Bethesda = Innovation? No Way!

Yeah, seriously, how many times have you seen Bethesda and innovation in the same sentence? *raises hand* About 14 kazillion times over here, guys. It's propesterous to use Fallout 3 as an example of how innovative Bethesda is, especially the latter. Fallout 3 is not innovative! :P It is not. It will never be. It isn't. Bethesda has been using the same formula since 94', no sorry, 93'! First person perspective is how old now? Like 81? I'm pretty sure Ultima 1 had some first person moments. Real-time? Oh crap, Ultima Underworld, which came out in 92, had real-time combat. Bethesda's first game, Arena, also had real-time combat.

So what say you?

who said they are innovative? lol superjim42

You're kidding?:o Well, a lot of people say it. A lot of people also call turn-based and isometric "old-fashioned" in the face of real-time and first-person.

Innovation is overrated.

Yeah, seriously, how many times have you seen Bethesda and innovation in the same sentence? *raises hand* About 14 kazillion times over here, guys. It's propesterous to use Fallout 3 as an example of how innovative Bethesda is, especially the latter. Fallout 3 is not innovative! :P It is not. It will never be. It isn't. Bethesda has been using the same formula since 94', no sorry, 93'! First person perspective is how old now? Like 81? I'm pretty sure Ultima 1 had some first person moments. Real-time? Oh crap, Ultima Underworld, which came out in 92, had real-time combat. Bethesda's first game, Arena, also had real-time combat.

So what say you?

VoodooGamer

Why argue? If someone considers something innovative, then it's innotivate -- it's their opinion. To you, the game company obviously isn't that innovative.

Why argue? If someone considers something innovative, then it's innotivate -- it's their opinion. To you, the game company obviously isn't that innovative.

Deiuos

You can't opinionate innovation. They are either innovative (as in doing something fresh) or not.

VATS is fairly innovative. Cinematic combat. :)Ninja-Hippo

VATS has been around since the first Fallout.

who said its innovating??? just look at the character models -.-

I don't know why you single out Bethesda for not being innovative. Most developers follow a formula that works. I mean Gears 2 looks the very same to the first game to me gameplay wise, and I mean exactly the same. Same as Halo and every other FPS on the market, same **** since Doom.

I'm really liking Fallout 3, just left the vault, it's got dark I've got the radio on and I don't know where to go. Just been attacked by a wild dog and a hobo guy.

Awesome.

Bethesda isn't innovative.

Infact, I'd go as far to say the only "innovation" they ever made was dumbing down their best game ever and then reshipping it with a boring world, shorter questlines, a dull story, weak character interaction, but prettier graphics and terrible voice acting.

And I'm talking about Oblivion. Oblivion sucks.

VATS is fairly innovative. Cinematic combat. :)Ninja-Hippo

Have you ever played the original Fallouts? VATS is basically the original Fallout's combat system.

Just like the entire skill list and stat list are pulled directly out of the original Fallouts. The only thing that's new about Fallout 3, as far as I can gather (that's basically not been done in either the original Fallouts or the last Elder Scrolls game), isa handful of new perks....

but, wait. Perks were in Fallout 3. Some new names don't qualify even remotely as innovation.

VATS is failure to the twelfth degree. You could basically do VATS in Fallout 1. The only thing that changed was the camera angle. Period. Acknowledge it.

I don't know why you single out Bethesda for not being innovative. Most developers follow a formula that works. I mean Gears 2 looks the very same to the first game to me gameplay wise, and I mean exactly the same. Same as Halo and every other FPS on the market, same **** since Doom.

I'm really liking Fallout 3, just left the vault, it's got dark I've got the radio on and I don't know where to go. Just been attacked by a wild dog and a hobo guy.

Awesome.

_Nicky1015_

I'm not singling out Bethesda so much as singling out those who call real-time and first-person innovative in comparison to turn-based and isometric.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]VATS is fairly innovative. Cinematic combat. :)gonzalezj1

VATS has been around since the first Fallout.

:( What?

who said they are innovative? lol superjim42

That was my next question. There are a lot of game companies who follow the same formula and are very successful. Nothing wrong with that if the games are good and gamers keep buying them.

[QUOTE="Deiuos"]

Why argue? If someone considers something innovative, then it's innotivate -- it's their opinion. To you, the game company obviously isn't that innovative.

VoodooGamer

You can't opinionate innovation. They are either innovative (as in doing something fresh) or not.

The game was fresh to me, therefore, innovative. Of course, you'll argue that you mean in comparsion to every game ever made, ever, and it's still opinion on if that game is "fresh" in comparison.

You're going to get nowhere arguing with this, you're arguing an opinion. It's almost like arguing politics. You wont find an end to this debate, ever.

Bethesda isn't innovative.

Infact, I'd go as far to say the only "innovation" they ever made was dumbing down their best game ever and then reshipping it with a boring world, shorter questlines, a dull story, weak character interaction, but prettier graphics and terrible voice acting.

And I'm talking about Oblivion. Oblivion sucks.

-TheSecondSign-

I'm not singling out Bethesda so much as singling out those who call real-time and first-person innovative in comparison to turn-based and isometric.

VoodooGamer

[QUOTE="gonzalezj1"]

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]VATS is fairly innovative. Cinematic combat. :)Locke562

VATS has been around since the first Fallout.

:( What?

people that havent play the 1st game ¬¬

That was my next question. There are a lot of game companies who follow the same formula and are very successful. Nothing wrong with that if the games are good and gamers keep buying them.

blackace

Well, dont get me wrong. I understand completely in the case of the Elder Scrolls, but it's ridiculous to call Fallout 3 innovative when other games are just like it.

Also, I'm liking Fallout 3 a lot. It's no Fallout 1 or 2, but it's better than I expected and quite fun. Hopefully, I can get some videos up soon. :)

Seriously, who is doing this? I'm just not seeing these retards you're so worried about who are calling first person real time innovative when it's been done for well over a decade now.Shafftehr

edit:

Ooops, I replied to the wrong post. :P

Anyway, I'm not going to do a search for any specific post, if you don't believe me I could not care less. But, you are only one of two or three persons saying they've never heard anyone say Bethesda was innovative so go figure.

[QUOTE="gonzalezj1"]

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]VATS is fairly innovative. Cinematic combat. :)Locke562

VATS has been around since the first Fallout.

:( What?

Like I just described, it's the exact same thing as the original Fallout's combat system. Now I'll get into detail so that you can see the failure of the claim.

The original Fallout has a turn-based combat system, as you know. You have the option to spend an extra action point to do an aimed attack. What it does is target a particular portion of the body that you get to choose from a diagram of body parts. Head, eyes, legs, arms, chest, groin. Sound familiar? It should. They have percentage values that indicate the likelyhood that you'll hit that particular portion, and status ailments (including disabling an arm or blinding an opponent) or a particular death animation will occur on a successful hit.

For example, when you hit somebody in the eyes and score a critical hit with a turbo plasma rifle in Fallout 1 (with high crit rates, high skill with the weapon, high perception and luck), they melt. You can make people explode, or gib them if you hit a particular body part.

The only difference is that VATS shifts the camera angle and that the execution is in first person as opposed to isometric. Um, period. That's the only difference. Get over it.

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]

Seriously, who is doing this? I'm just not seeing these retards you're so worried about who are calling first person real time innovative when it's been done for well over a decade now.VoodooGamer

Don't you have better things to do?

Innovation is overrated.

TheOwnerOner

Do you still live in a cave?

Oh, I do love to see all of the people desperately trying to hate this game nitpick as it sweeps the critical community by storm and gets tremendous applause from the soon to be millions playing it.Shafftehr

Your sig, icon, and the content of your post confuse me utterly.

I've not played Fallout 3, but I've played Oblivion and the original Fallouts and Planescape. Fallout > Oblivion. Yes, by today's standards. Yes, I have my jaded and super-critical glasses on. No, I'm not a Fallout or a Black Isle fanboy. I've never played another Bethesda game prior to Oblivion (although I now own Morrowind...I hate it) and never a BI before Fallout outside of Planescape. I never played any Black Isle game prior to playing Oblivion.

Oblivion received incredible critical acclaim and it got tremendous applause from the millions playing it. I fell into that trap and now I'm ragingly pissed. I've installed OOO and a massive leveling mod to Oblivion and I still can't tolerate it to this day.

I could ask the same thing about you. As far as I can tell, you've made up a group of people to complain about and you're wasting not only your time, but all of our time with it.Shafftehr

Jeesh, why the attitude?:shock:

Anyway, see my edit, I replied to the wrong post which happens to a lot of us.

Also, I didn't make up a group. A lot of people apparently know what I mean.

Innovation is to risky for most developers, get it wrong and you've got a flop on your hands, even if you get it right it doesn't mean it's going to be more popular than the tried and tested road other games take. Look at Banjoe Nuts and Bolts, it's innovative, but it's split the fanbase with a lot saying they don't get it, don't like it. They could have just made a bog standard platformer and it would have probably been accepted better.

People like safe games, there is a reason why we still use analog sticks and D-pads, why we still play games with mechanics that are 10 years old. Because they work, and they get the job done better than the alternatives that you could probably think up. Innovation is cool if it makes things better, no point of innovation just to be different.

[QUOTE="superjim42"]who said they are innovative? lol VoodooGamer

You're kidding?:o Well, a lot of people say it. A lot of people also call turn-based and isometric "old-fashioned" in the face of real-time and first-person.

yeah, i remember hearing that recently ...."fallout 3 is really innovative " lol

Innovation is to risky for most developers, get it wrong and you've got a flop on your hands, even if you get it right it doesn't mean it's going to be more popular than the tried and tested road other games take. Look at Banjoe Nuts and Bolts, it's innovative, but it's split the fanbase with a lot saying they don't get it, don't like it. They could have just made a bog standard platformer and it would have probably been accepted better.

People like safe games, there is a reason why we still use analog sticks and D-pads, why we still play games with mechanics that are 10 years old. Because they work, and they get the job done better than the alternatives that you could probably think up. Innovation is cool if it makes things better, no point of innovation just to be different.

_Nicky1015_

I may not know what I'm talking about but Nuts and Bolts doesn't seem to be innovative in the slightest respect. It's a massive paradigm shift, sure. But it's not innovative.

On the other hand, you have Super Mario Galaxy. It's a paradigm shift and it's innovative. And people love it.

On the final hand, Fallout 2 is neither innovative nor is it a paradigm shift. It's essentially the exact same game as Fallout 1. More of the same. Minor fixes to make it more playable, and that's really all. Innovation doesn't make the game.

Oh, I do love to see all of the people desperately trying to hate this game nitpick as it sweeps the critical community by storm and gets tremendous applause from the soon to be millions playing it.Shafftehr

People need to be more tolerant. You know, I don't agree with a lot of people on a lot of issues, namely Theokoth, but I respect his positions. When you take things like games so seriously where you start to "hate" on certain groups, you lose sight of the fun factor.

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]Oh, I do love to see all of the people desperately trying to hate this game nitpick as it sweeps the critical community by storm and gets tremendous applause from the soon to be millions playing it.BobHipJames

Your sig, icon, and the content of your post confuse me utterly.

I've not played Fallout 3, but I've played Oblivion and the original Fallouts and Planescape. Fallout > Oblivion. Yes, by today's standards. Yes, I have my jaded and super-critical glasses on. No, I'm not a Fallout or a Black Isle fanboy. I've never played another Bethesda game prior to Oblivion (although I now own Morrowind...I hate it) and never a BI before Fallout outside of Planescape.

Oblivion received incredible critical acclaim and it got tremendous applause from the millions playing it. I fell into that trap and now I'm ragingly pissed. I've installed OOO and a massive leveling mod to Oblivion and I still can't tolerate it to this day.

I've installed OOO and a massive leveling mod to Oblivion and I still can't tolerate it to this day.

BobHipJames

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

I've installed OOO and a massive leveling mod to Oblivion and I still can't tolerate it to this day.

Saturos3091

Do you know of any questline expansion, dialogue expansion mods?

How about combat/character creation mods? The biggest thing for me is that the entire game seemed like a dungeon crawler. This is going to be a hard question to answer but...is there anything that "fixes" that? I'm sick of clubbing goblins to death.

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]

I could ask the same thing about you. As far as I can tell, you've made up a group of people to complain about and you're wasting not only your time, but all of our time with it.VoodooGamer

Jeesh, why the attitude?:shock:

Anyway, see my edit, I replied to the wrong post which happens to a lot of us.

Also, I didn't make up a group. A lot of people apparently know what I mean.

Oh, I do love to see all of the people desperately trying to hate this game nitpick as it sweeps the critical community by storm and gets tremendous applause from the soon to be millions playing it.Shafftehr

None of that does anything to say it doesn't suck to certain individuals, and if they can give valid reasons, they are deserving of every bit of respect you get for your own opinion.

What's confusing? Planescape is my favorite game, and I enjoy Bethesda's work. A lot of people have jumped on the "purist" bandwagon and have an almost irrational bias against anything Bethesda makes, and I love to see those people who go on a crusade to make sure everyone knows Bethesda sucks look like idiots as millions enjoy Bethesda's games.

You didn't like Oblivion? Ok, run with that. I did - in fact, it was a heck of a lot of fun. Best game ever? No. Best Bethesda game ever? Nope. Very good? Hell yeah. I haven't even touched Fallout 3 yet, but I'm hopeful based on my experience with every one of Bethesda's previous games. Now, where is the confusion? Are all Black Isle fans such starched-collar snobs that you just can't imagine one stopping playing through Planescape for the 2000th time with his one hand, and leafing through The Unbearable Lightness of Being with the other, long enough to actually sit down and enjoy low brow swill like a Bethesda game?

The big problem with a lot of Black Isle fans (and older PC gamers in general) is big-time elitism. These people think because they enjoyed games which were very well written, but too wordy and a bit too niche oriented for most, they deserve an honorary PHD from Oxford or something. I take notable pleasure in watching snobs like this shout until they`re blue in the face that Bethesda sucks while tons of gamers enjoy their games. At the point where you`ve so lost touch with gaming that what`s fun isn`t as important as what fits into your pretentious view of what`s good, you become comical to me.Shafftehr

Snobs? I really have no problem with Bethesda. My problem is with the game I have played, Oblivion.

Fun? What was fun about it? Stalking around and stealing stuff? Managing gigantic lists of alchemical ingredients? Mixing ingredients for hours? Shooting fireballs? Spawning minions? Clubbing goblins? Wandering around desolate landscapes of repeating textures and templates? Crawling through the 39th Oblivion Gate, Goblin Cave, Ayleid Ruin, or Bandit Dungeon?

Micromanaging stat points? In fact, that's what I hate about the game. Everything is repetitious, everything is without value or joy....and YES....the dialogue was truly awful and it had zero choice and zero consequence. It's been illustrated aptly by people on these forums...Would you like to query about rumors or about the predefined quest you've already been confronted with? Would you like to make this quest your active quest or ponder that fact later? It seemed like they thought that bloom could erase all the issues this game had.

I was utterly without joy when playing this game. Is that so hard for YOU to comprehend? It seems like you've taken on your own crusade, I've gotta say.

It's not that I'm terrifically high brow, I like shooting stuff most of the time when I play games. I'm just loud and pissy when something does not satisfy me in a game. I'm a consumer. Should I not be critical of the games this industry produces?

I'm probably a hell of a lot more critical of Microsoft, Infinity Ward, Activision, Bungie, or Peter Molyneux than I am of Bethesda.

[QUOTE="-TheSecondSign-"]

Bethesda isn't innovative.

Infact, I'd go as far to say the only "innovation" they ever made was dumbing down their best game ever and then reshipping it with a boring world, shorter questlines, a dull story, weak character interaction, but prettier graphics and terrible voice acting.

And I'm talking about Oblivion. Oblivion sucks.

Makari

Of course it can.

Generally, the farther you look back on a long running series, the better it gets. I've never had the pleasure of playing Daggerfall.

None of that does anything to say it doesn't suck to certain individuals, and if they can give valid reasons, they are deserving of every bit of respect you get for your own opinion.

-TheSecondSign-

They aren't innovative, but they are damn good at the style of games they make.

Open world RPG's with plenty of freedom and you're choices have such a large impact on the game. Yeah, its been done before, but they do it exceptionally well. This reminds me of the "Halo is generic" argument. The games are still amazing, though.

And Bethesda does add some fresh elements to all their games. The new combat system in Fallout 3 allows for abit of turn-based elements, but also forces you to use their real-time system. Its pretty well done IMO.

AUGHHHH!

Repetitive, repetitive, repetitive.

That was my point and I'm being repetitive. Repetition is not fun.

"That's your problem." The art of argument explodes like the Hindenburg.

[QUOTE="-TheSecondSign-"]

None of that does anything to say it doesn't suck to certain individuals, and if they can give valid reasons, they are deserving of every bit of respect you get for your own opinion.

Shafftehr

If I want to complain I will.

I don't care if it's a "problem" for other people. I'll speak my mind wherever the hell I feel like. If another person has such a problem with it, we can talk about it.

"who said they are innovative? lol"

"I don't think I've ever heard anyone in SW say anything about Bethesda being particularly innovative..."

"I don't see much anyone saying they're innovative... Who is saying this?"

"who said its innovating???``


A lot of people apparently don`t know what you mean. I`m sure somewhere, someone called this game innovative, but by far the prevalent general consensus is that it isn`t - it`s just good. To me, this is akin to starting a thread about the people who said Gears had bad graphics in 2006 - they were some retarded minority that no-one payed attention to... And here you are going on some big diatribe about them.Shafftehr

You really need to lighten up.