Poll: Open worlds: Bethesda or Rockstar?
- Thread starter Iwata
- Start date
I think that is the only game I had FUN going from one part of the city to the next to do a mission. GTA.....god that was boring. And Elder scroll's ....well Fast travel much?Auxiliary said:
Voted Bethesda for Oblivion and morrowind > GTA's and red dead
Bethesda and Sega do it best due to how stylish their worlds are.
Elder Scrolls is known for huge countries, chock full of many, many sidequests. Which might be to its detriment due to it having to automate certain things. The cracks begin to show when the repetition begins, but that can't be helped in worlds with hundreds of dungeons and characters and quests. Not many minigames like in GTA, but I think that'll change with Skyrim's pseudo sim systems.
Yakuza's open world is a bit more restrictive, what with having a smaller real estate and more RPG trappings than GTA, but damn if Kamurocho (and Osaka, and Okinawa) doesn't exude seamless, effortless personality and style, while being DENSE with stylish things to do. I'm 38 hours into Yakuza 2 and I'm not even finished yet. I can't quit Mahjong.
Rockstar's style has a place in this world, but I like Bethesda and Sega best. They have their irks, but for my money, they get it right precisely where it counts in an open world: in the visual style. Elder Scrolls feels like epic fantasy, storied and old. Yakuza feels like a mob tale in a seedy town full of oddballs. The last time Rockstar truly made atmosphere and style its ***** was with Red Dead Redemption, the time before it was Vice City. Which is why I find myself so disappointed with LA Noire.
LA Noire doesn't exude that noir atmosphere I so longed for. It feels like all they did was make a 1940's LA and give it GTA4's lighting. Boring. Where's the exaggeration in the artstyle? The pulp? When I think of noir I think of epic sunsets and twilights, imposing cities teeming with life that are characters in their own right, dark nights in sleazy avenues, unconventional methods from unconventional people, femme fatales waiting to put a bullet in your head in spite of having fallen helplessly in love with you, brooding pasts, trenchcoats watching the city go by them as they plot and plot...LA Noire hasn't been much of that so far. Just having old music and old buildings isn't enough. Exaggeration is where the style really comes from.
At least for me.
On Destructoid's podcast Max Scoville mentioned how it's good that it wasn't just "GTA in the 40's with Jazz..." But honestly I'm really wishing that's what I was playing right now.
Elder Scrolls is known for huge countries, chock full of many, many sidequests. Which might be to its detriment due to it having to automate certain things. The cracks begin to show when the repetition begins, but that can't be helped in worlds with hundreds of dungeons and characters and quests. Not many minigames like in GTA, but I think that'll change with Skyrim's pseudo sim systems.
Yakuza's open world is a bit more restrictive, what with having a smaller real estate and more RPG trappings than GTA, but damn if Kamurocho (and Osaka, and Okinawa) doesn't exude seamless, effortless personality and style, while being DENSE with stylish things to do. I'm 38 hours into Yakuza 2 and I'm not even finished yet. I can't quit Mahjong.
Rockstar's style has a place in this world, but I like Bethesda and Sega best. They have their irks, but for my money, they get it right precisely where it counts in an open world: in the visual style. Elder Scrolls feels like epic fantasy, storied and old. Yakuza feels like a mob tale in a seedy town full of oddballs. The last time Rockstar truly made atmosphere and style its ***** was with Red Dead Redemption, the time before it was Vice City. Which is why I find myself so disappointed with LA Noire.
LA Noire doesn't exude that noir atmosphere I so longed for. It feels like all they did was make a 1940's LA and give it GTA4's lighting. Boring. Where's the exaggeration in the artstyle? The pulp? When I think of noir I think of epic sunsets and twilights, imposing cities teeming with life that are characters in their own right, dark nights in sleazy avenues, unconventional methods from unconventional people, femme fatales waiting to put a bullet in your head in spite of having fallen helplessly in love with you, brooding pasts, trenchcoats watching the city go by them as they plot and plot...LA Noire hasn't been much of that so far. Just having old music and old buildings isn't enough. Exaggeration is where the style really comes from.
At least for me.
On Destructoid's podcast Max Scoville mentioned how it's good that it wasn't just "GTA in the 40's with Jazz..." But honestly I'm really wishing that's what I was playing right now.
This is true...but I might be liking Avalanche Studios better than Rockstar in that department too. Just Cause 2. I mean...come on.Xaio30 said:
i enjoy Red Dead Redemption and The Elder Scrolls equally. i love all of my children.
[http://s645.photobucket.com/albums/uu180/TheBitterFrost/Gaming/?action=view&current=jesussaves.jpg]
(but not gta)
[http://s645.photobucket.com/albums/uu180/TheBitterFrost/Gaming/?action=view&current=jesussaves.jpg]
(but not gta)
While I prefer Rockstar's games, from this specific point of view I prefer Bethesda's style. Their worlds just seem more... populated.
Bethesda, because their open world games have more of a plot than just walk in and kill everything forever.
Oblivion, for example, focuses mostly on story with some decent combat. Bully or GTA mostly keeps you playing just to dick around.
Not trying to insult Rockstar games, because they are fun and much larger, but there is just more to do in games like Oblivion or Fallout 3 with the added potential to dick around.
Oblivion, for example, focuses mostly on story with some decent combat. Bully or GTA mostly keeps you playing just to dick around.
Not trying to insult Rockstar games, because they are fun and much larger, but there is just more to do in games like Oblivion or Fallout 3 with the added potential to dick around.
Rockstar, no competition. Oblivion....boring, Fallout....yawn. GTA....detailed feast for the eyes, Red dead....Most immersive game world I ever had the pleasure of living in.
Well, to me it seems that Bethesda can create the better enviorment (the landscape, trees, plants, etc) while Rockstar is amazing at filling the world with beliveable people and oppertunities.Both are on equal terms in my opinion in the case of their open worlds.
Liked Fallout 3 as much as I could.....Morrowind turned me off of every Elder Scrolls game after countless swings through a monster with a melee weapon that didn't "hit" them.
GTA was neat when I was younger...same plot twist in every game takes the fun out of doing anything but running around....
...tie I guess.
GTA was neat when I was younger...same plot twist in every game takes the fun out of doing anything but running around....
...tie I guess.
Bethesda hands down. Rockstar makes fun open world games but the actual world is nothing special.
Bethesda wins with Morrowind, Oblivion and F3 alone.
Now if we were talking about the storyline then yes, Rockstar is better. Bethesda's main storylines have never been anything special.
Bethesda wins with Morrowind, Oblivion and F3 alone.
Nah, Rockstar's characters are good but they are not really part of the open world.sabercrusader said:
Now if we were talking about the storyline then yes, Rockstar is better. Bethesda's main storylines have never been anything special.
Definitely Bethseda!
There's always something to do. In Rockstar games buildings are props, in Bethseda games they're fully interactive environments.
There's always something to do. In Rockstar games buildings are props, in Bethseda games they're fully interactive environments.
The way Rockstar handles missions feels more like a set-piece outside the world: missions start and dudes randomly appear wherever they're scripted to be.
In a Bethesda game, the missions and quests feel more natural and organic to the world in which they take place.
In a Bethesda game, the missions and quests feel more natural and organic to the world in which they take place.
Bethesda takes an easy win because in their worlds every person has a name and story and their deaths actually matter whereas in Rockstar you can't de-populate a city and very few characters exist, particularly in open world.
I prefer Rockstar. I just think their worlds have more substance, so to speak.
However, I'm biased. The only Bethesda game I really liked was Morrowind (the first I played) and Call of Cthulhu (and this one wasn't developed by them).
Regarding Oblivion and Fallout 3, I hate those games. Not because they are bad, mind you, but because I know they could be so much better.
However, I'm biased. The only Bethesda game I really liked was Morrowind (the first I played) and Call of Cthulhu (and this one wasn't developed by them).
Regarding Oblivion and Fallout 3, I hate those games. Not because they are bad, mind you, but because I know they could be so much better.