Does the number of issues affecting a console system determine its quality or the reputation of the company that manufactured it? Not necessarily. The Xbox One, if you recall, had to undergo a technical redesign when consumers shunned its initial DRM and ‘Always On’ features.
It can be argued that Microsoft should have delayed the launch of the Xbox One to flush out any technical issues. And while there were more technical issues plaguing Xbox One than PS4 during launch, the issues themselves were not as widespread as everyone believes.
Disney Dreamlight Valley devs have officially teased the second part of the paid expansion titled The Spark of Imagination.
Starting out a new farm, but need help choosing a name? Check out this article for a 100 farm name ides for Stardew Valley.
Waiting a decade for new instalments in franchises as massive as Fallout and Elder Scrolls feels like a waste.
Microsoft have Obsidian but I feel it's Bethesda who just don't want to play ball as they've always said they want to do it themselves.
Once MS bought Zenimax in 2020 they should have put the Outer Worlds 2 on the back burner, allow Bethesda to finish off its own Space RPG with Starfield (despite totally different tone why have two in your first party portfolio with two developers who's gameplay is a tad similar) and got Obsidian for one of their projects to make a spiritual successor to New Vegas.
When the Elder Scrolls VI is finished Bethesda can then onto the main numbered Fallout 5 themselves.
The Outer Worlds 2 started development in 2019 so putting it on the back burner wouldn't have been the end of the world, they'd have always come back to it once Fallout was done and it would have been nicely spaced out from Starfields release once they had most likely stopped supporting it and all the expansions were released.
If they did this back in 2020 when they bought Zenimax and the game had a good, steady 4 - 5 years development, you might have seen it release in 2025.
We are literally going to be waiting until 2030 at the very earliest for Fallout 5 and all they seem bothered about is pushing Fallout 76.
Its not just only Todd not playing ball.
Obsidian have made a name for themselves in delivering stellar RPGs, but most famous once have always been sequels/spin-offs to borrowed IPs like KOTOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Stick of Truth etc.
Obsidian wants to invest more in their own original IPs like Outer Worlds or Pillars of Eternity with Avowed.
Similar to what Bluepoint & inXile wants to do or Kojima is doing (i.e not involving anymore in Konami's IPs).
So yea, even if New Vegas has the most votes from 3D Fallout fans, Obsidian just wants to do their own thing, like any aspiring dev studio and MS is likely currently respecting that.
But a future Fallout game from Obsidian will surely happen. Founder Feargus Urquhart has already stated an year ago that they're eager to make a new Fallout game with Bethesda, New Vegas 2 or otherwise. Urquhart was the director of the very first 1995's Fallout game after all.
And don't forget Brian Fargo and his studio inXile, as Brian Fargo was the director of Fallout's 1988 predecessor: Wasteland
Obsidian should take over the FO IP. They're do far better with it than Bethesda who hasn't made a great game for almost 15 years
@KyRo
So, by 15 years, you mean Fallout 3 was the last great game Bethesda made?
You don't consider Skyrim a good game, which came out 13 years ago?
I'd consider Fallout 4 a pretty decent game as well. It's Story & RPG elements were a bit downgrade from New Vegas but the exploration and shooting on the other hand, were upgrades.
FO76 was disappointing and Starfield could've been better at launch I'll agree.
I disagree. Part of these games is the support for the mod community. If they move to releasing a "next game" every 2 or 3 years, the modding support plummets and the franchises turn into just another run of the mill RPG.
Make the games good enough to withstand the test of time, to keep people coming back to them and expanding on them with mod support.
I dont think anyone is saying they need to come out every 2 years (not to mention almost no game is released that quickly anymore)
By the time Fallout 5 comes out, it will be more than 15 years since Fallout 4 came out (same with ES6 coming out 15 years after Skyrim). Even if you want to use F76 as the metric for the most recent release, that one came out in 2018. It will be a miracle if F5 comes out before 2030
The point is that for a studio that doesnt seem to operate with multiple teams doing several projects at once, that their projects normally take 4-5 years as a minimum, and that now they even added Starfield to the rotation, it becomes a 15+ years waiting period between releases for each series, which doesnt make sense. Imagine that Nintendo only released a mainline Mario or Zelda game every 15 years…
They either need to start developing more than 1 project at a time, let someone else take a crack at one of the IPs or significantly reduce their development times
Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs? Look at what happened to Final Fantasy as a recent example - there is pretty clear FF fatigue setting in because they are now pumping out titles in the franchise every few years. Pumping out more games faster doesn't always make a series better.
There are plenty of options to make new games, not just create more titles in the same universe at a faster pace.
"Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs"
He's literally just told you why
We're waiting like 15 years before a sequel comes out, it's insane
Skyrim came out in 2011, the next game is expected to come out in 2027 at the earliest so that's 16 years apart while Fallout 4 came out in 2015 and might not release until 2031, again 16 years.
We're fine with Bethesda trying new things and doing new IPs like Starfield but adding a new game to the cycle now means a bigger wait. Also Starfield didn't meet most peoples expectations, can you imagine waiting 15 years or so for a sequel and it's disappointing? It would feel even worse because you would have to wait another 15 years to see if they manage to come back from it.
They need to give it to another developer, we don't need main numbered titles but a spin off of Fallout and Elder Scrolls should be cycled in between the long gaps of the main releases.
Once again you are making out people want these games as quick as possible when all we want is a standard development time of at least 4 years or so rather than waiting 15.
Yeah I’m going to say it, who cares about the modding community when making a game? Half the time developers only tolerate modders because they fix there game for them.
Yeah, let's all advocate for smaller gaps between series' releases, then we'll probably get headlines about how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven. Let them cook.
"how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven" So every Bethesda game then? Got it.
Listen, I would agree if this was about From Software or something, but Bethesda?
🤣
C'mon now. What timeline are you from?
Think about it, they're already bug filled messes on their current schedule, can you imagine how much worse it would be if they rushed things?
@Skuletor
Who's saying to rush the releases? No one is saying that...
People just don't want to be waiting 15 years for a sequel, they aren't working on the game for that long, you do realise that right? The issue isn't coming down to them working on the game and us "rushing them", it's the fact they are working on other games like Starfield now meaning bigger gaps before they even get started on them.
I bet you any more Elder Scrolls VI only entered full development last year when Starfield was finished despite being announced in 2018.
Bethesda [or Microsoft] would have to reallocate internal and external studios towards fallout and elder scrolls titles. Bethesda has the issue of developing 2 big IPs that are large RPGs on rotation. If you want more Fallout and Elder Scrolls, development will have to be outsourced.
To who?
http://m.youtube.com/watch?...
So both consoles are possibly under 0.4% Failure rate?
Yes there were a few defective consoles from both parties. So what its nothing new and to be expected.
Now im tired of seeing the " _ of death" articles. Until one of these things start dropping like flies similar to rrod (wich was a legitimate "death") then lets move on here. Oh wait we'll just be talking about who sold more and where. Back to playing my game on fully functional console.
A man doesn't see why people think these things are abnormal. EVERY console will go through SOME hardware failure. EVERY console doesn't have VAST volumes of games available at launch. These are two of the most loaded launches in history. People are just way too entitled and way to vocal with every little thing that's not included (external HDD and MP3 support are not day 1 concerns). People today have short memories and are short on patience. You knew what you were getting day 1 and if you expected more then you should have done more research before plopping down $400-$500.
This applies to both consoles even though a man only has gotten PS4. A man saw this crap with WiiU, Vita, and 3DS as well. 3DS is the only one of thosewith an abnormally bad launch lineup, and look at where it is now. Be patient and enjoy the superior cross gen games, flawlessly up and running sharing and Twitch integration (surprising at launch), and the launch titles which are much better (at least Killzone and Contrast and a man is sure Ryse and Dead Rising) than reviewed. Reviewers are just leaving themselves room to hand out better scores later in the gen. If you give out a 10 early on it doesn't leave any room for improvement for Halo 5 and Uncharted 4.