3 ms·

Skyrim was a significant technical advancement of Gamebryo, not just in terms of visual quality or so forth, but also in terms of what was possible with the eng

Skyrim was a significant technical advancement of Gamebryo, not just in terms of visual quality or so forth, but also in terms of what was possible with the engine. Fallout 4 was a minor upgrade and could have easily been a total conversion mod for Skyrim - there was no innovation and it did nothing new. Irrespective of whether people enjoyed that re-skinned Skyrim, it was a blatant cash-grab. The argument has nothing to do with anybody enjoying the game, a metric that I did not mention at all in my comment, it has to do with a growing trend where Bethesda has been doing the absolute bare minimum to cash in on their fans' good will.

noncoml 6y ago
You do understand that the quality of game engine is completely orthogonal to how good a game is, right? For some reason you believe that your opinion about the game is universally true, while the opinion on the other is personal preference. You are just trying to prove that vanilla flavor is universally better than chocolate. Edit: Retracting "Borderline bigotry."
- codezero 6y ago
  They left a comment on the internet - I don’t think it’s civil to conflate it to being universal - why not explore their opinion, or just accept that de gustibus non est disputandum? Also, what if vanilla could be proven to be universally better? That’d be cool, how could one go about doing that? Probably either: eliminate the supply of chocolate world wide, or spend billions marketing vanilla... Probably lots of ways to get a universal sentiment with the right levers! One ding in chocolate: there’s no chocolate coca-cola... or is there? I should google that :) There do seeeeeem to be more vanilla flavored mass market colas than chocolate, but that’s very much cherry picking. A ding for vanilla, I’m not sure if it’s ever eaten alone in any meaningful way, but I dunno, I’d have to think about it more.
- zamalek 6y ago
  > quality of game engine is completely orthogonal to how good a game is, right? That's exactly my point. I haven't once conflated the two, all of your comments have.
  - codezero 6y ago
    I’m feeling like, during the lockdown, we need to have some kind of shit throwing HN comment competition to get all the angst out of our systems. First rule: make every assumption about the other commenter’s intent. Second rule: never actually directly respond to the other commenter. It’s like code golf, but to get toxic online interactions out of our systems in a controlled environment. What do you think? :)
    - zamalek 6y ago
      Sign me up :)
    - noncoml 6y ago
      I don't see it as shit throwing or being toxic. Apologies if I came across like this. I am just trying to argue about something that really doesn't matter for the sake of making arguments
      - codezero 6y ago
        Appreciate you saying this. Consider that your argument counterparts don’t see it this way. Are you saying you’ll sign up for my weird internet argument championships?
  - noncoml 6y ago
    > That's exactly my point. I haven't once conflated the two, all of your comments have. How? The disagreement is if Fallout 4 was a moneygrab or not. Is that correct? According to you it was because it "Skyrim was a significant technical advancement of Gamebryo, not just in terms of visual quality or so forth, but also in terms of what was possible with the engine. Fallout 4 was a minor upgrade and could have easily been a total conversion mod for Skyrim - there was no innovation and it did nothing new." Correct me if I am wrong but isn't this "conflatng" the effort gone into a game, and specifically the engine, with the quality of the game?
    - zamalek 6y ago
ehnto 6y ago
I think settlement building was a pretty big step for the engine/gameplay.
amatecha 6y ago
That was my big problem with Fallout 3, it felt like an Oblivion total conversion... I had difficulty enjoying it because it still "felt" like Oblivion in so many ways, to me :(

noncoml 6y ago

You do understand that the quality of game engine is completely orthogonal to how good a game is, right? For some reason you believe that your opinion about the game is universally true, while the opinion on the other is personal preference. You are just trying to prove that vanilla flavor is universally better than chocolate. Edit: Retracting "Borderline bigotry."

codezero 6y ago
They left a comment on the internet - I don’t think it’s civil to conflate it to being universal - why not explore their opinion, or just accept that de gustibus non est disputandum? Also, what if vanilla could be proven to be universally better? That’d be cool, how could one go about doing that? Probably either: eliminate the supply of chocolate world wide, or spend billions marketing vanilla... Probably lots of ways to get a universal sentiment with the right levers! One ding in chocolate: there’s no chocolate coca-cola... or is there? I should google that :) There do seeeeeem to be more vanilla flavored mass market colas than chocolate, but that’s very much cherry picking. A ding for vanilla, I’m not sure if it’s ever eaten alone in any meaningful way, but I dunno, I’d have to think about it more.
zamalek 6y ago
> quality of game engine is completely orthogonal to how good a game is, right? That's exactly my point. I haven't once conflated the two, all of your comments have.
- codezero 6y ago
  I’m feeling like, during the lockdown, we need to have some kind of shit throwing HN comment competition to get all the angst out of our systems. First rule: make every assumption about the other commenter’s intent. Second rule: never actually directly respond to the other commenter. It’s like code golf, but to get toxic online interactions out of our systems in a controlled environment. What do you think? :)
  - zamalek 6y ago
    Sign me up :)
  - noncoml 6y ago
    I don't see it as shit throwing or being toxic. Apologies if I came across like this. I am just trying to argue about something that really doesn't matter for the sake of making arguments
    - codezero 6y ago
      Appreciate you saying this. Consider that your argument counterparts don’t see it this way. Are you saying you’ll sign up for my weird internet argument championships?
- noncoml 6y ago
  > That's exactly my point. I haven't once conflated the two, all of your comments have. How? The disagreement is if Fallout 4 was a moneygrab or not. Is that correct? According to you it was because it "Skyrim was a significant technical advancement of Gamebryo, not just in terms of visual quality or so forth, but also in terms of what was possible with the engine. Fallout 4 was a minor upgrade and could have easily been a total conversion mod for Skyrim - there was no innovation and it did nothing new." Correct me if I am wrong but isn't this "conflatng" the effort gone into a game, and specifically the engine, with the quality of the game?
  - zamalek 6y ago

ehnto 6y ago

I think settlement building was a pretty big step for the engine/gameplay.

amatecha 6y ago

That was my big problem with Fallout 3, it felt like an Oblivion total conversion... I had difficulty enjoying it because it still "felt" like Oblivion in so many ways, to me :(