Octopus Overlords

Rumor is that there will be an announcement this summer, with a release later in 2021, just like Fallout 4:

https://www.gamesradar.com/bethesda-is- ... d-in-2021/

I want to be excited but so far with zero info Im thinking it will be something I hate or not at all what I think it is.

Which is why I'm trying not to think of it until it the full reveal. I can imagine all sorts of variations of the Bethesda formula in space. I just hope it isn't a gritty, industrial aesthetic. I've had my fill of gritty, industrial looking sci-fi. Give me the Mass Effect/Star Trek look, with clean panels and modern materials, not the Firefly/Gears of War/Fallout/Outer Worlds look again, where it looks like a greasy guy named Vern welded everything together with scrap and two-inch-wide rivets held in with rust.

If a company is quiet on something, it normally means they're actively working on it, which is why they're able to surprise everyone with a quick turnaround. And Bethesda is known for keeping quiet until they have something firm to announce. I love how this article tries to imply quick development. I'd be more worried if we started hearing rumors about the project.

They've been working on this for years. They've just become the opposite of Blizzard - they wait to give any info until right before release and then drop it all at once. I still remember the Fallout 4 announcement where everyone expected to hear it would be ready in two years and were told five months. They then also announced the tie-in mobile game (Shelter) and announced that it had been released during the announcement that it existed, telling everyone in the audience that they could download it as soon as they left the room.

However, after Fallout 76, I'm going to be waiting for reviews. I've pre-ordered every Bethesda game since Oblivion (it was Morrowind that hooked me), but I don't trust them anymore.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:07 pm Which is why I'm trying not to think of it until it the full reveal. I can imagine all sorts of variations of the Bethesda formula in space. I just hope it isn't a gritty, industrial aesthetic. I've had my fill of gritty, industrial looking sci-fi. Give me the Mass Effect/Star Trek look, with clean panels and modern materials, not the Firefly/Gears of War/Fallout/Outer Worlds look again, where it looks like a greasy guy named Vern welded everything together with scrap and two-inch-wide rivets held in with rust.

Looks like your preference lost out. The few screenshots we have seem to be of a lower tech level, more like The Expanse than Star Trek. I think that would be an interesting choice as most sci-fi games seem to be pretty highly developed technology civilizations.

Actually, the Expanse look is fine, as long as it doesn't look like discount Belter tech!

I'm not talking about Trek levels of technology, I'm talking about the ships not looking like they were made out of the remains of an abandoned 50s metal factory.

Those pics are fine to me. I agree with BH on this.

The screen shots look nice but I'm more worried about the character build options. Are there stats/attributes or HP/mana/End? Skills plus perks or level limited perks? Are there ways to do things that feel different or is it all variants of shoot things with differing effects?

Madmarcus wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:52 pm The screen shots look nice but I'm more worried about the character build options. Are there stats/attributes or HP/mana/End? Skills plus perks or level limited perks? Are there ways to do things that feel different or is it all variants of shoot things with differing effects?

Uh, I'm pretty sure this is going to be an RPG in some way, shape or form, not a first/third person shooter. I'm pretty sure everyone is expecting an RPG.

I'm sure it will not be a full on shooter but will it be more mechanically similar to Skyrim, FNV, or Fallout 4? I really like Fallout 4 but I rarely feel that my characters play differently. Some of that is the forced story of your stolen child. Yet some of it is because guns are guns and it feels harder to differentiate characters.

Madmarcus wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:23 am I'm sure it will not be a full on shooter but will it be more mechanically similar to Skyrim, FNV, or Fallout 4? I really like Fallout 4 but I rarely feel that my characters play differently. Some of that is the forced story of your stolen child. Yet some of it is because guns are guns and it feels harder to differentiate characters.

I don't get that. You can build very powerful melee characters in Fallout 4 for one. Secondly, you can play gun characters very differently. Put on power armor, a mini gun or gatling laser and go to town. Or put on lighter stealthy armor and kill from range with a sniper rifle. Or become a gunslinger with a pistol (do wish they had dual pistols) - I've seen some very effective pistol builds. You can play very differently with guns. The story issue is a very different issue than the issue of character builds.

I doubt it will be like Skyrim - that seems to be reserved for their Elder Scrolls games. FNV skill/perks vs. FO4 perks only, probably the later but I guess we will see.

There's bound to be some shared aspects from Elder Scrolls and Fallout. I mean, all of their games as of late have shared certain aspects in terms of game mechanics. While technically different IPs, they do play fairly similarly. I'm almost expecting this new game to be more like Fallout, but in space where you can travel via ship and board others.

Yeah, Bethesda does have a formula. They write mediocre stories, but set them in fantastic open worlds. There are factions, there are main quests and side quests, crafting, collecting, optional side locations, etc. From Morrowind to Oblivion to Fallout 3 to Skyrim to Fallout 4 (and even Fallout 76) that formula has evolved, but hasn't changed all that much (FNV wasnt' Bethesda.) Morrowind innovated the formula from the bones of it's ancestors. Oblivion pushed the open world sandbox elements with things like dungeons that served no purpose but to be explored. Fallout 3 emphasized the exploration and variable path more (do you save the town and spend the whole game living there, or do you join it's enemies and nuke it into a literal crater?) Skyrim tweaked factions with the civil war by creating opposed factions where you could never do both in one game, and polished the open world (got rid of Oblivion's generic dungeons in favor of hand-built dungeons.) FO4 pushed the factions again (almost every faction had an anti-faction), took 'player homes' and crafting to a new extreme by giving you multiple settlements and DIY weapons.

I'd expect something at least recognizable as a Bethesda RPG, but with a new set of character mechanics and some new innovation or other. But you never know.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 2:29 am all of their games as of late have shared certain aspects in terms of game mechanics. While technically different IPs, they do play fairly similarly.

What? No way. Skyrim has three attributes that increase as you level up (health, stamina and mana) and skills that you level up only by using them, perks upon level up and it has magic/spells, melee combat, and some ranged combat. Fallout 4 has seven attributes that can only rarely be leveled up (unless you use perk points), perks upon level up. But while it has melee and ranged combat, it has no "magic" whatsoever. For the most part, they play very differently. The way you level up on skills that you use in Skyrim is very very different than Fallout. And in Skyrim, you can level up any perks as long as your skill level is high enough while in Fallout, you can only level up perks where you attributes are high enough.

These games are very different, IMO. The only way they are the same is in their open world design. But of course, YMMV

How the characters are defined is different. But in flow and storytelling, in gameplay approach, in design philosophy, they are nearly identical.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:37 pm How the characters are defined is different. But in flow and storytelling, in gameplay approach, in design philosophy, they are nearly identical.

The OP is specifically talking about "game mechanics". Story telling, flow, etc are not game mechanics, IMO. Game mechanics are how you level up/develop your character and use his/her skills/abilities in the game.

It is also how you interact with the world and how the world responds to your actions, including roleplaying and reputation elements, loot mechanics, economy, etc.

Grifman wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:24 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 2:29 am all of their games as of late have shared certain aspects in terms of game mechanics. While technically different IPs, they do play fairly similarly.

What? No way. Skyrim has three attributes that increase as you level up (health, stamina and mana) and skills that you level up only by using them, perks upon level up and it has magic/spells, melee combat, and some ranged combat.

Well, sure, there are some differences, but the way they approach their games is very similar. It's their design philosophy that tends to really show, down to the quest system, how characters interact, etc. Much of that is down to how long they've used their engine for, which they've kept upgrading with better visuals while the underlying tech has been clunky, which has limited them to what they can do to certain extents. Moving to a completely new engine would likely help push them into doing new things with gameplay, and part of me wonders if this game will be built using idTech. I don't think they'd be able to do that via Gamebryo or whatever they call their engine now.

"Creation Engine"

And yes, they really do need to take a step back and come at it afresh. Just leave the plugin functionality intact, please.

Nope. They're using an "overhauled Creation Engine".

And that's what they said of Skyrim. The Creation Engine is basically an overhauled Gamebryo engine, which they've been using since Morrowind. At the time of Skyrim's release many wondered if it was going to be a completely new engine, to which they said it was the Creation Engine, an upgraded version of Gamebryo. It's the reason why the games have only gotten buggier as the engine has been a patchwork of upgrades trying to prolong its use, but with things being strained under the hood from doing things they were never meant to do.

I just feel their design philosophy is too tied to the engine that they're using. At least, with say, Bioware, Dragon Age felt very different to Mass Effect in the types of gameplay they were offering even though both had their signature dialogue system. But from a gameplay standpoint, both the Elder Scrolls and Fallouts (3&4) are so similar in their structures and gameplay mechanics, even sharing things such as the building mechanic. So, while this new game will likely be in space aboard ships, I wouldn't be surprised if the gameplay ends up feeling more than a little familiar because of engine limitations.

It's possibly just me but all three of the first person Fallouts come down to a few gameplay choices; stealth, range of engagement, power armor or not. Using FO4 for example pistols use different perks than rifles but it doesn't really change the gameplay. Is that a consequence of VATS? Maybe; smaller weapons can generally shoot more times in VATS but need more hits to kill. Skyrim (especially as I played it with Ordinator, Apocalypse, and related mods) felt like it had more different options. Crafting perks without weapon perks felt like a more viable path. Magic investment (both perks and investing enough in Mana) allowed a character to do things that could not be easily recreated without magic (although crafting could blur the line).

Drugs in Fallout are something I rarely use as it is too close to real drug use. Yet in Skyrim I have no problem with a character who dumps a lot of perks and time into alchemy such that they feel mechanically different than a sword and board fighter. Heavy weapons (explosives or miniguns) don't feel like a viable choice at low levels in Fallouts due to limited resources but destruction magic in Skyrim seems viable at all levels.

From my experience, I'd say the fighting options that have distinct experiences are:

Stealth lethal
Stealth avoidance (which is iffy, but doable.)
Sniper (which plays differently from other firearms, and not always in a good way - the AI is too dumb for deathclaw to even react as you whittle it down from long range.)
Medium/short range firearms, including heavy. This is just using raw firepower most of the time.
Melee/unarmed

Plus power armor or not power armor, which really only applies to the last two. I mean, you can snipe in power armor, but it won't matter much.

But that's only the combat elements. There are non-combat elements that add variety, too. A charismatic character will have a very different experience from a character who relies on brawn. A smart character with lots of focus on science and crafting will have a different experience from a dumb character that's tough as hell.

And that's before choosing your approach to the game. In Fallout 4, for instance, a person who plays Institute/Brotherhood will experience different stuff than one who plays Railroad/Minutemen. I've been thinking about a raider playthrough to take advantage of Nuka-World. And then there is collector/builder vs someone who just ignores that side of the game. And the game plays differently if you go solo vs with a companion, and there is at least a little variation depending on who your companion is.

So, a tough, angry raider who is willing to kill at the drop of a hat but can't talk his way out of an empty shack, runs with a super mutant follower, and uses melee weapons while supporting the Brotherhood is a different experience entirely from a smart, fast scientist who runs only with non-combatant robotic companions (using the Automatron DLC) and tries to avoid combat with his wits, skills, and charisma, fighting at extreme range if he has to, but carries a shotgun for backup if he fails a check, tries to rebuild society and supports the Minutemen as the best way to achieve that.

They aren't hugely deep games, but they're more than combat styles. But yeah, if you just approach it as a combat game, it'll feel very samey.

My only play through I helped the Minutemen a lot but in the end sided with The Brotherhood of course. Next go Im killing the Railroad for sure and siding with The Institute. Fresh showers, cable, microwave ovens..ya. Normalcy.

Yeah, I understand what you are saying but the modernish / realistic-ish setting means I tend to react in a quasi-real manner. No matter what I've never been able to side with the Legion or the Institute. I can be a selfish jerk but I can't be actively evil. Skyrim's fantasy setting and more ambiguous start (why was I crossing the border anyway) can get me in more of a morally grey to black mindset.

It doesn't help that neither Skyrim or FO4 embrace dialog choices based on Stats, Perks, or in most cases game state (FO4 does recognize The Silver Shroud occasionally). So Bill Nye the Science! Guy speaks exactly the same as Captain Caveman (I mean no offense if the OO Captain Caveman sees this).

I think Fallout 4 has some of my favourite character moments. That Silver Shroud set of missions was pretty awesome. But I think my absolute favourite has to be the Japanese Sub Captain and his quest.

Bethesda has given me years of gaming fun, but I have to say hands down that the Assassins' Guild quest lines in the Elder Scrolls game are the greatest I've played, usually followed by the Thieves' Guild. In Skyrim I genuinely enjoyed the Fighter's Guild quest, as well.

My only qualm, and it's one that I can easily avoid if I'm not trying to powergame, is that I can do them all. I can have a character that's the Master of the Mages', Thieves', Fighters', and Assassins' guild, as well as Lord (or Jarl) to every major holding in the entire game. I wish they would include some kind of balance/conflict of interest storyline between certain guilds that would prevent you from attaining the Master's position in them all. If they can do it with the major players in Fallout, it shouldn't be THAT hard to incorporate that for some of the smaller ones...

Word is that this is coming out this year. Bethesda/MS has said that they have a game announcement this summer, and the only 2 games they are working on are Starfield and ES6, and Starfield started development earlier. I expect this will be like Fallout 4, an announcement followed by the game coming out 2-3 months afterwards, probably in Oct/Nov. I am very interested to see a new IP from Bethesda.

I kinda figured this one would be vaporware.

Grifman wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 11:59 pm Word is that this is coming out this year. Bethesda/MS has said that they have a game announcement this summer, and the only 2 games they are working on are Starfield and ES6, and Starfield started development earlier. I expect this will be like Fallout 4, an announcement followed by the game coming out 2-3 months afterwards, probably in Oct/Nov. I am very interested to see a new IP from Bethesda.

If this is true then it looks like I will have to break down and get an Xbox Sx sooner rather than later. I just hope they are actually available in stores by then.

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:15 am I kinda figured this one would be vaporware.

Seriously, a new IP from Bethesda is vaporware? Does that even make any sense?

Grifman wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 9:02 am

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:15 am I kinda figured this one would be vaporware.

Seriously, a new IP from Bethesda is vaporware? Does that even make any sense?

It takes them forever to get one of their well know games using the same old engine out the door. Many many years. Then they are still filled with crazy amounts of bugs and lacking content. Really didn't and still sorta dont think they have it in them.

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 10:06 am

Grifman wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 9:02 am

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:15 am I kinda figured this one would be vaporware.

Seriously, a new IP from Bethesda is vaporware? Does that even make any sense?

It takes them forever to get one of their well know games using the same old engine out the door. Many many years. Then they are still filled with crazy amounts of bugs and lacking content. Really didn't and still sorta dont think they have it in them.

So what you are saying is that MS spent billions on Bethesda to have them do nothing? That makes even less sense.

Grifman wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 12:21 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 10:06 am

Grifman wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 9:02 am

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:15 am I kinda figured this one would be vaporware.

Seriously, a new IP from Bethesda is vaporware? Does that even make any sense?

It takes them forever to get one of their well know games using the same old engine out the door. Many many years. Then they are still filled with crazy amounts of bugs and lacking content. Really didn't and still sorta dont think they have it in them.

So what you are saying is that MS spent billions on Bethesda to have them do nothing? That makes even less sense.

Nah they get the next ES game and Im sure there are others. Plus anything going forward will be GamePass.

I thought Bethesda's pattern was to announce a game (officially) late Q1 / early Q2 and then have it shipped to everyone Q4 of that year? Like...they don't announce until it's just about ready to go, minimizing the amount of time you first hear about it to when you get it?

There's only been an announcement for Starfield; only speculation on ES 6 at this point - nothing formal announced.

I'm not following vaporware comment either.

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 10:06 am

Grifman wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 9:02 am

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:15 am I kinda figured this one would be vaporware.

Seriously, a new IP from Bethesda is vaporware? Does that even make any sense?

It takes them forever to get one of their well know games using the same old engine out the door. Many many years.

Which is rather normal for game development these days, for any studio.

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 1:41 pm I thought Bethesda's pattern was to announce a game (officially) late Q1 / early Q2 and then have it shipped to everyone Q4 of that year? Like...they don't announce until it's just about ready to go, minimizing the amount of time you first hear about it to when you get it?

There's only been an announcement for Starfield; only speculation on ES 6 at this point - nothing formal announced.

Fallout 4 was announced and shown at E3 in June, 2015 and was released Nov, 2015. Expectations that the same will happen this year - show Starfield at E3, release late fall/early winter. Fits the prior pattern except that Starfield was announced a while back but virtually nothing is know about it.

Grifman wrote: ↑Wed Mar 17, 2021 12:06 am

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Tue Mar 16, 2021 1:41 pm I thought Bethesda's pattern was to announce a game (officially) late Q1 / early Q2 and then have it shipped to everyone Q4 of that year? Like...they don't announce until it's just about ready to go, minimizing the amount of time you first hear about it to when you get it?

There's only been an announcement for Starfield; only speculation on ES 6 at this point - nothing formal announced.

Fallout 4 was announced and shown at E3 in June, 2015 and was released Nov, 2015. Expectations that the same will happen this year - show Starfield at E3, release late fall/early winter. Fits the prior pattern except that Starfield was announced a while back but virtually nothing is know about it.

Well if they are going to announce @ E3 the game won't come out this year as E3 has been cancelled