5 ms·
While others will be sarcastic (perhaps rightfully so), I think it's fair to actually point this out. Bethesda clearly doesn't do a lot of checks. Consider so
by ergothus 7y ago
While others will be sarcastic (perhaps rightfully so), I think it's fair to actually point this out. Bethesda clearly doesn't do a lot of checks. Consider some of their Fallout 76 gaffes - including have no public test server.
One does not launch an online game with an expected massive audience and just "forget" that step (which has hurt them several times already) unless utterly lack any processes and any culture that would have caught it.
Now, I know Bethesda is multiple studios and I know nothing about their operations beyond that, but when the reputation is of a company that delivers great story in notoriously buggy products, and trends don't seem to be improving, that says SOMETHING about priorities, right?
- komali2 7y agoAfter Oblivion, I'm not sure why we give Bethesda any credit. Even Oblivion was a stretch, it was incredible for the time period but still comically buggy. Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skyrim, and Fallout 4 were tremendously buggy, and if you take a step back from the "whee immersion" aspect, aren't that good RPGs. The choices are extremely limited and by the time you get to Fallout 4 insultingly so. They all pushed the envelope for explorable area, but you really had to make your own game out of it, and you really have to work at it. Skyrim is only fun for me if I load it up with hella survival mods.
- ionised 7y agoNew Vegas was actually developed by Obsidian (some of the original Fallout 1 and 2 guys), not Bethesda. Explains why it was better than Fallout 3 and 4.
- m-p-3 7y agoTo be honest, I'm still having a lot of fun with Skyrim, and it was released in 2011. It is buggy, they don't really update it anymore, but the modding community kept it alive and well and the way Bethesda treats their customers doesn't make me optimistic about the future.