this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2023
127 points (99.2% liked)

Games

32419 readers
1121 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] picassowary@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (3 children)

“Bethesda has a strong track record though” i mean… do they?

their games sell a lot of units but i can’t remember any time since morrowind that they launched a game that received widespread praise for anything other than its technical merits, and i say this as someone who still dips back into heavily modded TES games a few times a year :/

[–] radix@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Morrowind: 89 on Metacritic
Oblivion: 94
Fallout 3: 91
Skyrim: 94
Fallout 4: 84

PC scores, for consistency. There are plenty of better games out there, but most AAA studios would kill for that kind of consistently good-but-not-quite-legendary track record.

[–] picassowary@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

oh yeah the metacritic scores are good but i was referring to audience reception about characters, narrative, etc

fallout 3 in particular is a fun one because once people started beating it there was a general upswell of “what the fuck was that?” that was loud enough that we got a changed ending in DLC :)

[–] beefsack@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Morrowind scoring lower than Oblivion and Skyrim is a travesty.

[–] LetMeEatCake@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

After a certain point, scores are as much based on hype as quality.

That's not even a malicious choice, either. Hype influences our experiences and perceptions of whatever is being hyped. It's intuitively obvious that people will enjoy a good thing that they are hyped about more than a good thing that they are not hyped about. Hype is strongest just before release... which is exactly when reviewers play and assign a score to a game.

A sequel to a well received game is going to have more hype than the predecessor in most circumstances. Morrowind sold something like 5-10x the copies as Daggerfall and came about at a time when there was a lot of upheaval in the industry from a target-audience standpoint: a lot of potential Morrowind players (and reviewers) would have not played Daggerfall.

In essence, Oblivion was reviewed more positively because of the positive reception of Morrowind. The positive reception of Oblivion in turn boosted Skyrim.

This is not to say people would hate the games without the prior game before it or hype, just that there is a "hype boost" for games.

[–] Alto@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's been a while since they've actually released one of their mainline games. I don't really count TES:O and FO:76 as IIRC neither had the normal dev teams working on them.

Im cautiously optimistic about it all, but am obviously going to wait for reviews.

[–] picassowary@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the thing for me about starfield is that most of the game looks like a reskin of games i’ve already played (no man’s sky, elite dangerous) and the parts that don’t look like mainline bethesda fare but In Space, so my general vibe about starfield is pretty dismal

would be absolutely stoked for it to turn out well though. more games in space = good

[–] Transcendant@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

looks like a reskin of games i’ve already played (no man’s sky, elite dangerous) and the parts that don’t look like mainline bethesda fare but In Space

Don't threaten me with a good time!

[–] Chailles@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What exactly do you think merits a strong track record then? If a series of games consistently over the course of 20 years being highly regarded, still being played, still growing with active communities, and selling extremely well for nearly every single title you made isn't a "strong track record," then who can claim that right?

It's not even like other game franchises which "just sell a lot of units" like sports games which tend to not do anything with their formula and release the same game but worse yearly.

[–] picassowary@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

well the context was about the quality of the game and not how many units they sell, so :/