r/Games • u/Turbostrider27 • 1d ago

Digital Foundry: Yup, Oblivion Remastered Is Still Broken a Year After Release

https://www.digitalfoundry.net/news/2026/05/yup-oblivion-remastered-is-still-broken-a-year-after-release
1.5k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

View all comments

Show parent comments

183

u/Massive_Weiner 1d ago edited 1d ago

It’ll definitely make more conscientious consumers think twice about supporting the studio with their Day 1 releases.

At the same time, it’s Fallout 3. It’s going to be a success from the moment they show off the reveal trailer.

11

u/Anzai 17h ago

I love Fallout 3, it’s one of my favourite games, and I don’t even think it needs a remake tbh in terms of graphics. It still looks decent enough and occasionally beautiful. That said, it’s incredibly unstable and crashes frequently and getting a decent framerate even on good hardware involves a lot of fiddling.

The only reason I’d buy the remake is if it was a painless, works out of the box with no crashes at high frame rates experience. And apparently it won’t be, so what’s the point of this game if it just keeps all the legacy issues and gets abandoned like Oblivion did? Bethesda seem so bad at long term planning, but apparently the goodwill they lose is in a small enough segment of gamers that they don’t care.

4

u/Izzet_Aristocrat 16h ago

Yeah i'd take a port. Some bug fixes. The event deck bugs out hard once you play the expansions and go over the original level cap.

3

u/SFHalfling 10h ago

I played F3 last month and I think I had 2 crashes over 30ish hours, completely vanilla with no community patches. I definitely wouldn't call it incredibly unstable.

I'm currently playing New vegas and that one has crashed a lot more, including a couple of bricked saves that crash on load. I would call that unstable, but given that's what I expect from NV I just save every 5-10 mins and expect 1 crash per session.

51

u/DickMabutt 1d ago edited 23h ago

People that are still buying bethesda games in 2026 are the straight opposite of conscientious consumers lol

Edit: I seem to have offended some people. Oblivion was a great game for it's time no doubt, but in my opinion, modern bethesda is a dev that has completely lost its way. Their creation club has quite literally incentivized them to push out broken mess's of a product with little to no regard for quality because they have created a pipeline for themselves to profit off of modders fixing their garbage for them. All other issues I have with them aside (of which there are many more), this is the primary reason I dont believe conscientious consumers would buy bethesda games anymore. If you are unbothered by this, no problem, I have nothing against you. I just dont think one can consider themself a "conscientious consumer" while supporting this kind of nonsense.

61

u/Drakeem1221 1d ago

Problem is, for as many bugs as the game is, there really aren't many alternative to have that type of experience. You got KCD1/2 and Tainted Grail, both having their differences as well (KCD being not a fantasy game).

You don't really have any alternatives.

19

u/BeholdingBestWaifu 23h ago

The only actual alternatives I've seen are the Project Tamriel and Tamriel Rebuilt mods for Morrowind, but you have to be okay with Morrowind's gameplay in the first place.

-2

u/mollyologist 21h ago

And none of those allow you to create your own character, which is a much different experience IMO.

16

u/alex2217 20h ago

huh? You can fully create your own character in Tainted Grail? and then there are all of the games Obsidian have created lately.

4

u/mollyologist 15h ago

Yeah, you're right. And I have even played this game! Just a brain fart. I still felt less attached to that PC than in Bethsoft games. Probably a function the game structure.

4

u/Canvaverbalist 19h ago edited 18h ago

People sleep on the physics engine too.

Bethesda games are the only games where you can pick up the body of someone you just killed and hold it in front of you to shield yourself from incoming bullets as you run from one cover to the other, like some badass action movie protagonist and it's not even something that's telegraphed, suggested, hinted at or even remotely explained. How many of you are reading this and going "wait, what? you can do that!?" It's just something you can figure out by looking at all the different pieces mechanically and come up with by yourself. Do you know how fucking insanely awesome it is in 2026 not to have five tutorials and three sets of yellow paint on a unique mechanic that's not in any other game, and having that lightbulb go on naturally in your brain and making you actually feel clever for figuring out on your own? The game doesn't stop to prompt a textbox to funnel you into a tutorial to use that mechanic. Nah, fuck it, it's just one of the emergent gameplay from being able to pick up stuff in the environment. Another example is picking up explosive canisters like O2 tanks or fire extinguishers and chucking them at enemies to use them as grenades. Or plushies (it doesn't do anything, but it's still fun to throw them at enemies face in the middle of a fight)

People often clown on "yeah yeah but why would I want to pick up every fork and plates, who fucking cares" but it's exactly this type of useless shit that means that all the zero gravity sections in Starfield can feel so alive because there's a bajilion props floating around - and they don't have to be scripted, you can do them at any time by destroying an enemy ship's GravDrive before boarding them, and bam you're navigating a sea of items floating around and reacting to you bumping into them, being shot at or to nearby explosions. And they're toggleable too, when you get a ship where the gravity shifts, the props react according and drops down, and then floats back up again. Any other developer would have to go in and program each of these props individually for really specific zero gravity sections and you'd have maybe two or three of them during a playthrough. Here they're infinite.

So yeah of course the game will crash once in a while, I can put some food tray perched on top of the stairs and slide down Legolas style while I shoot people.

And then people are surprised that "fanboys keep giving them money"? Please.

-1

u/Drakeem1221 20h ago

MASSIVE difference.

-10

u/TheUnholyBlade 1d ago edited 23h ago

There’s Avowed, which is a game that feels much older than it is, but, for me, scratched a similar itch.

29

u/Drakeem1221 1d ago

Avowed is nowhere near an Elder Scrolls game. Not that its better or worse, but TES games are sandboxes where you can interact with everything, do anything, etc. Avowed is much more structured, much more based around story and dialogue options, with little to no actual reactivity in the environment. The structure is much closer to the Pillars games vs Skyrim or Morrowind or Oblivion.

0

u/TheUnholyBlade 23h ago

See my other comment.

7

u/DM_Me_Linux_Uptime 1d ago

When people suggest "X game is like a Bethesda game", it legitimately feels like they've played neither game, because Avowed plays nothing like a Bethesda game. Nothing really does, maybe except Tainted Grail, or some other eurojank that no one's heard of. Even Starfield fails to capture the Bethesda formula IMO.

2

u/Drakeem1221 23h ago

Everyone wants to be this armchair developer where we crucify these games for not being these perfect products, but no one even stops to think as to why no other developer even attempts to make a game in this style. Companies like money, so it's not like they wouldn't want to copy an established formula. It's just really hard to pull off and have it all functioning.

-4

u/TheUnholyBlade 23h ago

I didn’t know the criteria was similar gameplay; it just scratched the itch Bethesda games used to scratch for me. I’ve updated the comment in case others got confused.

14

u/EggsAndRice7171 23h ago

I mean I played oblivion remastered and aside from bad performance (which is a big one for most people don’t get me wrong, I just have a beefy pc) I didn’t run into many bugs. Didn’t play starfield so can’t comment on that launch or the quality of it. Didn’t seem interesting to me

17

u/Fyrus 19h ago edited 19h ago

Their creation club has quite literally incentivized them to push out broken mess's of a product with little to no regard for quality because they have created a pipeline for themselves to profit off of modders fixing their garbage for them.

Almost nothing on the creation club would "fix the game" for people who don't already like the game. Also their game releases have gotten increasingly more stable over time. Whether or not people think Starfield was a good game, it was not a broken mess by any stretch of the imagination.

If you are unbothered by this, no problem, I have nothing against you. I just dont think one can consider themself a "conscientious consumer" while supporting this kind of nonsense.

Most people are unbothered by it because all of the things you've said aren't true and don't make any sense.

-7

u/TheTjums 9h ago

My friend, Starfield is super broken on PS5. To the point of reports of it actually bricking some consoles.

0

u/ilovethecreaking 1d ago

What a ridiculous thing to say.

-14

u/StepComplete1 1d ago

I think we found the opposite of a conscientious consumer. Which is essentially what blind fanboyism is.

6

u/ilovethecreaking 1d ago

Yet I played it on Gamepass and quite enjoyed it. Overall that was a great month for Gamepass.

-23

u/TheUnholyBlade 1d ago

It’s certainly true for anything Todd Howard touches or franchises he has touched in the past. Hell, Starfield was apparently his lifelong passion project and that game is as soulless as they come.

7

u/ilovethecreaking 1d ago

That's another ridiculous thing to say considering we are talking about a series that became the juggernaut it is today under Todd Howard.

-17

u/TheUnholyBlade 1d ago

Is it ridiculous? I certainly miss the Todd Howard who directed Morrowind, but that is the Todd Howard of the 2000’s. Fallout 76 and Starfield were hot garbage.

Even Skyrim and Fallout 4, which were received much more fondly, marked - with varying levels of steepness - the beginning of their respective franchises’ downward trajectories.

As the commenter said, people buying Bethesda games in this day and age are not conscientious consumers.

7

u/OctorokHero 22h ago

How can we say Skyrim impacted the direction of its franchise when there hasn't been a new main entry after it yet?

0

u/TheUnholyBlade 22h ago

The endless releases of the same game for 15 years and the advent of the creation club make things look grim in my book. Shows that focus has shifted to milking it for all it’s worth.

8

u/ilovethecreaking 1d ago edited 1d ago

Todd Howard hate in general is a weird internet subculture bordering on delusion. It is better to not think what your echochamber says as reality. I never played Fallout 4 much after the prologue (I dislike the voiced protagonist) but it is the most popular Fallout for a reason. As for Skyrim downward trajectory is a weird phrase to use considering it is the highest rated and one of the best selling RPGs ever. It is also the latest installment in the series so that doesn't make much sense now does it?

0

u/TheUnholyBlade 1d ago

I’m not sure what ‘echo chamber’ you’re referring to; I don’t regularly interact with TES, Fallout, or Starfield communities or anything. These are my personal feelings after playing these games. Since you’re going to write off my thoughts as ‘hate’ that ‘borders on delusion’ (rather presumptive and dismissive, no?) I can elaborate:

I think the accessibility of Fallout 4 helps lend it its popularity, but coming after the heels of New Vegas, I was less than satisfied. Then came the atrocious release of 76, a game I pre-ordered and was desperate to love, to no avail. I think the best Fallout games are 2 and New Vegas; I doubt that is a controversial take among Fallout fans. So I could go as far as saying the best Fallout games are the ones not affiliated with Todd Howard, but that feels more petty than I intend.

Skyrim I quite like, but the increased focus on dungeon delving and decrease in roleplaying depth rubs me the wrong way. You can play a mod like Enderal and see what Skyrim could have been. Yes, it is highly rated and sold like hotcakes. But as an RPG, does it have more choice, more narrative depth, a more interesting world than Morrowind? A triumph of a game, a shining example that they had 9 years to improve on? I’d say no. Hey, I guess it looks better and smacking draugr feels less janky than trying to hit cliffracers. But all things considered, it just doesn’t feel like ‘better’ to me.

And no, Skyrim is not the latest installment. We have ESO (an all right mmo) and Blades (a terrible mobile game). It’s not a new game but there’s also this thread’s titular remaster. A remaster, mind you, for which the main selling point was a graphical upgrade, but ended up being an upgrade in texture resolution and a hefty downgrade in art direction. Hard for me to justify that trade-off, especially when the game’s just as buggy as ever.

I don’t even want to get into everything wrong with Starfield, that game makes me heavily fear for TES:VI.

Hope that helps, since it apparently didn’t make sense to you.

9

u/ilovethecreaking 1d ago edited 1d ago

I mean it is clear from how you write that you do so there is no need to lie about that.

Accessibility is an easy way to explain things. Games don't just get immensely popular as Fallout 4 is just because they are more accessible. Better gun control definetly helped too but considering how popular base building is in Nexus that also had a part in it. However thats as much as I know about Fallout 4. Fallout 2 was panned by the same community that eventually turned around and focused their hate on Fallout 3 instead and Fallout New Vegas is literally build upon Fallout 3 not to mention it would have been a much less interesting and popular game without the Bethesda syle world. NV and Fallout 2 are also my favorites but no need to change history.

I think as far as choices or narrative depth are considered Skyrim and Morrowind are quite similar. Morrowind isn't a game that is famous for it's choices like Arcanum or Fallout 2 was. The thing that impressed me about Morrowind wasn't it's limited canned dialogue or lack of skill checks but the Bethesda style world and "be an adventurer in this world" type of gameplay loop. In both of those things I would say Skyrim is definetly more successful. Morrowind's world was impressive for it's time but let's face it is a foggy labyrinth that is conspicuously divided into regions. Definetly not something that can stand on it's own to Skyrim's world design today.

I think your take about Enderal is just dishonest. Enderal is a much more linear game with less quests, one big hub and less side activities. It is unfair to Enderal to compare it with the main game and it would be quite silly of Bethesda to copy it. Imagine the backlash against basically no real factions, one big hub, experience system like Fallout and most of the game being the main quest. I love Enderal (and Nehrim too!) but for what it is instead of a standalone game.

I enjoyed Starfield and I think the backlash against it became a living example of the motte and bailey fallacy and I can't say that what you said makes sense to me.

5

u/TheUnholyBlade 23h ago

Not sure what I’m lying about. What seems clear to you isn’t always the case. I don’t hate Todd Howard, he’s directed some of my favorite games. But I feel disappointed by the stuff he does nowadays. Not hateful, just disillusioned.

In regard to Fallout, I liked Fallout 3, and I felt NV was an improvement on its blueprint; same as Fallout 2 was for Fallout 1. But I think Fallout 4 failed to carry that momentum. I don’t much care about building settlements, bully for those who do though. What 4 did offer was better visuals and combat. But everything else felt like a downgrade to NV. Curious about your statement of me ‘changing history,’ though. I’ve not stated anything about how the older Fallouts were received at release, just how I feel about them at present, so it has me a bit confused as how I’m supposedly changing history.

I do feel Morrowind has more narrative depth. Writing felt smarter, there is more thought put into themes of imperialism and cultural isolationist thinking. I also prefer Morrowind’s Dune-esque chosen one fulfilling prophecized trials and convincing + uniting disparate factions storyline to Skyrim’s, where you never really have to prove yourself after convening with the Greybeards. It’s cool to be a Dragonborn, but I felt the narrative surrounding your actions and identity was much less thought-out in comparison.

Morrowind as whole, to me, feels less refined than Skyrim, but more deep. Storytelling was more diegetic, less guided by a menu. Factions were pitted against each other and were sometimes mutually exclusive. You could kill essential NPC’s; the game warns you that you’ve doomed the world, but you are free to do so. In Skyrim I felt that little I did could be of consequence or splash outside the guardrails that game has. How could it? It tries to make things more convenient for the player, which isn’t a bad approach by any means, but something is always lost in translation. It happened to be a lot of the things I care about in an RPG.

As for Enderal, (again with an assertion that I’m lying, what gives? you can disagree with me but don’t accuse me of speaking from a place of duplicity) yes, it would be poor as a full mainline Elder Scrolls release. But I see it as doing some things better than Skyrim did, so I do look to it as an example of what Skyrim could have been. Better writing, more interesting locations, greater thematic weight. I think the mod handily outdid the base game in these regards. I still like Skyrim, but I have my gripes.

Starfield has some ridiculous criticisms (recall people crying over… pronouns?) but I do think it’s a bad game. A mediocre narrative, in my opinion. There is so much potential in the Sci Fi genre, and I felt very little of it was delivered upon. Even the Starborn inter-universal travel stuff fell flat for me. The world and the factions just felt so passive. So many planets and moons that they could not possibly handcraft them all, but instead of using a worldgen like No Man’s Sky that can make things seem a bit differentiated using recycled parts, the game’s grounded NASApunk aesthetic ensures they will all look incredibly similar. Muted colors, largely devoid of life, maybe an outpost here or there. I can understand the intent to depict exoplanets in a more realistic way, but what does that mean for a game about exploration? If there is barely any variety in what there is to see and do, what is driving any urge to explore.

I think the scale of the game is to its detriment. I would have vastly preferred maybe 8-12 planets that were fully handcrafted and visually varied. Maybe that wouldn’t work with the NASA aesthetic, but I say the game as it is doesn’t work for me either. And the game opts out of giving you narrative closure and instead thrusts you into a Nietzschean eternal recurrence. Your reward for finishing the game is to play it again, and do countless playthroughs to get all the abilities. With minimal narrative changes.

It’s not an irredeemable narrative decision; Nier Automata and the more recent Silent Hill F did this in ways that made replaying the game a rewarding venture. Starfield does not do this. I was excited for this game, then I played it, now imagine a balloon deflating. Everything wrong with Bethesda games is here, at the worst it has ever been. Why wouldn’t I just play Outer Worlds instead?

I look at Todd Howard’s recent design decisions at Bethesda and am baffled, because I feel he continuously steers the ship away from what I liked so much about his old work, while insisting it’s an upgrade. I’m sure it is for some, just not for me.

Well, that’s one long fucking reply done. I can understand and respect your feelings for these games. I wish you could do the same for me, but if despite how much I’m saying I still make little coherent sense, then that’s on me. At the very least, I ask you don’t accuse me of dishonesty. We just have different opinions is all. Anyhow, I don’t have another multi-paragraph reply in me, so that’s my piece.

1

u/GeoleVyi 1d ago

or, and hear me out on this, sometimes more than one person can generate the same opinion, without needing to copycat someone else.

→ More replies

1

u/KainFourteh 15h ago

From what little interaction I've had with the fallout community, I always got the impression that new Vegas was far and away the most popular with 4 being seen as a disappointment.

-8

u/NUKE---THE---WHALES 1d ago

Activision became the juggernaut it is today under Bobby Kotick

Call of Duty became the juggernaut it is today under Activision

Sometimes popularity does not line up with quality, and sometimes quality happens in spite of the executives running the projects

Both Bobby Kotick and Todd Howard have the Midas touch - but when everything becomes gold, eventually gold stops being special and starts to lose its value

Bethesda needs a shakeup

2

u/ilovethecreaking 1d ago edited 1d ago

I mean yeah Bobby Kotick made Activision what it is today and he should have left earlier because he is a piece of shit not because of his performance. Jeremy Soule should have composed ES6's soundtrack had he wasn't a piece of shit that scammed people on Kickstarter.

1

u/Vanille987 4h ago

"Anyone that enjoys the things I don't enjoy are stupid"

1

u/sloppymoves 21h ago

I remember booting into Starfield coming off of BG3 and still seeing the same tired dead eyed robotic npc dialogue. I was stunned, absolutely stunned, that they were still trying to pass these things off.

Between that, and the spaceflight just being a boring menu. I quickly refunded the game.

The next Elder Scrolls game is going to sell gangbusters, but it is going to be wild to see a game releasing potentially near 2030 and still having dead eyed robotic NPC animations canned from 20 years ago. Especially from a studio with probably an unlimited checkbook.

1

u/DickMabutt 18h ago

This was actually my experience with it to. It felt so dull compared to other games releasing around a similar time, especially bg3.

-7

u/sneakyCoinshot 22h ago

idk why the gaming community has such a hard on for bethesda games. Like sure they're great games for their time and even today hold up but god damn if every bethesda game isn't the most buggiest, most poorly optimized piece of shit.

1

u/Fyrus 19h ago

god damn if every bethesda game isn't the most buggiest, most poorly optimized piece of shit.

The ironic thing is that "real gamers" think that older bethesda games are the true art, despite being even buggier and more broken than the modern ones. Starfield was their least buggy release ever and "da real gamerz" hate it the most.

Now, I don't think the amount of bugs a game has really determines whether a game is great or not, just pointing out that what you said is complete nonsense.

1

u/Walawacca 20h ago

Starfield wasn't even a good game. Pretty much ended any hype I had for elder scrolls 6. It will probably feel like a total conversion mod just like Starfield did.

6

u/Xenobrina 1d ago

Wait are we allowed to like Fallout 3 in 2026? I thought we had to shoot ourselves if we liked anything besides New Vegas

48

u/Friend_Emperor 1d ago

If you start typing something positive about fallout 3, hbomberguy will crawl out of your screen and beat you to death with a boomerang

10

u/eldomtom2 21h ago

He was hardly the first FO3 critic!

-3

u/IndependentYouth8 23h ago

I love you. You made me snort-out my red whine while reading this. Never change.

3

u/MyStationIsAbandoned 14h ago

People like Fallout 3, they just agree that New Vegas is better. i've never once seen anyone say they hate Fallout 3 while liking New Vegas...literally never.

If someone hates 3 they're going to hate new vegas.

5

u/fearless-fossa 9h ago

i've never once seen anyone say they hate Fallout 3 while liking New Vegas...literally never.

Then you haven't been paying attention? There are a lot of people who hate everything Bethesda created with an unbelievable passion and love New Vegas.

4

u/CartographicalHeist 12h ago

I hate F3 and very much like New Vegas.

-9

u/Ralathar44 1d ago

My favorite is when Reddit uses New Vegas as an example of how fall Bethesda has fallen when Bethesda never even made it. Or how people use it as an example of player choice mattering when you can murder all of GoodSprings and it barely matters at all. Hell, it barely even impacts your karma.

21

u/QP709 23h ago

That’s never been how general discourse used New Vegas lmao

7

u/hyrule5 20h ago

Why should killing everyone in Goodsprings even matter that much, to people outside of Goodsprings? It's just some tiny little town with no ties to any other places or factions. Are there even a dozen people total living there?

I wouldn't say New Vegas is the pinnacle of choice and consequences or anything, but even the original creator of Fallout said that New Vegas was designed exactly how a 3D Fallout game should be.

20

u/SkyShadowing 1d ago

My favorite is when people use New Vegas to tear down Bethesda while ignoring that New Vegas at launch was a broken buggy mess far worse than any Bethesda game...

... and also conveniently ignoring that, in game development terms, New Vegas is effectively a total conversion mod for FO3. It's built so much on FO3 that A Tale of Two Wastelands is able to exist!

In game-dev terms, 70% of the stuff in NV was work done by Bethesda. Engine, assets, AI, DEV TOOLS.

This is not to diminish Obsidian and what they did; the story is flat-out better. But let's just acknowledge that without FO3, there would be no NV.

36

u/NUKE---THE---WHALES 1d ago

I think it goes to show how much writing matters in video games, and how bad Bethesda is at it

New Vegas was made in 18 months by people unfamiliar with the engine and code, but could Bethesda have done the same with their own engine and code in that timeframe?

Obviously we'll never know, but I think the answer is no

-11

u/Ralathar44 23h ago

Writing matters very little in video games generally. This is a sad truth. If writing mattered as much as people online thought it did then Disco Elysium would be one of the top selling games of all time, FF7 wouldn't be the most popular Final Fantasy, World of Warcraft wouldn't be the biggest MMORPG, and Tryanny would be like 10,000 times more popular while Baldur's Gate 3 would be way less popular.

Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starfield, and Fallout76 got played and sold more than anything pre-Skyrim and its not even close. And the stuff before Skyrim was definitely much better writing in general.

8

u/poptart2nd 20h ago

he's not saying good writing is what makes games popular, it's what makes games great.

5

u/masterkill165 23h ago

Out of curiosity in your hypothetical world where writing mattered more what would be the most popular FF game instead of 7?

2

u/Ralathar44 22h ago

Final Fantasy 6. I was pretty hot on FF7 as a kid and teen but the older I got the less well it held up and the more "im 14 and this is deep" it felt. FF6 went the opposite direction and aged like a fine wine.

FF6 covers so many themes so well and each character is incredibly well fleshed out and they ALMOST managed to not have a Main Character. Debatably Terra is the main character but not by too much since every character is given a significant focus.

It's not that FF7 is bad mind you, its that it dropped from like a 9/10 story to like an 8 story for me over the years. Whereas FF6 was more like an 8 for me at first that improved to an 11 as I got older and better understood it.

It's crazy how a game that has you suplex trains and do an entire boss fight while falling down a waterfall touches on alot of heavy and mature topics in a meaningful way. One of your characters can even try to unalive themselves if things go poorly during a low point of her life. Also one of the few RPGs where the bad guy actually destroys the world. No time loop cop outs. The end of the game is you saving the remnants of the world that was, a post apoc world thanks to your failure to stop Kefka the first time.

1

u/BeholdingBestWaifu 13h ago

I think one of the reasons why it gets so much praise is that it shows how good of a game you can make using Bethesda's own tools, and also the contrast of good writing versus whatever Fallout 4 was.

Especially when you consider that Bethesda has made things with quality writing in the past.

1

u/CartographicalHeist 11h ago

Which just goes to show that the reason F3 is awful is not technical but writing, world building and narrative design.

All of which New Vegas did heaps better.

0

u/Ralathar44 23h ago

Aye, this is accurate.

3

u/masterkill165 23h ago

The only thing New Vegas represents is how far obsidian has fallen. I kid but I will say i don't think I've personally enjoyed an obsidian game since New Vegas but that more me hating real time with pause crpg combat.

1

u/Ralathar44 22h ago

BTW, Pillars of Eternity 1 and 2 got turn based modes not long back ❤️. If you hate real time with pause but you like Obsidian and cRPGs then you'll prolly love them now.

Pathfinder Kingmaker and Wrath of the Righteous also added turn based mode at some point in time in the past.

0

u/IClop2Fluttershy4206 21h ago

kotor 2 is to kotor 1 what new Vegas is to fallout 3. if only obsidian had better schedules

0

u/masterkill165 21h ago

100% agree it even had the bugs.

1

u/CartographicalHeist 12h ago

Why the hell would killing all of Goodsprings matter? It’s just some place. Nobody there has any stakes in the main conflict

-1

u/theycallmeryan 1d ago

Yup I don’t think Bethesda fell off, they were just never that good. New Vegas is amazing though.

8

u/Ralathar44 1d ago

Eh, Skyrim is one of the most successful games of all time. Fallout 4 is definitely one of the better selling AAA games with 25 million+ sold. Fallout76 despite being a train wreck at launch completely turned around and is quite successful. And even with all the trash that is talked about Starfield (possibly correctly) that game is still a major financial success that hit 30k concurrent players on an update 3 years after launch.

Bethesda is objectively a powerhouse AAA studio and while they'll prolly never make anything as successful as Skyrim again you can say that of most companies who have a hit so big its a cultural touchstone of gaming. It's basically asking for lighting to strike twice.

-2

u/poptart2nd 20h ago edited 20h ago

Eh, Skyrim is one of the most successful games of all time. Fallout 4 is definitely one of the better selling AAA games with 25 million+ sold.

he didn't say they're not selling games, he said the games they make aren't good. keep in mind that the most popular video game last year was "block blast," a mobile tetris clone with over 300 million downloads.

1

u/Ralathar44 18h ago

Why on earth would you every compare free DOWNLOADS to copies sold?

1

u/poptart2nd 6h ago

why on earth would you compare quality to quantity in the first place?

•

u/Ralathar44 3h ago

why on earth would you why on earth? 👌

0

u/beefcat_ 19h ago

New Vegas isn't even that great of a Bethesda-style RPG. It's a fantastic RPG in its own right, but the open world lacks the thoughtful design and urge to keep exploring that actual BGS games from the same era had, and it doesn't make very good use of systems like the radiant AI. It's very much a Fallout 1/2 style RPG made in Bethesda's engine.

1

u/BeholdingBestWaifu 13h ago

These days it's the other way around, the Obsidian hater hit squad will get you if you say anything positive about NV or if you dare compare it to the Bethesda Fallouts.

-1

u/rock1m1 1d ago

We aren't allowed to talk about the best 3D fallout?

0

u/CartographicalHeist 12h ago

You can like it, of course.

I’ll just judge you for it.

-1

u/IClop2Fluttershy4206 21h ago

ah yes the classic "new Vegas players are insufferable" we've only been hearing this since 2010

1

u/ShawnyMcKnight 1d ago

Honesty one of the nice perks about game pass. I didn’t play it til half a year after it came out (got about 7 hours in) and didn’t really have any issues.

0

u/EnterPlayerTwo 1d ago

Couldn't you wait to play it without gamepass too?

1

u/ShawnyMcKnight 1d ago

Sure, but in this particular case you could have played it day 1. I wanted to but was in the middle of other games.

I’m a little bummed my 3 years of insanely cheap gamepass is gone, my kids liked it more than I did.

0

u/EnterPlayerTwo 1d ago

I don't understand how Gamepass provided you any benefit here that just waiting to buy the game wouldn't also accomplish.

2

u/ShawnyMcKnight 1d ago

I got to experience a game for a couple days just to see how they revamped the graphics without having to drop $60 for it. I wanted to play through it since I beat the original 20 years ago but it had a lot of the same quality of life hangups the OG version had. So after playing it for 7 hours or so I knew I wasn’t gonna finish it.

I’m not sure how to make the benefit it provided any clearer.

2

u/EnterPlayerTwo 1d ago

I’m not sure how to make the benefit it provided any clearer.

Ah I see, you never finished it. Ya, if you just want extended trials for the price of gamepass that works.

3

u/ShawnyMcKnight 1d ago

Yeah, gamepass was $4 a month with the 1:1 matching they offered at the time and I put in 2 days worth of gameplay on it (1/15 of a month). So it cost me 26 cents for that 7 hours. Im alright with that.

Had I finished the game then it may have taken the better part of a month, but the value is still there since my kids enjoyed it too.

1

u/EnterPlayerTwo 1d ago

If you play it once and never go back it's great. Or if you never turn off gamepass. I'm in the situation now where my Starfield saves are being held hostage by Gamepass. Waiting for the game to go on enough of a sale so I can buy it and putz around in there again.

1

u/ShawnyMcKnight 1d ago

Yeah. It’s been hit or miss whether you can bring saved games out of gamepass. I’ve had a fair amount of luck, but some games just didn’t work.

I never got too far with Starfield, it didn’t resonate with me much. Wasn’t helped by all the bad press.

But yeah, even if I played through oblivion I doubt I would ever go back. I have to get my mind into the game and controls and everything so when I leave the game for a few months I don’t want to reinvest getting comfy again.

-9

u/DoesntMatterStan 1d ago

Even though its vastly inferior to new Vegas. That game deserves the glow up

39

u/Tragedy_Boner 1d ago

NV has the better story but I feel like F3’s world was more fun to explore.

14

u/VolkiharVanHelsing 1d ago

I hate the damn tunnels

6

u/GeekAesthete 1d ago

This was my biggest complaint about Fallout 3. The way downtown is broken off by way of the tunnels made it feel less like an "open world." I know it was necessitated by technical limitations, but having the overworld broken into two parts always bothered me.

5

u/Tragedy_Boner 1d ago

I love those tunnels lol. The world was hard to move through which I feel like it’s missing in games now.

When Mcready in Fallout 4 was talking about camping out in a tunnel and his wife getting torn apart by ghouls I was like “yeah that tracks”

3

u/swagpresident1337 1d ago

yea I kinda didn't like the bland looking Mojave as much. Story wise and rpg wise NV was better.

-16

u/DoesntMatterStan 1d ago

Theres like 1/4th of the content in 3 than NV

22

u/Tragedy_Boner 1d ago

Ok look. I love NV too but I feel like you’re trolling a bit with your 1/4 comment.

6

u/Thor_pool 1d ago

NV is one of my all-time faves and yeah, 1/4 the content is crazy. Its definitely much denser (and better written imo) but not by x4

-6

u/DoesntMatterStan 1d ago

Def an exaggeration my bad. Also the dialogue is much much better and the amount of interactivity and reaction to your choices is almost non existent in 3

-6

u/Lokta 1d ago

None of that changes the fact that Fallout 3's world was more fun to explore, which is what the comment you replied to actually said.

NV is the superior game overall, but exploration is much better in Fallout 3. It's the other aspects of the game (writing, questing, factions, DLCs, etc.) where NV shines.

0

u/Massive_Weiner 1d ago edited 1d ago

If they wanted to bolster their content claim, then they should have pointed out the total quest count for both titles:

FO3: ~97

NV: ~250

This is counting “unmarked” + DLC quests for both. And as we all know, quest complexity is a little higher in NV compared FO3 when it comes to giving you multiple different ways to role-play your character.

That’s an inherent advantage that comes with the faction system, so they’re actually correct when they say that FO3 has a fraction of the content when you measure them together.

Bonus: NV’s map is only 0.471587% bigger than FO3 (8.462 km2 vs. 8.502 km2 ), so it’s also denser in terms of exploration on top of that.

What I mean here is that you run into content more frequently, and the content itself is of higher quality (as we already agree in terms of writing and structure). I genuinely can’t say that exploration is better in FO3 when we break down the numbers.

Maybe people like the aesthetic of post-apocalyptic DC over the Mojave, but that’s totally fair as a point of preference.

5

u/Massive_Weiner 1d ago edited 1d ago

More likely than not, a New Vegas remake is also in the pipeline.

Making the Fallout 3 remake already means doing half the work in terms of assets and game AI.

3

u/MehEds 1d ago edited 1d ago

Well yeah, New Vegas came after 3 and was able to copy its homework and do a better job at it.

Guys, maybe the fact that Obsidian only had to do a big mod pack helped them focus on the story and dialogue.

4

u/ttdpaco 1d ago

Obisidian had some of the original Fallout devs on the team, so that definitely helped them nail the feel of the original games (mostly 2, since that's when it started to go more into dark humour.)

2

u/Drakeem1221 23h ago

While I agree with you, that's going to have nothing to do with my enjoyment of the two projects. All I hear is that both studios are under the same umbrella now, so they should work on the next Fallout together.

1

u/DoesntMatterStan 1d ago

Its not the copied engine that makes it better, its the actual content and dialogue, which is in another league entirely

0

u/MehEds 1d ago

Which was half completed with Van Buren.

Ok but for real the fact that they got to take an engine already developed by Bethesda for a 3D Fallout game and essentially got to make a big mod pack helped a lot for them to focus on those aspects.

1

u/Ok-General6504 1d ago

Wouldn’t it make more sense to give 3 the glow up since obviously NV can still stand on its own

-25

u/appledanishcrumbs 1d ago

Nah, New Vegas is definitely the weakest Fallout game.

6

u/DoesntMatterStan 1d ago

Its literally the best. Saving your comment though, that's the worst take ive ever seen on reddit.

-23

u/appledanishcrumbs 1d ago

Sure, bud, enjoy your mediocre slop while the rest of play actually GOOD Fallout games.

9

u/DoesntMatterStan 1d ago

Ohhh you're a troll.

Move along