Bethesda CEO on Starfield an Bugs: " We embrace Chaos"

lol....just now my game froze when I clicked quit game. Embracing chaos....

jennifer lawrence ok GIF
Game is clearly not done, needed more time. But no increasing those GP subs is more important….. 🤦🏻‍♂️
 
Translation: "Why waste money fixing bugs when modders do it for free and we can always include modders work on any re-release as an "Unofficial Patch"? "
 
What a weird statement.
I can certainly believe that it's true, that freedom invites bugs, and it's fine to laugh about and present bugs in some video in extras or whatever but "embracing" is a stupid attempt on spinning it.

We lost control of the code and game logic! Oh no, shrugs shoulders, grins, patts his own shoulder. What!
 
How about embracing development that gets rid of bugs during the actual dev cycle?
This is simply impossible. Thousands of lines of code made by people. You are bound to get bugs.

People who except bugfree games since the 2000's are simply oblivious to the complexity of coding.

You cant eradicate ALL bugs. It's simply impossible with games of this magnitude...

Yes, games used to have less bugs. But they were also a fraction of the size of modern games coding wise.

More code = More prone to bugs. Its not rocket science.
 
Last edited:
How about embracing development that gets rid of bugs during the actual dev cycle?

This entitled & completely unrealistic attitude towards expectations in a game the size & scope of something never done before such as Starfield is why so many developers play it safe and keep making the same thing over again, instead of trying something new.

I'd rather devs keeps pushing the boundaries of what's possible to new heights. Bugs are part of that, like it or not. Also this game is launching with fewer bugs than any previous BGS title, but I'm assuming that doesn't matter to you. If you don't want anything unexpected to happen, maybe stop playing interactive games and go watch a movie or read a book.
 
Last edited:
This entitled & completely unrealistic attitude towards expectations in a game the size & scope of something never done before such as Starfield is why so many developers play it safe and keep making the same thing over again, instead of trying something new.

I'd rather devs keeps pushing the boundaries of what's possible to new heights. Bugs are part of that, like it or not. Also this game is launching with fewer bugs than any previous BGS title, but I'm assuming that doesn't matter to you. If you don't want anything unexpected to happen, maybe stop playing interactive games and go watch a movie or read a book.
The issue is that Bethesda doesn't bother to fix a lot of known bugs. Latest Skyrim release for the Switch still has same bugs from OG 2011 Skyrim.

That's the issue. If course such a complex title is going to have bugs. Problem is when the developer or publisher don't put in much effort to do anything about them.
 
"We embrace chaos. We could make a safer, less buggy, less risky game if we wanted to. But what we try to lean into is player freedom. Yes, there's going to be some little things here and there where your companion might stand a little too close to you sometimes, yet the freedom you get, and the things that happen because of that, we absolutely love and embrace.
I feel like this is the worst answer they could've given. "Yeah, we could make a game with less bugs. Easy. But we chose not to because freedom.

How fucked must your system of systems be when for emergent gameplay to happen, you need to allow bugs. Like, what? One doesn't exclude the other unless you have a major problem in your design.
 
It's actually a good philosophy. Most don't want to deal with chaos so it creates an environment with few competitors.

Bethesda is revered for a reason.
 
Why is it that sometimes devs feel the NEED to put asinine statements like that out to the public? Just shut the fuck up.
 
Not enough in Bethesda's case.

Irrespective of that, his communications could and should be better.
See my post about bugs, read back your own and then comment. Its IMPOSSIBLE to eradicate all bugs in a game thats 120+gb..... It's not possible.
Unless you do a 4 year beta with 100.000+ dedicated testers, even then you won't come near 100% Bug free.
 
See my post about bugs, read back your own and then comment. Its IMPOSSIBLE to eradicate all bugs in a game thats 120+gb..... It's not possible.
Unless you do a 4 year beta with 100.000+ dedicated testers, even then you won't come near 100% Bug free.

The point being made is that it was a stupid fucking thing to say. The amount of actual bugs is irrelevant.
 
Why not publish this a week ago when the interview happened? *shakes fist* damn you, gamesindustry.biz!
Because they were hoping it would coincide with a typical buggy Bethesda release and capitalize on it when the game became available for people to play.
 
The point being made is that it was a stupid fucking thing to say. The amount of actual bugs is irrelevant.
Oh yes, the reasoning is beyond anything acceptable. Fair point.
They need to be honest and say: Yes, you may encounter bugs but rest assured we take this seriously.
 
I was told there would be no bugs. Or at least very little compared to previous Bethesda games. I haven't really seen any so far, but I just started.
 
Not enough in Bethesda's case.

Irrespective of that, his communications could and should be better.

I have no problem with them at all. Agree to disagree, I guess. This is by all accounts the least buggy of their games and yet still the complaints and armchair quarterbacking. I find it all a bit tiring. 🤷‍♂️
 
Hope you are enjoying your cinematic 30FPS coupled with artistic choice of no local Co-op.

Local co-op is far from merely a "artistic choice". That would be running two instances of the game on one platform, and not something that would be done well unless the entire game was designed around it. You know this already, of course. You're just being obtuse.
 
Correction - by pretty much every account, the least buggy BGS game in like the first 10 to 15 hours. Intentional as many reviewers may not progress any further? Who knows.
Many many outlets have had the game for 2+ weeks and have played over 100 hours, actually. Playing a non-Day One patch build, in fact. Which would be even buggier, no doubt. Show me all the negative reviews about how the game is too buggy and miring the experience.

Early access users who just started playing overnight are in the range you're talking about. But sure, let's keep arguing about this.
 
Last edited:
If you think about the status and money that was put into this game, it's not acceptable to ship it in some of the state its in.

AAA games are held to a higher standard so with some of the issues and lack of polish in certain reguards, it shows that Bethesda isn't some tentpole or in the status they were during their peak years.

They will work on this and fix but it shouldn't take the community to patch it up.

Dark Souls PC comes to mind when Durante fixed that. Not excusable then even if a "smaller" Japanese studio and less now.
 
Last edited:
As long as it's not game breaking, save corrupting ,freezing or crashing, I'm okay with the occasional bugs. Can even be funny sometimes when a character loses its head, or a creature launching into the air like a rocket when you kill it.

Agreed. The dragons randomly flying backwards in the PS3 version of skyrim was hilarious.
 
I felt like embracing chaos when one of the civil war questlines broke on my playthrough of Skyrim when I was trying to platinum the game.
It's like the 5th special anniversary definitive directors cut remastered edition of the game so one would think stuff like that would've been sorted.
 
Top Bottom