Why do people hate Oblivion,Fallout and maybe other Bethesda games

Particulate

New member
May 27, 2011
235
0
0
IKSA said:
Title explains it I want to know why I personally like them very much so why the hate? can you please tell me.
I don't hate Bethesda. I think they're a fine company. Now I have issues with the glitches but I usually just wait a few weeks to buy. The only game that I really have a problem with is Oblivion and that's just because of the ending which pissed me off HARDCORE.
 

blizzaradragon

New member
Mar 15, 2010
455
0
0
Well many people have listed off the reasons I don't like many Bethesda games, but I'll say it anyway.

-Bland combat that doesn't really show you doing anything and will more than likely cause your finger to fall off
-A huge world that is pretty much lifeless
-Most of what you do in the game doesn't seem to impact the world
-NPCs scare the ever-loving shit out of me with their lifeless stare, and I've run into many situations that Yahtzee described of someone talking to himself about how much he loves the store run by himself
-Bland, somewhat generic story in a generic fantasy setting

Albeit most of this is directed at The Elder Scrolls series. I love New Vegas(though that was more because of Obsidian than Bethesda) and thought Fallout 3 was alright, but I had to trudge through Oblivion wondering when the fun would start. It did for a bit when I did Shivering Isles and I smirked a bit when I did the Thieves' Guild, but other than that I was bored 90% of the time. With a game that big that isn't a good sign. The absolute killer though was the story. I feel like story should take front and center in an RPG, and when I have to dig to even find one and it's bland at that, it kills the game for me.

Give me a Bioware RPG, Obsidian RPG, or most JRPGs over a Bethesda RPG any day.
 

KelsieKatt

New member
May 14, 2008
180
0
0
I don't hate any of them, in fact I enjoy most of their games.

I just found Oblivion to be specifically mediocre and way too streamlined to the point that I lost a significant amount of interest after finishing it once. Some of the skills also served no purpose whatsoever because the game relied primarily on mini-games for that particular aspect which you could win at any skill level (One example being Lockpicking.)

Other than that, 99% of the quests in the entire world were totally linear, so you just completed them in whatever order you liked until you ran out of content with little to no choice in how any of them play out.

So, basically it was a sandbox world with a pile of quests you play until you have nothing to do, and a broken character creation system to go with it, which you can easily learn every skill in the game on as well, becoming a master of all trades. None of these elements add up to interesting Role-Playing and lack any sort of emphasis on the player "defining" their character or their impact on the world, because you could do basically everything and almost all of it played out the same every time. In general, I would say Oblivion was more like Grand Theft Horse than anything else, but more open world.

The world also reeked of copy pasting in a number of spots, so outside of the areas they wanted you to play for quests, a lot of the extra parts of the world weren't even worth exploring.

The only thing I liked about it better than Morrowind was the combat was more responsive, which was nice, but they ripped out a lot of other things I liked in the process.
 

shrimpcel

New member
Sep 5, 2011
234
0
0
I didn't know anyone hated their games. They're not in my top three best games of all time or whatever, but they're still good, I enjoyed Oblivion a lot.
 

Wereduck

New member
Jun 17, 2010
383
0
0
Thyunda said:
I just have to say, for point c), Old World Blues for New Vegas had some of the best dialogue ever. Of all time. Those scientists made up for every mudcrab-fearing peasant or repeated conversation ever.
If that's how you really feel then why don't you just get on your many-penised feet and leave ;)

As for me; aside from bug infestations my only complaint is the skill caps that limit your character to mediocrity and, in Oblivion, effectively lower the level cap if you play a combat-oriented race as a combat-oriented character.
 

CRRPGMykael

New member
Mar 6, 2011
311
0
0
You gotta be fucking with me... I LOVE EVERY GAME BETHESDA MADE(under the leash of Todd Howard, obviously)!!! Of course, they can be glitchy sometimes and everything, but they're just so epic you can't help but love 'em.
 

UnderCoverGuest

New member
May 24, 2010
414
0
0
Good lord. Five topics on Skyrim under the hot topics section thing.

Anywho, Bethesda games Oblivion and Fallout, for me, are huge open world choose-your-own-adventure-with-a-few-set-pieces games that let you explore the wilderness of either a sprawling fantasy forest world or a sprawling nuclear wasteland.

...and that's pretty much it. Aside from being very huge, I just can't find much captivating in either of them.

Some Good:
- Generic objects that clutter the world can be manipulated; picked up, dropped, moved around and placed exactly where you want them to be--I spent hours in Oblivion decorating my house in-game, even though I had the Construction Set running in the background.
- Open Environment lets you go where you want to.
- Lots of realistic foliage and world objects like rocks and stuff litter the landscape, giving it a sense of depth.

Some Bad:
- Clutter objects generally don't have a use; you can't fill and drink from cups in Oblivion for example; though the construction opportunities in Fallout 3 are much improved (but that might have been a mod, I don't know).
- Though it's an open environment, there isn't much to do other than be attacked by either bandits or dogs (or their mutant variety, in the case of Fallout 3).
- While the world is filled with natural objects that give it a realistic look such as trees, shrubs, flowers, rocks, water, etcetera, when you find a high point in the landscape and take a look around, you realize it's just a gigantic terrain height-map with copy/pasted objects dotting the ground. In short, despite all their efforts, it's painfully transparent as to just how flat the world really is.

Some More Bad:
- Not being able to climb chest-high ledges and rocks is very irritating, as is the inability to climb steeper terrain. Oblivion would be one gigantic step closer to perfection if you could hoist yourself up to higher objects, rather than spam your jump button trying to find a way to get up onto that balcony.
- More movement issues: you slide down surfaces too steep for you to climb, unless you're running against the slope; this leads to the situation where you're running diagonally uphill just to reach the next climbable angle. Not very fun, nor in-character.
- NPCs and animals know exactly where you are the instant combat is initiated, even when you break their line of sight. Foliage does nothing for concealment, making the world all the more 'flat', when you're forced to take cover behind rocks and static objects rather than bushes and such.
- You're a floating camera with no legs or arms, yet are some how able to manipulate world objects through telekinesis. A mod for Oblivion where you can actually see your legs significantly enhances the immersion factor thankfully--however it's buggy stage makes it a little irksome to deal with--which leads me to the biggest point...

- Bugs and Glitches. Instability seems to be a theme in both Oblivion and Fallout 3. The number of crash screens and such are usually due to mods, yet those mods significantly improve the game. So you're left with either a somewhat dull adventure game with various set pieces, but moderate stability; or an exciting RPG with unique add-ons and enhanced levels of creativity and customization, but with an average of one "Program has encountered a problem and needs to close" screen per hour.

I like Oblivion and Fallout 3. I want to love Oblivion and Fallout 3. But every time I think about how much fun it would be to play it, I'm instantly reminded of the significant decrease in fun levels I'll encounter once I actually start playing it. I like Immersion in my RPGs--and Oblivion and Fallout, despite how close they are to open-world perfection, keeps taking a step back every time they take a step forward.
 

Terramax

New member
Jan 11, 2008
3,747
0
0
Never seen anyone making hate on these games, but then again I'm not on these forums often these days.

I wouldn't say I hate them, but I honestly don't understand what the fuss is all about. Skyrim looks like the most unimaginative fantasy, where they've grabbed every medievil fantasy cliche going and added an ultra dose of shiney on it all then shoved on the shelves.

Indeed I played Oblivion and it was very fun for the first two hours. Then I realised it was ultimately rinse and repeate gameplay where the locations didn't so much as change as rearrange themselves and I pretty must stopped upon this realisation.
 

RaikuFA

New member
Jun 12, 2009
4,370
0
0
Glitches and popularity. That seems to be the reason why people hate them.
 

Gmans uncle

New member
Oct 17, 2011
570
0
0
I'm a little weird, I loved Fallout 3 with all my heart, loved New Vegas too, but I hated Oblivion. Maybe it's because I played F3 first, and from my perspective Oblivion just seemed like a not-as-good version of that. Example: I loved the exploration in Fallout 3, and how you couldn't fast travel somewhere until you'd actually been there, Oblivion killed that for me by letting you fast travel all over the place from day one. Also, when I played Fallout 3 I was a dirty rotten thief thanks to the Wasteland's general lack of any kind of law enforcement, so robbing my first house and getting the "STOP RIGHT THERE CRIMINAL SCUM!" was a real downer. Also, I HATE melee based combat systems in the first person, even in third person I sucked at it, and Oblivion's stupid thing where the monsters level up with you removed all point in level grinding, making it impossible for me to get any better. While I'm on the leveling system, I absolutely HATED how ridiculously slow you leveled, and how you needed to sleep after every level up (Seriously, what the hell was that?)

The way I see it, Fallout 3 > Oblivion in EVERY CONCEIVABLE WAY.

I am looking forward to Skyrim though, because I understand they removed all the crap I complained about.
 

kyogen

New member
Feb 22, 2011
673
0
0
I don't hate them. I don't play Fallout 3 because its setting and story don't interest me. I really liked Oblivion for the most part, and I am particularly fond of Bethesda's glitches. Immersion is a matter of perception, and I don't consider a good laugh to be an interruption of my enjoyment. I would much rather have a ton of ambition with technical shortcomings than soulless mechanical perfection.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
I'll have to answer the original question with another question: Do you enjoy crashing to desktop every 30 minutes because your computer didn't have the EXACT chipset or graphics card that was required?

(And no, I refuse to buy a console purely to play two games more stably. So don't even try to argue it.)

That's what I got with Bethesda and their Gamebryo engine, and it's the main reason I hate their games.
This year though, I'm not bothering with Skyrim because I don't trust it, or Bethesda. I've been bit twice by their buggy programming, and until this new engine proves itself (yes, I know id Software developed it, but given how technically disastrous their PC release of Rage was...yeah), I'm not bothering with Skyrim.

Nevermind that even when the games worked, their core gameplay components weren't all THAT amazing.
I love exploring worlds, but ultimately, I didn't really feel as though my explorations had any purpose to them. The generic quests were boring, the NPCs were cardboard cutouts and the main story quests were bland, cliche' or outright insulting to my intelligence.
 

AssassinFisH

New member
Jun 12, 2011
130
0
0
I hated Oblivion and Fallout. I put my dislikes aside after getting my hands on an early copy of Skyrim, and im happy to report, its fab! Buggy as hell as usual, but a great game.
 

Crazycat690

New member
Aug 31, 2009
677
0
0
They're full of bugs and have bad animations, oh and lets not forget all that filler landmass and trivial shit you can do. If you cut down their games to what's relevant and fun in it you'd get a map the size of Arkham City and a leangth of 6 hours.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
Only reason I could think of is that they leave the game's fans to patch bugs and glitches that shouldn't have even made it into the launch version of the game. Although that's generally why I refuse to buy their games at launch. I'd either get them close to launch as gifts or wait until the game + DLC bundle is out, they've finished patching everything that they'll actually bother patching, and fans will have fixed most of the rest through their own patches or figuring out what console commands to use to fix it in-game.

My utter indifference to Skyrim (and pretty much any other November launch title) can be easily explained in four words, though:

[HEADING=2]Saints Row The Third[/HEADING]

Atmos Duality said:
I'll have to answer the original question with another question: Do you enjoy crashing to desktop every 30 minutes because your computer didn't have the EXACT chipset or graphics card that was required?

(And no, I refuse to buy a console purely to play two games more stably. So don't even try to argue it.)

That's what I got with Bethesda and their Gamebryo engine, and it's the main reason I hate their games.
This year though, I'm not bothering with Skyrim because I don't trust it, or Bethesda. I've been bit twice by their buggy programming, and until this new engine proves itself (yes, I know id Software developed it, but given how technically disastrous their PC release of Rage was...yeah), I'm not bothering with Skyrim.

Nevermind that even when the games worked, their core gameplay components weren't all THAT amazing.
I love exploring worlds, but ultimately, I didn't really feel as though my explorations had any purpose to them. The generic quests were boring, the NPCs were cardboard cutouts and the main story quests were bland, cliche' or outright insulting to my intelligence.
I think you mean "I refuse to buy a 360 purely to play two games more stably." Don't even think about getting a Bethesda game for PS3. As bad as their games right be running on your PC, on PS3 it's worse. The more you play, the worse it gets too. I could barely finish the last two DLC packs of Fallout 3 on PS3 because it would quite literally lock up or freeze every 5 minutes. Sometimes it would recover if you left it alone, other times you had no choice but to force the PS3 to shut down.

As for the awful Gamebryo engine, god damn was I said to see that logo pop-up when I popped in my new copy of Catherine. And unsurprisingly, the controls are unresponsive: Vincent either does nothing or does something I absolutely did not want him to do. I've died more times due to controls than due to my inability to solve a puzzle so far. Why do people keep using this piece of shit? Please, games industry, stop using Gamebryo.
 

Dusk17

New member
Jul 30, 2010
178
0
0
I never understood why people complained about the leveling system in oblivion, if it gets to hard just turn down the difficulty, that should work unless you made a character without putting any thought into their combat capability
 

Seanfall

New member
May 3, 2011
460
0
0
Well bugs are kinda hit or miss so everyone gets different milage out their games. But yeah alot of Bethesda's game are released with bugs. I've rarely run into any that broke the game for me. The last big bug I can think of that I found in the Xbox Version of Oblivion was me not getting any gold when I sold stuff. Oddly enough the same thing is happening in New Vegas in the Big Empty and that was released by Obsidian not Bethesda. *shrug*

I sunk days worth of time into Oblivion and hardly ran into bugs. Same with Fallout 3. So i personally have no complaints. Of course I also missed a lot of the Expansion bugs I hear about so I might just have good timing on that.
 

Moonlight Butterfly

Be the Leaf
Mar 16, 2011
6,157
0
0
I would say it's subjective and people like different things, but I'm kind of bored of that answer now so.

I think it's becuase some people are

1. Totally OCD about everything being 100% perfect. If a creature gets stuck on a rock its OMG TAKE THE GAME BACK IT'S BROKEN!

2.Unimaginative. I make shit up about my character in my head with no concious effort at all while I'm going along do quests. Some people want every thing laid out for them. ie: 'This book is boring it has no pictures.'

3. They don't understand that there is going to be a difference in quality between a sandbox game and a 'tunnel game' like Mass Effect 2 or Gears of War 3. Of course there is the scale is completely different.

That's my ideas anyway.
 

DustinOffAClassic

New member
Oct 20, 2011
21
0
0
What hate? The Elder Scrolls series is always hyped to oblivion (I made a pun. Yeah me).

And Fallout 3 and Vegas are ridiculously buggy. Vegas had a GAME BREAKING glitch where you would spawn and instantly die, turning into longman!! Not cool, New Vegas. Not cool. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JssYKOQ-e2o] You could lose hours of progress if you hadn't made a new save file in a while, or even the entire game if you relied on autosaves.