Current Events > Is Bethesda an overrated developer?

(+) Yeah! (+)

poll

No.

You know exactly what you are getting with a Bethesda title. They don't try to really pretend to be anything different and I feel like a lot of people just really like what they sell.

I think Diablo 3 and 4 were both kinda boring and definitely were not for me. Do I think it's overrated? Not at all, it's just not the game for me.

Just right. They make good games

Their mod support makes them one of the best developers.

Not really, I don't think. Their games are fun, buggy as they maybe... and there is the modding scene.

Plus they are successful, so the interest is there.

Everyone talks shit about the games that they buy and then play for 1,000 hours.

Guide posted...

Everyone talks shit about the games that they buy and then play for 1,000 hours.

Do they?

The games have their issues, and barring the horror that was the Fallout 76 or w/e, they seem to do alright review wise.

It just works!

I wouldn't say they're overrated, per se.

I would say that they get a pass on quality issues that would get near every other dev dogpiled on sight. For some reason we all continue to pretend that Bethesda bugs and jankiness is just unexpected comedy from overambitious scamps, instead of a damning indictment of a multimillion-dollar operations lask of quality control. And the fact that the community is expected to fix their games really should not be ok.

DarkBuster22904 posted...

I wouldn't say they're overrated, per se.

I would say that they get a pass on quality issues that would get near every other dev dogpiled on sight. For some reason we all continue to pretend that Bethesda bugs and jankiness is just unexpected comedy from overambitious scamps, instead of a damning indictment of a multimillion-dollar operations lask of quality control. And the fact that the community is expected to fix their games really should not be ok.

When you put it that way, it sure is weird how memeish their bugs have become...

But I think it just goes to show how fun the games can be, regardless.

Do wonder why they don't spend more money on quality control... I would understand if they were some small indie dev... they're big games. But is it a really a budget thing, or just greed? Or are the games just too big... idk, personally.

No.

10 years ago I would have said yes but the gaming community has really turned on them. I rarely see people praise them and I constantly see people shitting on them. At this point the general attitude seems so negative that I would say it's flipped, and Bethesda may be slightly underrated.

Still some of the best value games for the price, I've never managed less than 300 hours in a Bethesda RPG.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

With sources and reasons too!

At this point they're underrated if anything.

appropriately rated with all the hate they catch

I would not say overrated.

It's more overdiscussed.

It's insane how much people are talking about Bethesda, and it feels like it's more bad stuff instead of good stuff.

This topic is just another part of it.

And the last Bethesda game I played was either Skyrim or New Vegas.

Not really.

I've been unable to get into any of the ones I've tried, but I can tell they do what they're supposed to.

Personally, not a fan.

I find the game-worlds to be very bland versions of popular genres, and the overall look and gameplay isn't for me.

They would be overrated except that I think most people know what to expect and I expect doodoo

Before FO76? Probably. Since then? Definitely not.

Not really.

People know exactly what they are getting and they still buy, and presumably enjoy, the games.

They don't 'get a pass' for the bugs and shit. People are always criticizing them for it. But they still like the games.

How are they overhyped? Anytime a game come out people are like it is going to be full of bugs .

with how little effort they put into them they definitely get far higher praise than they earned. starfield is absolutely a 6/10

"their mod support makes them one of the best developers"
nope

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


This. They have a lot of mod support really means they know they can release buggy shit because modders will fix it and people will shrug it off as a joke rather than actually hold them accountable for it.

Theyre not friends with modders. They see them as unpaid and uncredited contractors.

I dunno I feel like even the biggest Bethesda fans are well aware that the brand comes with quite specific expectations

scar_the_1 posted...

I dunno I feel like even the biggest Bethesda fans are well aware that the brand comes with quite specific expectations

failures of the game developer shouldnt be an "expectation" - they are charging full price for the game, not bargain basement price

Kloe_Rinz posted...

failures of the game developer shouldnt be an "expectation" - they are charging full price for the game, not bargain basement price

Expectation in this case feels more like giving a pass.

People know and expect their games to be buggy messes. And they are. So I would say they are not overrated.

Not for a second

Elder Scrolls and Fallout are both titans of the gaming industry

And the internet madly hates them over every little thing.

How are they overrated?

UnfairRepresent posted...

How are they overrated?

because people like you give them a pass for things that are expected such as incomplete buggy pieces of shit they expect the community to finish and fix for free

If you asked me this back in say, 2016 I would have said yes, but now? Not really tbh

UnfairRepresent posted...

And the internet madly hates them over every little thing.

The internet hates them for justifiable reasons, just like every other AAA publisher. Theyre all scummy in their own way.

As someone whose kind of over the Bethesda model, no. They made some great games I loved and were very influential.

Absolutely.

Nah gamers just have too high of a standard these days

if a dev can release a game and it expected to be a buggy mess and that supposedly ok, then yes. fuck 'em

Kloe_Rinz posted...

because people like you give them a pass for things that are expected such as incomplete buggy pieces of shit they expect the community to finish and fix for free

Case and point

They're appropriately rated. Everyone knows what they're getting with a Bethesda game and as just sandbox games to fuck around in, they're fun.

Of course.

Morrowind is one of the best designed and most interesting worlds, and is an actual RPG, but ever since then, theyve basically just coasted on their formula.

The writing has gotten worse, the roleplaying (both in terms of dialogue / quest choices, and in terms of progression mechanics) has gotten worse.

They have a tendency to create unintentionally hilarious bugs (for example, in Starfield, enemy ships always aim for center mass, so if you build a ship thats basically a big empty frame, theyll just shoot through the empty part and rarely hit you).

Both the Fallout games theyve created are nothing like a Fallout game and their idea of writing is a Som looking for his father then a father looking for his son.

They make sandboxes that are fun to dick around in and provide a good canvas for modded to paint on, but they are otherwise absolutely riddled with problems, from the uncanny valley Mass Effect Andromeda-esque facial animations, to the poor writing, to the shallow gameplay, to the propensity of bugs that demonstrates some of the worst Quality Assurance of all time, etc.

Aren't they fairly rated? Most people probably look at then as "those guys that make buggy WRPGs I download mods for" which is accurate

KanWan posted...

Their games are always painted into a corner as casual games for casual folks these days but despite the easy price of admission, theyre incredibly fun sandbox games with tons to do compared to other games. The bugs in the games are simply due to the massive scope of what they try to achieve and by all accounts they check off what it is they set out to do. Fun games with fun side quests and content and with enough accessibility anyone could get into.

To me it's like you just said "People say they're casual games for casual folks, but actually they're casual games for casual folks."

gasgpmo posted...

To me it's like you just said "People say they're casual games for casual folks, but actually they're casual games for casual folks."

I wasnt going to say it, but I thought exactly the same lol.

There's a quote which I'm paraphrasing here but it's along the lines of "People said we were sell outs when we added objective markers for quests. We thought we were sell outs when we added a map in Arena instead of demanding players draw their own."

Bethesda has always been about inclusivity since day 1. And it has always paid off. Bringing new fans into the genre rather than solely preaching to the choir.

It's the toxic gatekeeper gamers who are now acting like it's a bad thing that "Filthy Casuals" play their vidya games.

The same people who scream in fury if someone brings up difficulty options for Dark Souls but then can't give a single logical reason why it would be a bad thing.

Kloe_Rinz posted...

failures of the game developer shouldnt be an "expectation" - they are charging full price for the game, not bargain basement price

The question ITT is if they're an overrated developer. My impression is that everyone, even die hard fans, are well aware of their shortcomings and rate them accordingly.

UnfairRepresent posted...

There's a quote which I'm paraphrasing here but it's along the lines of "People said we were sell outs when we added objective markers for quests. We thought we were sell outs when we added a map in Arena instead of demanding players draw their own."

Bethesda has always been about inclusivity since day 1. And it has always paid off. Bringing new fans into the genre rather than solely preaching to the choir.

It's the toxic gatekeeper gamers who are now acting like it's a bad thing that "Filthy Casuals" play their vidya games.

The same people who scream in fury if someone brings up difficulty options for Dark Souls but then can't give a single logical reason why it would be a bad thing.

Because difficulty options in most games are shitty number tweaks where on Easy the enemies are stupid marshmallows and on Hard theyre stupid tanks that hit harder and have a lot more health, meaning they arent anymore difficult at all, only more tedious.

FromSoft games are pretty intricately balanced, so they wouldnt be satisfied with number tweaks and would have to do a bunch of extra work to accommodate a vocal minority who probably arent going to play their games anyway.

This is also ignoring that many if not most of their games (Sekiro being a notable exception) are very easy to break to the point they become trivial for even the most casual of players.

A bit.

On the one hand, you have fairly consistently good games. On the other, you have the bugs. That's the thing though, their games are good. Genuinely so, but not legendary. They do achieve a legendary status though, like Skyrim did. Even though Skyrim is more like just a good or great game, not a legendary one.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Case and point

you dont have a case or point, per usual

I don't see how you can honestly believe they're overrated when any topic about them is going to be filled with people making fun of their bugs

As for why they get a "pass" for buggy games, it's mostly because the games are still fun despite them. When they're not, like in the case of Fallout 76, they get shit on.