I was thinking: "What if Bethesda fu****d another good title like they did with FO3?" The Beth team at the feces scene: Dev 01 - "hey, let's do a feces scene!" dev 02 - "Are you crazy?!?! How would we sell a game like this to stupid kids under 8 years old?" Dev 01 - "You are right... Perhaps he could throw arround a can of beer?" dev o2 - "Do you want to be fired? Can of beer? A candy bar at most!" Bethesda Technical issues: Dev 01 - "hey, let's use a good engine like Skyrim to develop a good Title that it is not TES?" Dev Boss - "Sure! Just let Skyrim age like 5 years, put some guns in Duke's hand thrown some new textures and noone will notice." At the stripper bar: Dev Boss - "oooo God! There are naked people inside!" At some randon cussing like the famous "Die son of b***!" Dev Boss - "NO BAD WORDS! Instead, put something like 'your mom is ugly'" At the end of the Teaser, with the twins and the xbox controller etc... Dev 01 -"Let's have a scene like (describes scene)" Dev Boss - "YOU ARE FIRED! Let's hire Justin Bieber!" Bethesda main boss at a random "long shower": Beth Boss - "mmmmooooOOOOOooooOOOOoonneeeeeEEeeeeeyyy!!" /me ducks and waits for rocks from FO3 fans DISCLAIMER: FO3 isn't a bad game, it is just a dumbed down version of what could be one of the best games ever.
I assume you are refering to Bethesda Game Studios (the developers) rather than Bethesda Softworks (the publishers) as FO3 was handled by both. If you take a look at all the games developed by Bethesda Game Studios post 2002(Wiki) except for a very sh**y racer, all they have developed is Elder Scolls + clones - and as for the age restrictions, most developers try to keep to the same age level on any sequals they release On the same spin - you can slam id software for being satanic worshipers due to thier doom series (back when they didn't have any other titles), but they turned out alright, right? My point being: Judge the developers when they have made a few various games, don't judge simply on a single title and its squels/clones. Some developers are good at branching out. Others not so much cough.cough.rockstar.cough.hack.weeze
OP. your post makes no sense. Why would bethesda say "no bad words" when FO3 has swearing and it's pretty gory. I can't even make a judgement of the rest of the post because i don't see what you're getting at with your means.
That's because you prolly didn't play the first two FOs. The role of that girl in FO3 turned into a ghoul is ridiculous. They tried very hard on making it funny, but it is just childish. And it is not just because you throw a rock in an enemy's hand and his HEAD explodes it is gory. That's just that's just gratuite and nonsense. On other hand, I liked New Vegas. Still just a shadow of the former sarcastic glory of previous FO. Because the dev team was formed basically by former FO devs. And anyone that played previous FO will agree with me that FO3 is really dumbed down. And what's the point of this thread? Just some thoughts.
but at least if it had been a bethesda game from the beginning it would have been out 10 years ago...
Really have no clue what the hell that's all about... for me Fallout 3 is one of, if not THE best game I've ever played. Was the first post meant to be funny or just a piss take? Cause I am confused to hell...
I've played Fallout 1, 2 and tactics (completed 2, not completed 1) And I wouldn't say it's dumbed down as such, more that it's adapted. If they made a game identical to FO 1/2 just with shiny graphics, I honestly don't think it would work. Having said that the sarcasm and black humour is almost entirely gone.
I'm mainly favourable towards Bethesda, despite how badly they managed to fudge Oblivion. They have real talent and potential (previously realised in Morrowind). The main thing they have to get past is their wooden-as-a-plank AI, their uncanny valley NPCs and their horribly underbudgeted voice acting. Fallout 3 was almost as bad an offender for these as Oblivion. Anyway, yeah, if there's one thing Bethesda will never do proficiently, it's reckless fun. But that's okay, since they seem to know it and they don't try. As for the depiction of them as moneygrabbing executive idiots...you lost me. Maybe you were thinking of EA
Or Activision. Or anyone, really. Every developer and every publisher is out there to make money. Maybe they don't want to make money as badly, and maybe they want to make good games in the process, but the bottom line is that they are in it to profit. It all starts at the most basic level: the guy sitting at the desk. Regardless of his love for making fun and memorable games he will still have bills to pay when he gets home. The profitability of a developer's game directly relates to the employees' job security, making the ambitious and experimental game you envision is lot harder to do when it's followed by a trip to the unemployment office. Every step up from there just gets more and more distant from the game and more and more about running a business. It is, effectively, an executive level employee's job to make more money for the company.
I played the first ones, although briefly, I got bored. Liked the humour somewhat. FO3 and Oblivion is but a fraction of what they could have been, but I still have some trust in the Bethesda team and haven't been able to get rid of the hard on I got when the first teaser for Skyrim hit.
Of course every single game released could always be better, nothing's ever perfect cause it would never ever be released. Fallout 3 and New Vegas are both absolutely fantastic if you like the FPSRPG genre and put some time into it. Sure it's not for everyone... but you want retarded bad face shots? Go play Oblivion. Lol.
