are just victims of our times.
i think there was genuine desire to try their hand at multiplayer. haven't been following how anthem handles mtx but FO76's monetization is pretty anemic for a corporate overlord manifest
not that greed didn't eventually come into play. at some point they had to realize Fallout 4's engine wasn't right for what they were doing but ran with it anyway. and anything with an EA stamp on it, well you know something is up but Anthem is no Battlefront 2
Well it sold well and was reviewed well (not as well as fallout 3 mind) it still took a lot of steps away from what people love about bethesda games.
The combat was tighter and it looked nicer than the older games. But things like a voiced protagonist, a defined back story and lack of options in dialogue to approach things in different ways soured a lot of people who bought it like myself for not really feeling like a step in the right direction.
The endless and recycled radiant quests were also horse shit. Having said all that I would still go buy Fallout 5 or Fallout: Los Angeles or whatever day 1 in the hope it goes back to a more RPG, player choice orientated direction.
Greed. Hopefully it's a lesson to the developers out there still creating quality games to not follow their path.
I'd actually bet money against that. If you actually take a closer look at what they've done since Fallout 3, Fallout 76 really seems like the next logical step for what type of game they have made in the last decade or so.
I hope they are too which is why I would still buy their next single player focused game day 1. But if that game continued Fallout 4's trends I would be extremely disappointed and almost certainly wouldn't be buying the next one straight up unless I heard it was a proper return to form.
Of course I didn't say everyone. Is it your favourite Fallout game?
People do realise the studio that made 76 aren't the main Bethesda Studio, right? Fallout 4 was their last game and that was well received. Dragon Age was Biowares last game, which again, was well received . You can't write off Bethesda for a game they didn't make and BioWare for a game that was vastly different than their previous output.
I did not lose faith in Bethesda because of one bad game.
But EA is clearly out of touch. It's like they don't see themselves as artists anymore. Shareholders are more important now. Same thing with Activision.
But EA is clearly out of touch. It's like they don't see themselves as artists anymore. Shareholders are more important now. Same thing with Activision.
It wasnt a total disaster but if i was Bethesda i would really take the FO4 criticisms seriously for their upcoming projects.
Correct. I don't worry much for Bethesda, they even seem committed to support FO76, same as ESO. Hopefully they'll manage to salvage something out of that mess.
BioWare on the other hand... I just don't know.
We're currently in a situation where these two studios are dying a slow death. The step away from RPG elements to shift to more action orientated games, lack of decent quality writing and story telling, lack of competence to deliver on the new genres they want to try, that thirst for greed, has all contributed to their current dismal failure.
Frankly they made too many wrong choices. Look at Bethesda, not just the game but the post launch stuff that happened. Their thinking is so warped, they can't help but fuck up at each and every turn.
They'll either course correct or burn their respective studios to the ground. It's up to them what future they want.
Frankly they made too many wrong choices. Look at Bethesda, not just the game but the post launch stuff that happened. Their thinking is so warped, they can't help but fuck up at each and every turn.
They'll either course correct or burn their respective studios to the ground. It's up to them what future they want.
Because the truth is that ME2 and FO3 were not great games.
Mass Effect 2 was a shooter with some light rpg elements. People just glossed over this because of all the alien sex, and because people generally like shooters. I suppose you could throw in not having 40 minute elevator rides as well. Otherwise all the broken rpg elements from ME1 were removed, probably because it was much easier to get rid of them then to actually fix them.
Coming from the perspective of an old gamer who loved the real fallout games, Fallout 3 was also a complete mess. I get that people, especially console gamers may have loved it, but that still has nothing to do with being "rpg masters". If anything it shows that Bethesda were already well past the point of producing something like their best.
Which might be excusable if other people had not made crpgs since then that are of a high quality. But of course we have several of those.
So how did they fall so low? The usual, standard, run of the mill way you fall so low. Not have much talent left but despite that chase massive sales numbers by moving to mass market gaming and/or get purchased by EA and chase massive sales numbers with no particular plan for how you will achieve that.
Mass Effect 2 was a shooter with some light rpg elements. People just glossed over this because of all the alien sex, and because people generally like shooters. I suppose you could throw in not having 40 minute elevator rides as well. Otherwise all the broken rpg elements from ME1 were removed, probably because it was much easier to get rid of them then to actually fix them.
Coming from the perspective of an old gamer who loved the real fallout games, Fallout 3 was also a complete mess. I get that people, especially console gamers may have loved it, but that still has nothing to do with being "rpg masters". If anything it shows that Bethesda were already well past the point of producing something like their best.
Which might be excusable if other people had not made crpgs since then that are of a high quality. But of course we have several of those.
So how did they fall so low? The usual, standard, run of the mill way you fall so low. Not have much talent left but despite that chase massive sales numbers by moving to mass market gaming and/or get purchased by EA and chase massive sales numbers with no particular plan for how you will achieve that.
lol no. bethesda isn't anywhere near "dying". they could coast off skyrim and fallout 4 well into the next decade if they really wanted
BioWare is a little more up in the air with EA's touch of death, if Anthem bombs commercially they'll be two for two. but even for EA pulling the trigger on them would be pretty drastic
BioWare's situation is straightforward, they were bought by EA and had to yield creative control to their executives. They make what they are told to make and have to release it when they are told to release it.
Bethesda haven't really changed that much, they've always released janky products. 76 is the first genuinely putrid product they've released.
Bethesda haven't really changed that much, they've always released janky products. 76 is the first genuinely putrid product they've released.
Fallout 4 is their best selling Fallout game, why would they do that?It wasnt a total disaster but if i was Bethesda i would really take the FO4 criticisms seriously for their upcoming projects.
Rethinking strategy for angry gamers on the Internet?
Bioware tried something new with Anthem. It's important that these studios are allowed to experiment and step out of their comfort zone.
BGS probably didn't have much to do with Fallout 76, it was developed in conjunction with sister studios. They did however develop Fallout 4, which is objectively a worse RPG than Fallout 3.
Also, there's a lot of turnover in this industry. A lot of the staff that were employed at these studios a decade ago have moved on. Just like a lot of their current staff will be elsewhere 10 years from now.
BGS probably didn't have much to do with Fallout 76, it was developed in conjunction with sister studios. They did however develop Fallout 4, which is objectively a worse RPG than Fallout 3.
Also, there's a lot of turnover in this industry. A lot of the staff that were employed at these studios a decade ago have moved on. Just like a lot of their current staff will be elsewhere 10 years from now.
Ignoring that the games in the OP are not fair (SP to MP, when you should have used Fallout 4 and ME:A as examples), its quite clear when this is happening. Some fat cat keeps telling them to dumb the games down to appeal to more players. So now you have essentially dude-bro shooter type games with so little actual RPG elements they can't really be called that.
The problem is, selling your game to new players is a hard ask in this day and age, and giving your older fans the middle finger, the people that will buy the game, is even worse...
So yeah. Maybe if ME:A was more like ME1 and maybe if Fallout 4 hadn't stripped everything that made F3/NV so good out... Maybe it would be different...
The problem is, selling your game to new players is a hard ask in this day and age, and giving your older fans the middle finger, the people that will buy the game, is even worse...
So yeah. Maybe if ME:A was more like ME1 and maybe if Fallout 4 hadn't stripped everything that made F3/NV so good out... Maybe it would be different...
Because as we've just seen with Fallout 76, if a games word of mouth at launch is bad it can impact sales. If there is a similar drop in reception for FO5 as there was for FO4 that is skirting near that threshold imo.
I'm sorry but lol.
Mass Effect 2 is *still* regarded as one of the best games of its generation. It still gets regularly mentioned as being one of BioWare best ever games. To write it off like you have done because you don't personally like it is so silly and reductive it just embaresses you.
Fallout 4 sold well lbecause it came at the heels of 3 and New Vegas. After being disappointed with it many people are way more cautious of buying a new fallout game so your logic of "fallout 4 sold well so they should double down on it" is as insane as thinking because RE6 sold well capcom would do RE6.5 after it ignoring the critics about the product (spoiler they didnt)
A large part of the AAA space is moving towards GaaS and not every company is equally well-equipped to make the jump. It's not that different from the transition to HD.
Not so worried about Bethesda, ok they put out a really bad game with 74, and had a idendtity problem with Fallout 4, but Far Habor was excellent. The talent is there. They're probably hungry and Starfield, next-gen Skyrim could be a return to form for them.
Lets not talk about Bioware.
Lets not talk about Bioware.
