Support NeoGAF

[Kagey K]

Fallout 4 did on launch day what Elden Ring did in 17 days. 12 million shipped.

Fallout 4 Ships 12 Million Copies in One Day, Breaks Records

That represents sales in excess of $750 million, Bethesda says; see all the record-breaking numbers here.

www.gamespot.com

That's niche.

 

[LazyParrot]

Some Piranha Bytes games (Gothic 1 and 2 in particular) have struck a way better balance between size and content variety than any Bethesda game, and they have significantly better writing and quest design to boot.

They never got popular outside of Europe though, mostly because they are not only janky AF, but also PC exclusives.

 

[Robb]

Not that surprising imo. Dev times are already very long in general and games like these seem to take a lot more time to both develop and playtest.

 

[Rockondevil]

Elder Scrolls is easily my all time favourite lot of games. I personally like Oblivion the most but Skyrim is definitely a beast.

I do think since Skyrim other games have done great in the open world genre too, in their own way.
BOTW, ER and Witcher are all great.
They don't have to copy Skyrim To be great.

 

[Sophist]

Elder Scrolls probably has the biggest lore. I prefer a more curated but smaller world like s.t.a.l.k.e.r, borderlands, dying light, shenmue... than an artificially larger one. You could remove at least 25% of the map of skyrim and still have the same experience. far cry 2 had the same problem; big for being big. Some people here want us to believe Skyrim was some kind of a technical miracle with unseen contents. it wasn't , it was a 13 gigabytes game using well known techniques to make it look like larger (mirroring, color palette randomization, procedural generation, ...).

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

The Witcher 3 is not only better but its Skyrim on steroids and both bow down to Elden Ring.

 

[RoadHazard]

I think Rockstar is the closest we've seen to polish and scale. But you're right most devs go for the safer controlled option of smaller worlds.

I think the main point here is the interactivity of the world, how you can pretty much pick up every single item you see in TES etc. GTA worlds are pretty but almost entirely static and non-interactive.

 

[fallingdove]

The Witcher 3 doesn't come close to elder scroll games.
Elder scroll games are more of complete RPG, considering the amount of things you can do on their games.


Elden Ring has the highest chance. Considering it has the highest metacritic.
But goty isnt only that. Starfield and god of war Ragnarök has a chance, if they bring that wining formula.

The amount of things you can do in an RPG doesn't make the game more complete. Skyrim was good when it came out but was immediately surpassed with games that had better traversal, better combat, bettet story, better quests, stronger progression, greater build depth and variation etc…

Skyrim isn't as special, as complete, or as ambitious as you make it out to be (especially by today's standards). It is handily destroyed by the likes of Witcher 3, Elden Ring and a half dozen other games.

 

[kingfey]

The amount of things you can do in an RPG doesn't make the game more complete. Skyrim was good when it came out but was immediately surpassed with games that had better traversal, better combat, bettet story, better quests, stronger progression, greater build depth and variation etc…

Skyrim isn't as special, as complete, or as ambitious as you make it out to be (especially by today's standards). It is handily destroyed by the likes of Witcher 3, Elden Ring and a half dozen other games.

Again, none of those have close to what bethesda did with skyrim.
What you are talking is subjective, vs what bethesda did for skyrim.
Skyrim can literally do everything as an rpg, which these games can't. You can't even interact with the world of these games, like you do with skyrim or any elder scroll games.

 

[tassletine]

Quantity not quality. I can appreciate the effort but not the skill. When I played it, it was awful.

 

[tassletine]

People who hate on Skyrim literally have no idea about what they're even talking about. Ask any game developer out there what they think of Skyrim and they would tell you that it is a a miracle as well as remarkable achievement in our medium's history that Bethesda were able to deliver on such an ambitious concept, at that scale, on the PS3/360 generation and at an absolute cutting edge level of quality for it's time. Legendary game.

So haters, please, shut up and show some respect to the king.

It didn't even work on PS3 how is that cutting edge? Please, shut up.

 

[Gandih42]

I think the biggest achievement of Skyrim (and the other Bethesda open world RPGs - at least Oblivion and Fallout 3) is the ability to immerse the player in their world. The feeling of adventure from escaping the prison in Oblivion, the vault in Fallout, or the execution in Skyrim is a unique experience to me that I haven't gotten from other open world games, even those I prefer above the output of Bethesda (Witcher, BotW, Elden Ring, etc.).

I don't think combat and moment-to-moment gameplay is the strength of these games, It's the first person perspective, seeing a settlement over the horizon, picking a house clean of silverware to earn a quick buck, breaking into a castle for the heck of it. The actual implementation of these things always feels kind of jank, but I think it coalesces into a very immersive experience that I don't think any other studio has managed to beat. I can't put a finger on what exactly creates this feeling, but I imagine that it is both hard and expensive to recreate, which is why I think most open world RPGs aim for something different.

That's also why I hope Starfield (and TES VI) doesn't simply aim to create a "bigger and betterer" world, making the game bigger horizontally. I think they should make the game bigger vertically, doubling down on all the complex systems interacting across each other in an already huge open world. You could argue that the ability to steal a ladle with no actual value from the dining table of a local citizen doesn't add much to the gameplay. But the compounded existence of all the minor systems and details is what I think is part of the Bethesda Open World MagicTM.

 

[kingfey]

It didn't even work on PS3 how is that cutting edge? Please, shut up.

Ps3 was shit console at that time. Most publishers had trouble with ps3 engine.

 

[MatrixReloaded101]

After Elden Ring, I have no interest in playing these massive games for awhile.

Either way I hope Starfield turns out to be good.

 

[Rac3r]

Starfield will be one of the greatest videogames ever made. Zero doubt.

Could also be mid af. We will see.

 

[nominedomine]

I played Morrowind and thought it was ok for the time, I didn't really get much into it or anything but I was somewhat impressed, then I played Skyrim and it looked like Morrowind again.

I dislike everything about Skyrim (except for the music I guess), to me it fails miserably at everything it attempts to do, the gameplay is putrid, the world is extremely uninteresting, the story breaks as you are allowed go on multiple paths that don't make sense when put together. Every system seems to lack any depth, it seems to be made with the design sensibilities of the 80s but over simplified to appeal to the lower common denominator.

Too me it's very similar but somehow even worse than Fallout 3, except that Fallout 3 came from a much more interesting series and pretty much ruined it by making it just like TES.

Also, it doesn't help, that little more than 3 years after Skyrim came out, TW3 was released and it's much better as an open world game in pretty much every way and actually has some good story telling that makes me care about what is happening.

 

[Punished Miku]

Morrowind blew my mind. Was basically like a second life for me for 8 months. Friends would come over every weekend and literally bring their own TV and systems and we'd all play Morrowind together. Literally one of the best OSTs of all time, one of the most influential games ever made. We'd drop items all over and customize our own entire villages. We'd break quests in 100 different ways. The crafting flexibility is out of control, to this day. I made a constant effect levitation ring and just walked vertically up to the top of the sky box and traveled around the world that way like a god. I had a poison spell that did 1 pt of damage for like 3 hours and would cast it then put on my constant effect invisibility ring and just watch enemies die super slowly lol. I had jump magic spells that let me jump across half the continent (literally); triggering like 6 full stop load screens in one jump.

Oblivion was graphically a lot more impressive, and near the launch of 360 so that helped it coast a bit in popularity. Ultimately though it was a significant simplification of the formula and I didn't enjoy it as much.

Fallout 3 was a lot better than Oblivion. Actually finished it.

Skyrim, I didn't buy until it was on Switch. I only could make it a few hours before bailing because it just sucked.

Thus ends my history with Bethesda. Hoping Starfield is good.

 

[Topher]

Witcher 3 was more "massive" in terms of the size of the open world and the world was filled with meaningful things to do. No, Witcher 3 is not a "copy" of Skyrim though. Thankful for that as Witcher 3 is a uniquely great game. But if we are going to talk about massive open world RPGs it is ridiculous to pretend Witcher 3 doesn't exist.

Also don't get why we turn random tweets into threads....

 

[brian0057]

Witcher 3 was more "massive" in terms of the size of the open world and the world was filled with meaningful things to do. No, Witcher 3 is not a "copy" of Skyrim though. Thankful for that as Witcher 3 is a uniquely great game. But if we are going to talk about massive open world RPGs it is ridiculous to pretend Witcher 3 doesn't exist.

Also don't get why we turn random tweets into threads....

The Witcher 3 and Skyrim are "RPGs" in the same way Resident Evil 6 and Dead Space 3 are "survival horror".

 

[fallingdove]

Again, none of those have close to what bethesda did with skyrim.
What you are talking is subjective, vs what bethesda did for skyrim.
Skyrim can literally do everything as an rpg, which these games can't. You can't even interact with the world of these games, like you do with skyrim or any elder scroll games.

No, Skyrim can't.

- Skyrim has terrible combat
- Skyrim has incredibly shallow progression (this is showcased by the fact that you can power-level attributes by doing pedestrian activities like pickpocketing NPCs or crafting low level gear.)
- Skyrim's enemy level scaling is stupid especially when you factor in how experience is gained.
- Skyrim's story is average
- Skyrim's traversal is equal parts boring and jank
- Skyrim's procedural generation makes exploration uninteresting
- Skyrim's dialogue and character development is sub par.

Again, there are a large number of RPGs that do all of these things better than Skyrim does. Skyrim has not aged well and is no longer anything special.

 

[GymWolf]

Can't wait to move some space forks from a space station to another and call that good gameplay

 

[kingfey]

No, Skyrim can't.

- Skyrim has terrible combat

Skyrim was designed for ps3 and Xbox 360.
As for combat, the witcher 3 has bad combat.

Skyrim has incredibly shallow progression (this is showcased by the fact that you can power-level attributes by doing pedestrian activities like pickpocketing NPCs or crafting low level gear.)

That is what rpg is. You level up, by working on your skills.
I dont know how that is a bad thing.

Skyrim's enemy level scaling is stupid especially when you factor in how experience is gained.

People complained about oblivion level scale. So bethesda had to tone it down.

Skyrim's story is

Most rpg games have average stories. Skyrim has make your destiny. You aren't tied by the story.

Skyrim's traversal is equal parts boring and jank

Skyrim is big open world. You travel around the world to unlock your map. Perfect for exploring.

Skyrim's procedural generation makes exploration uninteresting

Isn't exploring means finding unexpected stuff?

Skyrim's dialogue and character development is sub par.

Its compensated by human like AI behaviors.

Again, there are a large number of RPGs that do all of these things better than Skyrim does. Skyrim has not aged well and is no longer anything special.

None of those RPG come close to what skyrim has achieved doing in 2011.

The game has full mod support, which allows users to create contents. Tell me a game, which managed to do what skyrim did with mods?

 

[Balducci30]

Install HIGGS and VRIK in Skyrim VR, they're mods that adds new collision detections and limbs with physics to Skyrim like in Alyx, it's awesome


Thinking about this makes me wonder if MS will ever allow Bethesda to make Starfield VR for Steam VR, if not it could be a serious downside to the acquisition.

Honestly the Skyrim VR stuff - which I played without this (looks amazing btw) really illustrates how crazy what they did with that game really is.

 

[manfestival]

ELDEN RING

 

[ANDS]

The "special sauce" is that their games are built around being YOU focused. The quest, world and gameplay design of Bethesda games aren't anything that another studio isn't able to do. . .they just won't do it because they're almost always telling tighter and focused stories (Horizon, Witcher, etc.) that don't need the hook of "open and aimless" to drive player engagement up. Everything in a Bethesda game is focused around YOUR entertainment and gratification instead of asking you to engage the world on its terms.

After Fallout 4 and 76 I don't think they got it anymore.

Fallout 76 in its current state is basically Fallout 4: Online. . .with all that that entails.

 

[ShaikhCroft]

Isn't New World a bit like Skyrim? I have only seen a few minutes of the gameplay though!

 

[adamsapple]

It didn't even work on PS3 how is that cutting edge? Please, shut up.

The game was still amazing in spite of not having a good PS3 version at launch tho. It just sucked for that specific install base. The 360 and PC players got a great experience.

 

[Georome]

People who hate on Skyrim literally have no idea about what they're even talking about. Ask any game developer out there what they think of Skyrim and they would tell you that it is a a miracle as well as remarkable achievement in our medium's history that Bethesda were able to deliver on such an ambitious concept, at that scale, on the PS3/360 generation and at an absolute cutting edge level of quality for it's time. Legendary game.

So haters, please, shut up and show some respect to the king.

Thank you. These are like people who say Seinfeld isn't funny.

 

[Filben]

Fallout 76 in its current state is basically Fallout 4: Online. . .with all that that entails.

I wish this were true, seriously. Gunplay and feedback is worse because there's always some kind of delay. They over-complicated repairing to make it more time-consuming and give you more reason to invest real money in repair kits. With all the streamlining they conveniently choose that to make it more "complex".

Many (world) events happening again infinitely. Solving a problem/quests only lasts so long. This is immersion breaking and a MMO thing that wasn't in F4. Sure you had these radiant quests but they lead you to other locations every time, in F76 it's literally the exact same thing, same location, same enemies, same quest.

Wastelander campaign... sound cool in theory but lacks real Co-op consequences. These quests are often instanced and there's no "one world state"... I enter a quest area, my buddy helps and then HE has to do the same thing and I help him, although we both have the quest. It's like doing the same thing but not having the same progression. Not to mention that my buddy has to get the same quest by talking to the same NPCs I've already talked to. It's really not well-thought.

Although I'm not a fan of F4 in direct comparison to its predecessors, I've played it 150 hours and I wish F76 were like F4: Online. Sadly it isn't, or let's say it's not like I would imagine an online version of F4.

 

[Fess]

Honestly the Skyrim VR stuff - which I played without this (looks amazing btw) really illustrates how crazy what they did with that game really is.

Yeah I fell in love all over again after playing Skyrim VR on Quest 2, was among my top gaming experiences last year.
The combat in VR is a joke though. I like the bow outside of VR but in general I wish they would rebuild the melee combat mechanic from the ground up in TES VI.

 

[Havoc2049]

I don't agree with the tweet by Gene Park, especially the, "There are no Skyrim-likes" statement. He is either being hyperbolic for clicks or is ignorant of open world RPGs past and present. Large scale open world CRPGs with multiple towns, cities, castles, dungeons, NPC characters, etc., have existed since the 80's. I love the Elder Scrolls series, but thankfully not every open world RPG is like Skyrim and they bring different things to the table for some variety.

People have already mentioned Witcher 3, but another current open world RPG that is extremely ambitious is Kingdom Come Deliverance.

 

[AX8]

Bethesda can pretty much get away with anything now and people will still buy it so I hope they put at least a little effort into Starfield.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I don't agree with the tweet by Gene Park, especially the, "There are no Skyrim-likes" statement. He is either being hyperbolic for clicks or is ignorant of open world RPGs past and present. Large scale open world CRPGs with multiple towns, cities, castles, dungeons, NPC characters, etc., have existed since the 80's. I love the Elder Scrolls series, but thankfully not every open world RPG is like Skyrim and they bring different things to the table for some variety.

People have already mentioned Witcher 3, but another current open world RPG that is extremely ambitious is Kingdom Come Deliverance.

That's it. Royal Edition is on sale for $10. I am biting.

 

[ANDS]

I wish this were true, seriously. Gunplay and feedback is worse because there's always some kind of delay. They over-complicated repairing to make it more time-consuming and give you more reason to invest real money in repair kits. With all the streamlining they conveniently choose that to make it more "complex".

Many (world) events happening again infinitely. Solving a problem/quests only lasts so long. This is immersion breaking and a MMO thing that wasn't in F4. Sure you had these radiant quests but they lead you to other locations every time, in F76 it's literally the exact same thing, same location, same enemies, same quest.

Wastelander campaign... sound cool in theory but lacks real Co-op consequences. These quests are often instanced and there's no "one world state"... I enter a quest area, my buddy helps and then HE has to do the same thing and I help him, although we both have the quest. It's like doing the same thing but not having the same progression. Not to mention that my buddy has to get the same quest by talking to the same NPCs I've already talked to. It's really not well-thought.

Although I'm not a fan of F4 in direct comparison to its predecessors, I've played it 150 hours and I wish F76 were like F4: Online. Sadly it isn't, or let's say it's not like I would imagine an online version of F4.

I mean, the negatives you're pointing out are exactly what an online co-op adventure would have to have. TES: Online has the same "issues."

I don't agree with the tweet by Gene Park, especially the, "There are no Skyrim-likes" statement. He is either being hyperbolic for clicks or is ignorant of open world RPGs past and present. Large scale open world CRPGs with multiple towns, cities, castles, dungeons, NPC characters, etc., have existed since the 80's. I love the Elder Scrolls series, but thankfully not every open world RPG is like Skyrim and they bring different things to the table for some variety.

People have already mentioned Witcher 3, but another current open world RPG that is extremely ambitious is Kingdom Come Deliverance.

I don't really think that was the point of their tweet. There have absolutely been BETTER ARPG's that have come out along the way, but few AAA ARPG's that just have as much "stuff" in them as Skyrim does. AC: Valhalla is massive with a lot of things to do, but I wouldn't say that open world has the same feel as a Bethesda open world. The Witcher 3 is unequivocally a more competent and complex game than Skyrim, but the nature of the narrative doesn't make it as easy to get into random "stuff" with no restrictions as it is in Skyrim or Fallout. The world in a Bethesda game exists for you to break (and waits for you to come and break it).

 

[Balducci30]

I don't agree with the tweet by Gene Park, especially the, "There are no Skyrim-likes" statement. He is either being hyperbolic for clicks or is ignorant of open world RPGs past and present. Large scale open world CRPGs with multiple towns, cities, castles, dungeons, NPC characters, etc., have existed since the 80's. I love the Elder Scrolls series, but thankfully not every open world RPG is like Skyrim and they bring different things to the table for some variety.

People have already mentioned Witcher 3, but another current open world RPG that is extremely ambitious is Kingdom Come Deliverance.

Witcher 3 reminds you of Bethesda games? I feel like Assassins creed and Horizon are all closer to Witcher 3 than Witcher 3 is to Skyrim. Never played kingdom come

 

[Boss Man]

It's true, Bethesda puts out some quirky/broken shit and and a lot of their design decisions are so bad they become memes but no one else is making open world sandboxes with NPCs who feel alive like they do. Rockstar is probably the closest.

Edit:
Ok, Kingdom Come is also worth mentioning even though they're racist for not putting Puerto Rican NPCs in Bohemia.

 

[Havoc2049]

Witcher 3 reminds you of Bethesda games? I feel like Assassins creed and Horizon are all closer to Witcher 3 than Witcher 3 is to Skyrim. Never played kingdom come

They are both classic style open world CRPGs. They each have a different vibe and focus on different aspects of the genre. For current RPGs, the closest to feeling like Skyrim would be Kingdom Come Deliverance, although it doesn't have any of the crazy aspects, like building a small keep out of pillows, like you could in Morrowind.

 

[fallingdove]

Skyrim was designed for ps3 and Xbox 360.
As for combat, the witcher 3 has bad combat.

So? Dragons Dogma has infinitely more satisfying combat. It was also designed for PS3/360.

Witcher may not have perfect combat but it is leagues better than Skyrim.

That is what rpg is. You level up, by working on your skills.
I dont know how that is a bad thing.

That is what shallow RPGs offer. I should not be able to gain 20+ levels in the first hour of the game by stealing forks off of someone's dinner table.

People complained about oblivion level scale. So bethesda had to tone it down.

Level scaling in general is stupid. It's lazy game design and defeats the purpose of experience/levels.

Most rpg games have average stories. Skyrim has make your destiny. You aren't tied by the story.

Bethesda RPGs have average stories. This is not typical for the genre.

Skyrim is big open world. You travel around the world to unlock your map. Perfect for exploring.

Big and open does not mean perfect for exploring. (See vanilla No Man's Sky)

Isn't exploring means finding unexpected stuff?

If the unexpected stuff is meaningful.

Its compensated by human like AI behaviors.

What?

None of those RPG come close to what skyrim has achieved doing in 2011.

lol.

The game has full mod support, which allows users to create contents. Tell me a game, which managed to do what skyrim did with mods?

You are arguing that Bethesda RPGs are great because modders have to fix them? Precious.

 

[kingfey]

So? Dragons Dogma has infinitely more satisfying combat. It was also designed for PS3/360.

Witcher may not have perfect combat but it is leagues better than Skyrim.

Combat isnt the only thing to judge on a game. You need to see the full package. Dragons dogma doesnt come close to skyrim.

That is what shallow RPGs offer. I should not be able to gain 20+ levels in the first hour of the game by stealing forks off of someone's dinner table.

You are upgrading your skills. That is not shallow experience.

Level scaling in general is stupid. It's lazy game design and defeats the purpose of experience/levels.

Use this logic for high end game. What happens when yo are the strongest. There would be no challenges anymore. A game like that loses purposes, as time goes on.

Bethesda RPGs have average stories. This is not typical for the genre.

It is. Most rpg games have lackluster main stories. Side quests enhances those story telling. Skyrim improves on that department. You discover more stories as long as you play the game.

Big and open does not mean perfect for exploring. (See vanilla No Man's Sky)

There is big open world bland game, then there is open world filled with tons of stuff to do. Assasin creed falls in to the first category, while breath of wild, Witcher 3, and elderscrolls falls on the 2nd category.
The idea of open world is to make the user busy with interesting quests, not open barren world and annoying quest, which irritates the players.

If the unexpected stuff is meaningful.

Its is, to the lore. Each unexpected quest offers unique experience.

What?

Eating, sitting, working, sleeping, doing normal work, talking like humans. Those are what skyrim does the most. Even though, their dialog isnt the perfect. Remember, Skyrim voice was by the same voice actors, who voiced alot of npcs.

'The Elder Scrolls 6' Release Date, Setting, And Political Systems Leaked By Alleged Insider

Who doesn't love politics in games?

www.gamingbible.co.uk

lol.

You are arguing that Bethesda RPGs are great because modders have to fix their games? Precious.

Great way to take the point in to negative way.

 

[Filben]

I mean, the negatives you're pointing out are exactly what an online co-op adventure would have to have. TES: Online has the same "issues."

It's not a must, there are several examples that work differently (and better). TES has indeed the same issues and is therefore not as good as a co-op adventure. However, it's a real MMO and has to have different states for thousands of players. If F76 would be a true F4 Online, you'd host a private session, let your buddy jump in and really share the same world and world state without any need of instancing. As I said, there are games doing this right. It's just the way Bethesda doing things preventing it from being a real good (Fallout) co-op experience.

 

[custardbun01]

I thought Cyberpunk might be Skyrim of the future. I got a hot disappointing mess.

 

[Gandih42]

[...]

Use this logic for high end game. What happens when yo are the strongest. There would be no challenges anymore. A game like that loses purposes, as time goes on.

[...]

I'm not really a part of this conversation but thought I'd butt in anyway.

Level scaling is one of my least favorite modern conventions in RPGs. I see it as a cost-effective way for developers to increase the amount of content in a game - you can keep large parts of the game world (or all of it) relevant for the player challenge wise by simply scaling the numbers of existing enemy types, instead of having to create and design new assets/enemies that challenge you at your current strength level.

It has its merits, but as a whole I feel like it always ends up devaluing the sense of player progression and I really hope RPGs start moving away from this difficulty design. Having areas of the world that are trivialized by your increase in power makes progression feel more meaningful. You could even incorporate this into the game design and story - something triggers a change in the world state causing more dangerous enemies to populate previously harmless areas. Quests take you back to an area with trivial enemies and make your growth a part of the story its trying to tell.

The worst is implementations like in Assassins Creed Odyssey where leveling up makes you weaker due to the way gear works in that game. I still love the game, but I'd like to see a different approach to this design.

I think there are many ways to do this, but they are all more expensive and difficult than level scaling. So I don't see the trend dying any time soon.

 

[GymWolf]

So? Dragons Dogma has infinitely more satisfying combat. It was also designed for PS3/360.

Witcher may not have perfect combat but it is leagues better than Skyrim.

That is what shallow RPGs offer. I should not be able to gain 20+ levels in the first hour of the game by stealing forks off of someone's dinner table.



Level scaling in general is stupid. It's lazy game design and defeats the purpose of experience/levels.



Bethesda RPGs have average stories. This is not typical for the genre.



Big and open does not mean perfect for exploring. (See vanilla No Man's Sky)



If the unexpected stuff is meaningful.


What?


lol.

You are arguing that Bethesda RPGs are great because modders have to fix them? Precious.

Don't waste your time dude.

If any other open world action rpg game would have all these big problems in key areas like combat, writing, animations, optimization and performance, shitty and boring traversal etc. Etc. Etc. You would see a much different reaction in here from many people.

Since M acquisition, bethesda broken ass games became untouchable in here

It is better to wait for starfield to see if bethesda is gonna fix their shit or if they gonna have the usual pass from journalists and fanboys.

 

[kingfey]

I'm not really a part of this conversation but thought I'd butt in anyway.

Level scaling is one of my least favorite modern conventions in RPGs. I see it as a cost-effective way for developers to increase the amount of content in a game - you can keep large parts of the game world (or all of it) relevant for the player challenge wise by simply scaling the numbers of existing enemy types, instead of having to create and design new assets/enemies that challenge you at your current strength level.

It has its merits, but as a whole I feel like it always ends up devaluing the sense of player progression and I really hope RPGs start moving away from this difficulty design. Having areas of the world that are trivialized by your increase in power makes progression feel more meaningful. You could even incorporate this into the game design and story - something triggers a change in the world state causing more dangerous enemies to populate previously harmless areas. Quests take you back to an area with trivial enemies and make your growth a part of the story its trying to tell.

The worst is implementations like in Assassins Creed Odyssey where leveling up makes you weaker due to the way gear works in that game. I still love the game, but I'd like to see a different approach to this design.

I think there are many ways to do this, but they are all more expensive and difficult than level scaling. So I don't see the trend dying any time soon.

While I also don't like the level scaling systems. It makes sense, if you plan to play it for too long.

Imagine you max your character. There would be no challenge left for you.

 

[The Eradicator]

The amount of things you can do in an RPG doesn't make the game more complete. Skyrim was good when it came out but was immediately surpassed with games that had better traversal, better combat, bettet story, better quests, stronger progression, greater build depth and variation etc…

Skyrim isn't as special, as complete, or as ambitious as you make it out to be (especially by today's standards). It is handily destroyed by the likes of Witcher 3, Elden Ring and a half dozen other games.

Except I've played Skyrim through at least 5-10 times over the last ten years, and I would never even consider playing through W3 again. Doesn't have to "better" to just be more enjoyable to play.

 

[The Eradicator]

They are both classic style open world CRPGs. They each have a different vibe and focus on different aspects of the genre. For current RPGs, the closest to feeling like Skyrim would be Kingdom Come Deliverance, although it doesn't have any of the crazy aspects, like building a small keep out of pillows, like you could in Morrowind.

Um, literally none of those games you mentioned are CRPGs...

 

[Gandih42]

While I also don't like the level scaling systems. It makes sense, if you plan to play it for too long.

Imagine you max your character. There would be no challenge left for you.

I agree that there should exist a challenge for you at high/max level, but I still think it is poor game design to achieve that by scaling ALL enemies with you as you grow in power. I think it could be improved by controlling the scaling more carefully, like, parts of the game are scaled more discretely as the player gets stronger (but again, requires more work). But in any case, I don't think Skyrim is the worst offender with respect to this.

Its definitely a subjective thing - but for the most part I would prefer zones and enemies designed around a high level/max level player, rather than scaled up weak enemies.

It wouldn't work in most games, certainly not Elder Scrolls games, but I actually really liked Xenoblade Chronicles DE solution to the problem of being overleveled - just let the player downlevel themselves. Its kind of dumb and immersion breaking, but I think it worked really in the context of that game specifically.

 

[Havoc2049]

Um, literally none of those games you mentioned are CRPGs...

The Elder Scrolls series takes the Ultima series, Questron series, etc., style of open world CRPGs and brings it into the modern age. Origin tried with the last couple of Ultima games, but by that time EA was involved and Origin went to crap, although Ultima Online was pretty awesome. Both the Elder Scrolls and Witcher series started out on the PC.

Here is a review of The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall by CRPG historian and author of Dungeons and Destops: The History of Computer Role Playing Games, Matt Barton. The Elder Scrolls and Witcher series is included in Dungeons and Desktops. Right at the begining he calls Daggerfall a CRPG and even references Ultima IV.


If anyone is interested, Barton just did a recent interview of Bruce Nesmith, who has worked in the industry since the 8/16-bit computer days, worked at TSR and Bethesda and was the lead designer of Skyrim.

 

[synchronicity]

The "special sauce" is that their games are built around being YOU focused. The quest, world and gameplay design of Bethesda games aren't anything that another studio isn't able to do. . .they just won't do it because they're almost always telling tighter and focused stories (Horizon, Witcher, etc.) that don't need the hook of "open and aimless" to drive player engagement up. Everything in a Bethesda game is focused around YOUR entertainment and gratification instead of asking you to engage the world on its terms.

Yes, they're unique in the flavor of freedom they offer while still building a world/universe that is interesting and engaging imho.

 

[BattleMonkey]

Bethesda typically does it best at making actual worlds you feel immersed in. You have tons of freedom, though I do feel they botched this in Fallout 4 by making the game world feel like a series of big set piece quests and no longer a breathing world. FO4 felt like other open world games where you are going to places checking off boxes. The pure open nature and feeling of doing things at your own pace and wondering, and ability to interact with so much is what makes their older games so memorable.

This isn't to say they are bug free or perfect, all their games have been technical messes, but they provide a game world with longevity that keeps bringing it's fans back and few others can replicate.