Elder Scrolls VI Announced

[Osprey]

I really enjoyed Skyrim, and I'll pick this up for sure... but it'd be nice to see Bethesda try something new. Elder Scrolls/Fallout on repeat is getting a bit stale. Fallout especially.

That's what they're doing with Starfield, their next game after Fallout 76.

The lack of console and save restrictions is really bad in a BethRPG because of bugs in the game, this is kind of obvious why this is an important detail. I also did not like sleeping limits on beds, that does not make sense and complete broke immersion for me. I also did not like the food system compared to how food was done in NV, in Fallout 4 it feels like it is built strictly around the cost of food items where as in NV it felt more organic as the value of food items did not directly line up with their use and had more to do with in game lore. I think ultimately comes down to I want survival to be immersive rather than just something to make the game mechanically harder. I don't mind if they make the game harder like Frostfall and Realistic Needs and Diseases in Skyrim, but they also made the game more immersive and paid respect to lore rather than harder for the sake of making things harder.

Have you played Kingdom Come: Deliverance yet? It has sleeping and food requirements that mostly contribute to immersion, rather than being nuisances. One thing that I like is its concept of sleep quality. You can sleep in any bed, even if it's just a hide on the floor, but higher quality beds heal you up faster and, IIRC, give you a temporary "rested" bonus to your stats. Simply sleeping longer isn't ideal because hunger increases while you're sleeping and you don't get the bonus.

It sounds complicated and like it'd be a bother, but it ends up not being because it feels realistic and not that restrictive. You can go a long time without sleeping or eating, especially if you don't mind a small "tired" or "hungry" unbuff, and it doesn't take many hours or amounts of food to get back to normal. For example, a loaf of bread or wheel of cheese will usually just about fill you up, whereas, in other RPGs, you'd need to eat dozens all at once to fill up or heal yourself. It's not perfect, but it's one of the best implementations of food and sleep systems that I've seen and convinced me that you can build them into a game, and on the standard difficulty, rather than tacking them on after the fact just to make things artificially harder for "hardcore" players.

 

[Painful Quandary]

That's what they're doing with Starlight, their next game after Fallout 76.



Have you played Kingdom Come: Deliverance yet? It has sleeping and food requirements that mostly contribute to immersion, rather than being nuisances. One thing that I like is its concept of sleep quality. You can sleep in any bed, even if it's just a hide on the floor, but higher quality beds heal you up faster and, IIRC, give you a temporary "rested" bonus to your stats. Simply sleeping longer isn't ideal because hunger increases while you're sleeping and you don't get the bonus.

It sounds complicated and like it'd be a bother, but it ends up not being because it feels realistic and not that restrictive. You can go a long time without sleeping or eating, especially if you don't mind a small "tired" or "hungry" unbuff, and it doesn't take many hours or amounts of food to get back to normal. For example, a loaf of bread or wheel of cheese will usually just about fill you up, whereas, in other RPGs, you'd need to eat dozens all at once to fill up or heal yourself. It's not perfect, but it's one of the best implementations of food and sleep systems that I've seen and convinced me that you can build them into a game, and on the standard difficulty, rather than tacking them on after the fact just to make things artificially harder for "hardcore" players.

I haven't played that game yet, but the sleep system is much better than the Fallout 4 one, though I like in the Realistic Needs and Diseases mod in Skyrim sleeping in dungeons is risky as it gives a chance to catch a disease. The eating system also seems similar to that mod as well, which is convincing me to add Kingdom Come to my Steam wishlist. I will agree with you that it is ideal to build it as an in-game option not tied to what difficulty you are playing on, my issue is I just don't trust Bethseda as a developer to add survival in corrected.

 

[Warden of the North]

I really enjoyed Skyrim, and I'll pick this up for sure... but it'd be nice to see Bethesda try something new. Elder Scrolls/Fallout on repeat is getting a bit stale. Fallout especially.

I present to you, Starfield, Bethesda's first original new IP in 25 years

 

[bigdirty]

I want one of the other continents

Not sure how far along it is now, but a while back I saw a trailer for a pretty ambitious Skyrim mod that let's you explore Atmora.

 

[bigdirty]

So apparently Bethesda recently applied for a trademark for the name "Redfall", which is naturally leading to speculation that this will be the title for ES6.

Skyrim Parent Company Files Trademark For "Redfall"

 

[RandV]

Not sure if it would be related but just thinking in the teaser clip that does look like an impact crater at the end. The obvious would be to assume Redguard but while it's less fantasy-ish "Redfall" could refer to an apocalyptic Meteor strike? TES games always have some sort of 'end of the world' scenario you have to stop.

 

[Desdichado93]

I'm almost positive that if Elder Scrolls 6 was just an updated Skyrim with a bit better
graphics (like what Fallout 4 was to 3/NV), people would lose their minds in frustration.

It's going to be trying something new. For sure. Maybe Fallout 76 is an experiment to help see which direction to take ES6.

Well it seems that TES VI will use the same engine as the older games.

Bethesda Will Keep the Same Fundamental Game Engine for The Elder Scrolls VI, Starfield
'Fallout 76' Shows Bethesda's Engine Has Gone From Meme To Liability
The Elder Scrolls 6 And Starfield Engines Discussed By Todd Howard- Most People Don’t Understand The Word ‘Engine’

 

[XX]

Bethesda needs to step up their lighting and texture game. Put crap in, get crap out.

TE6 and Starfield will need to run on XB1/PS4 so I don't imagine any drastic leaps forward in image quality.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Bethesda has fallen so far behind the competition on all technical levels.

It's a real shame, because boy can they build a fun world to play in.


I really want ESVI and Starfield to be good.....

 

[Morbo]

Bethesda needs to step up their lighting and texture game. Put crap in, get crap out.

TE6 and Starfield will need to run on XB1/PS4 so I don't imagine any drastic leaps forward in image quality.

ES6 once again using Creation is disappointing. although I didn't consider the issues with Fallout 4 to be graphics.

 

[Commander Clueless]

ES6 once again using Creation is disappointing. although I didn't consider the issues with Fallout 4 to be graphics.

I wouldn't say Fallout 4's biggest issues were with graphics, but it looked old 3 years ago.

Fast forward to today, and Fallout 76 looks positively dated.

 

[Morbo]

The Elder Scrolls 6 And Starfield Engines Discussed By Todd Howard- Most People Don’t Understand The Word ‘Engine’

A little arrogant there.

you know what Todd? actually, a lot of us DO know what an engine is.

we also know what an old crappy engine looks like, since we, you know, play a lot of games.

 

[Commander Clueless]

A little arrogant there.

you know what Todd? actually, a lot of us DO know what an engine is.

we also know what an old crappy engine looks like, since we, you know, play a lot of games.

I'm more than willing to admit I don't know much about game development.

But that's not the point. We don't need to know how games are made to know that Bethesda's well behind the times, regardless of what the reason is.

 

[Turin]

Bethesda’s creation/gamebryo engine and havok physics aren’t the big problem. The problem is that Bethesda is either too lazy or (more likely given their lead writer) incompetent at coding. I don’t worry about this engine being used for new games, I worry that the same people who made Fallout 76 and to a lesser exemtent Fallout 4 are using this engine for TES and Starfield.

 

[SuperScript29]

Bethesda’s creation/gamebryo engine and havok physics aren’t the big problem. The problem is that Bethesda is either too lazy or (more likely given their lead writer) incompetent at coding. I don’t worry about this engine being used for new games, I worry that the same people who made Fallout 76 and to a lesser exemtent Fallout 4 are using this engine for TES and Starfield.

You don't get to create games as big as the ES or FO and be this successful if you're incompetent at coding.

 

[Turin]

You don't get to create games as big as the ES or FO and be this successful if you're incompetent at coding.

Uh huh, that’s why mods have to fix their code all the time, and fixable bugs are present multi-generationally.

 

[SuperScript29]

Uh huh, that’s why mods have to fix their code all the time, and fixable bugs are present multi-generationally.

Bugs happen all the time, and their existence could be a combination of reasons, but I can tell you as a programmer that incompetent developers don't make games like the Elder Scrolls. It takes years of experience along with talent to put anything half as good as that.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Bugs happen all the time, and their existence could be a combination of reasons, but I can tell you as a programmer that incompetent developers don't make games like the Elder Scrolls. It takes years of experience along with talent to put anything half as good as that.

Granted, but again that's not the point.

Bethesda Game Studios releases some of the buggiest games around, and that often includes bugs at release that have existed in prior games that they never bothered to patch (even though modders figured out how in some cases). They also lag pretty far behind the technical standards of other modern games, in everything from graphics to modern hardware support.

Don't get me wrong, I've very much enjoyed Fallout 4 and Skyrim in spite of the issues (I love Bethesda's style), but it's obvious to a consumer they aren't up to the same quality standards as their competition, and that has only gotten worse over the last few years. A well written game can make up for a lot of the issues, but it doesn't change the fact that they are there.

The question is, then, what's wrong? To me, it seems that either that Bethesda Game Studios can't keep up with the rest of the industry (even including the other studios the parent company owns), or that they simply won't put in the effort required. I'm curious, do you have another theory?

 

[SuperScript29]

Granted, but again that's not the point.

Bethesda Game Studios releases some of the buggiest games around, and that often includes bugs at release that have existed in prior games that they never bothered to patch (even though modders figured out how in some cases). They also lag pretty far behind the technical standards of other modern games, in everything from graphics to modern hardware support.

Don't get me wrong, I've very much enjoyed Fallout 4 and Skyrim in spite of the issues (I love Bethesda's style), but it's obvious to a consumer they aren't up to the same quality standards as their competition, and that has only gotten worse over the last few years. A well written game can make up for a lot of the issues, but it doesn't change the fact that they are there.

The question is, then, what's wrong? To me, it seems that either that Bethesda Game Studios can't keep up with the rest of the industry (even including the other studios the parent company owns), or that they simply won't put in the effort required. I'm curious, do you have another theory?

That's fine, I'm not saying don't complain as a customer, you have the right to do so. I'm just saying that incompetent developers don't make games like the ES or FO.

 

[Commander Clueless]

That's fine, I'm not saying don't complain as a customer, you have the right to do so. I'm just saying that incompetent developers don't make games like the ES or FO.

While I'm sure they aren't incompetent on an individual basis, "incompetent" from a consumer perspective can simply mean the studio as a whole lacks the ability to produce games on a modern technical level that is expected from a full price "AAA" video game.

For the record, I think they have the ability to build it ("competence"), but lack the ability to take the time required, whether that be complacency with their product (in which case Fallout 76 should be a rude awakening) or the authorization (Bethesda proper/Zenimax) to spend time and money to make a better product.....but that's just one internet goofball's opinion.

Either way, Bethesda is in a pickle right now.

 

[Osprey]

Uh huh, that’s why mods have to fix their code all the time, and fixable bugs are present multi-generationally.

Even the best programmers have and overlook bugs in their code. It doesn't mean that they're incompetent. You seem to be giving modders too much credit. It's a misconception that they "fix" code. Modders don't have access to the original code and most don't even have the programming skills to fix it even if they were to have it.

The very few mods that fix bugs do so via hacks. I, myself, have created and released several that fix issues in some old games, but I would never be so conceited to pretend that the developers were incompetent or that I "fixed their code" for them. The fact that I've been able to fix a few things that they overlooked in no way means that I'm anywhere near as competent of a game programmer as they are.

 

[Osprey]

Bethesda Game Studios releases some of the buggiest games around, and that often includes bugs at release that have existed in prior games that they never bothered to patch (even though modders figured out how in some cases). They also lag pretty far behind the technical standards of other modern games, in everything from graphics to modern hardware support.

Much of that can be attributed to the style of games that they make, IMO. Open world games are simply buggier than other types of games. Lack of restriction leads to a nearly infinite number of possibilities for interactions, not always with the most realistic results. It doesn't help appearances when Bethesda promotes modding as much as they have, since the result is a slew of mods, some of which improve the game, giving some people the idea that the games aren't worth playing (or are even "unplayable") without them.

Open world games also take longer to develop, which tends to contribute to them lagging behind in the technical department. An old example is that Daggerfall (Elder Scrolls II) and Skynet (a Terminator-themed Quake-like shooter) were both developed by Bethesda and released in 1996, but whereas Skynet had cutting edge graphics that rivaled Quake's, Daggerfall's graphics looked more like Doom's (i.e. 2-3 years old). Larger worlds and more complex gameplay have to come at the expense of something, and that something is often the graphics because they end up looking a little dated once all of the rest of the work that is required is completed. That said, I've been frustrated at times by how much Bethesda's graphics have lagged behind (particularly when it comes to shadows), so I don't want to sound like I'm completely excusing it, but some lagging behind should be expected.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Much of that can be attributed to the style of games that they make, IMO. Open world games are simply buggier than other types of games. Lack of restriction leads to a nearly infinite number of possibilities for interactions, not always with the most realistic results. It doesn't help appearances when Bethesda promotes modding as much as they have, since the result is a slew of mods, some of which improve the game, giving some people the idea that the games aren't worth playing (or are even "unplayable") without them.

Open world games also take longer to develop, which tends to contribute to them lagging behind in the technical department. An old example is that Daggerfall (Elder Scrolls II) and Skynet (a Terminator-themed Quake-like shooter) were both developed by Bethesda and released in 1996, but whereas Skynet had cutting edge graphics that rivaled Quake's, Daggerfall's graphics looked more like Doom's (i.e. 2-3 years old). Larger worlds and more complex gameplay have to come at the expense of something, and that something is often the graphics because they end up looking a little dated once all of the rest of the work that is required is completed. That said, I've been frustrated at times by how much Bethesda's graphics have lagged behind (particularly when it comes to shadows), so I don't want to sound like I'm completely excusing it, but some lagging behind should be expected.

Right, but there are plenty of open world games to compare them to - and not favourably either.

Don't get me wrong, I like their style of games a lot....but Starfield/ESVI have a lot of ground to make up from a technical perspective.

 

[Desdichado93]

I don't think it is a matter of incompetence as it is a matter of laziness/taking short cuts/reusing outdated engines
since people will by their games anyway. At some point though you have to cut the ties with the old and go with something new.
The same goes for the assets/engines of Skyrim/fallout. They can reuse the old has been stuff and all of it's restraints
but then your games will be just as limited as the old games. The new games will have the same bugs/errors as the old games.

IMO this is where Bethesda is taking a wrong turn by reportedly reusing an already outdated engine for a game that still might be 3-4-5-6 years away from release.

It wouldn't be first time a company would be too overconfident in themselves and stick with the old.

This sorta comes to mind:

 

[Osprey]

Something to consider is that re-using the engine that everyone at Bethesda is most familiar and comfortable with should mean faster development and fewer bugs. A brand new engine would take longer and likely bring with it more bugs as the developers learn it and optimize it.

Also, I'm not sure if this needs to be pointed out, but re-using an engine doesn't mean that it won't be significantly upgraded. New Vegas re-used Morrowind's engine 8 years later, yet the graphics were noticeably better. EA has been using the Frostbite engine since 2008, but has significantly upgraded it several times. They've just been smart enough to give each iteration a version number. Bethesda doesn't do that, but they probably should, IMO. If they were to announce that ES6 will use Creation 3.0, whereas Fallout 4 & 76 were Creation 2.0 and Skyrim was Creation 1.0, they'd mostly avoid this grumbling from fans. That could be a small symptom of how Bethesda is a little out of touch with the pulse of the fans.