#1 Posted by FreakAche (2954 posts) -

This may seem like a weird question, but do you think Bethesda will outsource the development of a non-numbered Elder Scrolls game using the Skyrim tech sort of like what they did with New Vegas? It would not surprise me if Bethesda wanted to capitalize on the success of Skyrim by getting a new Elder Scrolls game out there right away. However, the bulk of their team has likely moved on to Fallout 4, with a smaller group continuing to support Skyrim through patches and DLC. Do you think Bethesda might do something similar with Elder Scrolls to what they did with New Vegas, or is Elder Scrolls a different situation given that it is their own franchise?

#2 Posted by TheHT (11524 posts) -

I want a Plantinum Games Elder Scrolls game. I doubt it'll happen. TES is Bethesda's baby, and I can't see them trusting another developer with it unless they themselves had a heavy hand in its development.

#3 Posted by falling_fast (2244 posts) -

I can't see it ever happening unless if Bethesda go out of business.

#4 Posted by 42manZ (105 posts) -

I mean, if you want to get technical, the Elder Scrolls Online is not being developed by Bethesda. Of course, that doesn't look like it's going to be that much of an Elder Scrolls game.

#5 Posted by Itwastuesday (975 posts) -

They already experimented with weird offshoot Elder Scrolls games, but I'm not sure if that means they'd be open to trying it again, or if it means that they would never try it again. I'm going to default on the latter.

#6 Posted by BaneFireLord (2952 posts) -

I would love to see an Obsidian take on it, but thanks to the big old New Vegas debacle, that's never going to happen.

#7 Posted by FreakAche (2954 posts) -

@BaneFireLord said:

I would love to see an Obsidian take on it, but thanks to the big old New Vegas debacle, that's never going to happen.

What's the "New Vegas debacle"? I still haven't played it. Do you just mean the fact that it was kind of buggy? Was it really that much worse than the Bethesda developed games?

#8 Posted by ConfusedOwl (952 posts) -

@FreakAche said:

@BaneFireLord said:

I would love to see an Obsidian take on it, but thanks to the big old New Vegas debacle, that's never going to happen.

What's the "New Vegas debacle"? I still haven't played it. Do you just mean the fact that it was kind of buggy? Was it really that much worse than the Bethesda developed games?

They were suppose to receive a bonus if New Vegas got an 85% meta critic score but they only got 84% so they were refused the bonus even though it was only by 1%.

#9 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4851 posts) -

@FreakAche said:

@BaneFireLord said:

I would love to see an Obsidian take on it, but thanks to the big old New Vegas debacle, that's never going to happen.

What's the "New Vegas debacle"? I still haven't played it. Do you just mean the fact that it was kind of buggy? Was it really that much worse than the Bethesda developed games?

Rumours persist that Bethesda offered little to no quality assurance and withheld Obsidian's bonus. The reason they did so is because the contract stipulated that the Metacritic average of New Vegas had to hit at least 85. the MC averagve of New Vegas was 84.

Basically it was just Obsidian whining because they don't know how to code games properly.

#10 Posted by _Zombie_ (1462 posts) -

Doubtful.

@FreakAche: I believe he's referring to the fact that it didn't sell as well as it was supposed to. So, as a result, seeing a TES game done by them is doubtful.

#11 Posted by Karkarov (3184 posts) -

I am pretty confident Bethesda owns all rights to the IP so I doubt it. If they decide to do a off genre entry into the "universe" of Tamriel maybe, but they won't let anyone make a game using the core engine/dev tools.

#12 Posted by EquitasInvictus (2036 posts) -

@Oldirtybearon said:

Basically it was just Obsidian whining because they don't know how to code games properly.

Ehhh... the engine and development tools for that era of Bethesda games weren't necessarily the most intuitive and consistent, so the fact they managed in spite of what little or no support they received from Bethesda is actually remarkable.

Having messed around with the development tools for Fallout 3 -- they were pretty busted. I'd actually give Obsidian a lot of credit for being able to sculpt New Vegas out of that, considering they even managed to hack in their own little additions to the engine (enabling the whole companion bits, hardcore mode, and casino minigames) . The fact they managed to get that deep into modifying the engine without catastrophically breaking their game (at least from my experience with New Vegas on the PC) is a big plus, since the issues with developing for FO3 in terms of the modding community was a nightmare. I can't imagine how much of a labor of love it was for them to take that engine and development system to create New Vegas and have it mostly work (granted I have no experience of the console versions so I can't really say much about that).

That being said, while I would be interested to see non-Bethesda developed games for another franchise in particular, I think I'd much prefer them to keep their stake on The Elder Scrolls.

#13 Posted by Animasta (14712 posts) -

@Oldirtybearon said:

@FreakAche said:

@BaneFireLord said:

I would love to see an Obsidian take on it, but thanks to the big old New Vegas debacle, that's never going to happen.

What's the "New Vegas debacle"? I still haven't played it. Do you just mean the fact that it was kind of buggy? Was it really that much worse than the Bethesda developed games?

Rumours persist that Bethesda offered little to no quality assurance and withheld Obsidian's bonus. The reason they did so is because the contract stipulated that the Metacritic average of New Vegas had to hit at least 85. the MC averagve of New Vegas was 84.

Basically it was just Obsidian whining because they don't know how to code games properly.

that game was made quite quickly for how big it is (a year and a half, I believe?) it was honestly surprising it wasn't as buggy as it could have been. It was also the first time they worked with that engine an all.

and I honestly don't think Obsidian is angry about it, because it's like, if that was in the contract than that was in the contract. Maybe they'll not do that sort of contract in the future, but you can't really hold it against Bethesda.

Obsidian would do TES much better than Bethesda and it would also give them something interesting to work on rather than a fuckin south park game and trying to recapture nostalgia

#14 Posted by FreakAche (2954 posts) -

@Oldirtybearon said:

Basically it was just Obsidian whining because they don't know how to code games properly.

As other people have pointed out, this just feels unfair. Legacy code is one of the largest sources of bugs in any software development. The case of New Vegas was particularly troublesome because not only was Obsidian working with legacy code, but it was code that they had no role in writing.

#15 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4851 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@Oldirtybearon said:

@FreakAche said:

@BaneFireLord said:

I would love to see an Obsidian take on it, but thanks to the big old New Vegas debacle, that's never going to happen.

What's the "New Vegas debacle"? I still haven't played it. Do you just mean the fact that it was kind of buggy? Was it really that much worse than the Bethesda developed games?

Rumours persist that Bethesda offered little to no quality assurance and withheld Obsidian's bonus. The reason they did so is because the contract stipulated that the Metacritic average of New Vegas had to hit at least 85. the MC averagve of New Vegas was 84.

Basically it was just Obsidian whining because they don't know how to code games properly.

that game was made quite quickly for how big it is (a year and a half, I believe?) it was honestly surprising it wasn't as buggy as it could have been. It was also the first time they worked with that engine an all.

and I honestly don't think Obsidian is angry about it, because it's like, if that was in the contract than that was in the contract. Maybe they'll not do that sort of contract in the future, but you can't really hold it against Bethesda.

Obsidian would do TES much better than Bethesda and it would also give them something interesting to work on rather than a fuckin south park game and trying to recapture nostalgia

Except not really, because the beauty of the Elder Scrolls games involves their ability to transport you to another world where you can be whoever and do whatever you want. Obsidian RPGs don't offer that level of freedom and they never have. I like Obsidian RPGs (when they're not entirely broken like New Vegas), but their strength lies in narrative and characters, not in gameplay freedom.

#16 Posted by Animasta (14712 posts) -

@Oldirtybearon: there was plenty of gameplay freedom in new vegas?

also new vegas is hardly entirely broken, even when it came out (it was PRETTY broken, but I completed my first game without any serious bugs)

I mean Dungeon Siege 3 apparently had very little bugs, so it's not like their gameplay programmers were at fault, it was the fact that bethesda's engine is awful and confusing.

#17 Posted by Marz (5658 posts) -

Elder Scrolls Online is basically an elder scrolls game not being developed by bethesda.

#18 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4851 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@Oldirtybearon: there was plenty of gameplay freedom in new vegas?

also new vegas is hardly entirely broken, even when it came out (it was PRETTY broken, but I completed my first game without any serious bugs)

I mean Dungeon Siege 3 apparently had very little bugs, so it's not like their gameplay programmers were at fault, it was the fact that bethesda's engine is awful and confusing.

Dungeon Siege 3 is the most linear game I've ever had the misfortune of playing. And for a top down Action RPG, that's kinda... sad.

Look at Alpha Protocol or KOTOR 2, or any of the other RPGs Obsidian has made. They're very narrow and linear. That in and of itself isn't a bad thing, but to say that they could take their style and make a better Elder Scrolls game out of it is laughable and attempts to diminish the herculean effort Bethesda puts into creating their games. Nobody else has the stones to put out a game as expansive and all-encompassing as Bethesda. New Vegas, despite being technically "open world" was chock full of invisible walls and corridor crawls all so Obsidian could funnel when and where you accessed quests, content, whatever. On top of that, the game was savagely broken from the word "go." If you didn't experience any major game breaking bugs, then bully for you. The rest of us on Planet Earth weren't so lucky.

But hey, if you want to continue being an Obsidian apologist, be my guest. I like their games, but I won't blindly kiss the studio's collective ass when there are people who made Geocities web pages with more skill than Obsidian programmers.

#19 Posted by PenguinDust (12557 posts) -

What makes the Elder Scrolls games special is that we don't see a new one every year or even every other year. I think Bethesda understands that in the RPG genre, you can have too much too easily if you're not careful. Two games this generation is enough. I'll be ready for another Elder Scrolls game around 2015. I'd rather Fallout 4 next followed by a new franchise. Maybe something set in space or the modern world; the paranormal or spy vs spy would do nicely.

#20 Posted by Gooddoggy (411 posts) -

@Marz said:

Elder Scrolls Online is basically an elder scrolls game not being developed by bethesda.

Yeah, this was my response when I saw the OP. In terms of single-player off-shoots along the lines of New Vegas, then I don't think it makes sense for them to farm that out. New Vegas made sense, as a lot of people from Obsidian had Fallout roots from back in the day, but between the main TES games and Fallout, would Bethesda really want to have a third line of giant RPGs? Doesn't that just dilute the brand? You'd have one coming out every year...

#21 Posted by EquitasInvictus (2036 posts) -

@Oldirtybearon said:

@Animasta said:

@Oldirtybearon: there was plenty of gameplay freedom in new vegas?

also new vegas is hardly entirely broken, even when it came out (it was PRETTY broken, but I completed my first game without any serious bugs)

I mean Dungeon Siege 3 apparently had very little bugs, so it's not like their gameplay programmers were at fault, it was the fact that bethesda's engine is awful and confusing.

Dungeon Siege 3 is the most linear game I've ever had the misfortune of playing. And for a top down Action RPG, that's kinda... sad.

Look at Alpha Protocol or KOTOR 2, or any of the other RPGs Obsidian has made. They're very narrow and linear. That in and of itself isn't a bad thing, but to say that they could take their style and make a better Elder Scrolls game out of it is laughable and attempts to diminish the herculean effort Bethesda puts into creating their games. Nobody else has the stones to put out a game as expansive and all-encompassing as Bethesda. New Vegas, despite being technically "open world" was chock full of invisible walls and corridor crawls all so Obsidian could funnel when and where you accessed quests, content, whatever. On top of that, the game was savagely broken from the word "go." If you didn't experience any major game breaking bugs, then bully for you. The rest of us on Planet Earth weren't so lucky.

But hey, if you want to continue being an Obsidian apologist, be my guest. I like their games, but I won't blindly kiss the studio's collective ass when there are people who made Geocities web pages with more skill than Obsidian programmers.

Wait a minute... don't you remember Fallout 3? I don't think it's fair to pit Obsidian against "the herculean effort" Bethesda puts into creating their The Elder Scrolls games when the more immediate comparison between FO3 and FO:NV is available, since Bethesda's Fallout 3 was an even worse offender with regards to "invisible walls" (main quest missions and some very binary final choices), "corridor crawls" (being forced to take the subway route to DC at some point of the main questline; parts of DC are inaccessible otherwise) and even certain aspects of the quirky brokenness of the engine.

I mean, if you even compare the core main quest paths and outcomes, Fallout: New Vegas is far more open than Fallout 3 (you've got the faction associations -- even an option for your own dark horse faction -- and multiple paths (doing NCR/Legion/House quests and stacking up your faction allies and immediate companions while getting an opportunity to develop them over a quest or two across the Mojave) whereas Fallout 3 kinda forced you on one side of the BOS vs. Enclave (unless you really wanted to be grimy as heck to the one side you were forced with) where your options boiled down to basically: FEV or not? Sacrifice yourself at the Jefferson memorial or or make Sarah Lyons do it (even while Fawkes, the most obvious choice due to his immunity, wasn't even an option until much later when they were forced to revise their ending with post-game DLC).

I will still say that overall, with The Elder Scrolls, Bethesda is still superior at providing expansive and open world experiences. They have no reason to let that go, either.

With respect to the Fallout franchise, however, their overall superiority falls short against what Obsidian accomplished with New Vegas. Finally, I'd like to reiterate that your dismissal of Obsidian programmers is grossly misplaced. The same issues that existed with Fallout: New Vegas were practically a result of how Bethesda ported Oblivion's gamebryo engine into Fallout 3 in the first place. I experienced game breaking bugs in both Fallout 3 and New Vegas -- heck I've even experienced crashes with parts of Oblivion back in the day, so I can't let you dismiss Obsidian's programmers like that. As someone who personally understands the labor that goes into programming and having actually experienced how broken the development tools for the gamebryo engine are when I looked at it myself for Oblivion, FO3 and NV (I follow the modding community and have worked with those tools to optimize my personal experience with those games), it's not right to attribute all the blame to Obsidian. Bethesda made its shares of mistakes with their engine choices and development tools, too.

#22 Edited by fisk0 (4290 posts) -

Were the Elder Scrolls Adventures/Legends (Redguard and Battlespire) games in the 90's and the mobile dungeon crawler in-house developed games?

It could certainly be an interesting experiment, if Bethesda/Zenimax haven't alienated all their developer partners, InXile, Obsidian and Human Head all pretty much said the same thing about working with them, didn't they?

While a New Vegas style non-Bethesda attempt at making a full scale open world RPG could be interesting, I'd probably be even more interested if they tried something entirely different. An Ceasar style town simulator? Large scale RTS with territorial control á la Emperor: Battle for Dune? X-COM style isometric SRPG set during the downfall of the Dwemer civilization? Mage's Guild Wonderbook spell creator with Kinect support? Descent/Terminal Velocity style 6DOF FPS where you play as a dragon? Messiah/Mindjack/Stacking style game where you play as one of the malevolent deadra and possess people? A Bimini Run style seafaring game? As long as it's not just another DOTA/MOBA or Tower Defense game, I'm up for anything!

#23 Posted by AuthenticM (3761 posts) -

I don't think so. It's their baby. Despite the games shipping with bugs, I am not interested in seeing a mainline TES game made by someone other than Bethesda.

#24 Posted by Animasta (14712 posts) -

Honestly? I crashed more often playing Fallout 3, 2 years after it came out, than I ever did playing new vegas.

Fallout 3 play time: 44 hours

New Vegas play time: 192 hours

I can expect a fallout 3 crash once an hour.

So yes, I'm clearly being an obsidian apologist (I aint never played dungeon siege 3 either despite having it, nor do I want to)

#25 Posted by YOU_DIED (703 posts) -

@EquitasInvictus: I would say Bethesda is better at creating interesting environments, but Obsidian is miles ahead in the writing and gameplay departments (which matter the most to me). I would be very interested in a non-Bethesda TES since they haven't really gone anywhere with it.

#26 Posted by EXTomar (4843 posts) -

I'd like to see a strategy style game along th elines of Fallout Tactics.

#27 Posted by yoshimitz707 (2453 posts) -

@Animasta: Anecdotal evidence works both ways. I had tons of bugs and hard locks in the 20 hours I played with New Vegas but almost no problems in the 80 hours of Fallout 3 I played. But the general majority seem to agree that New Vegas was much buggier than Fallout 3, I don't see how you can discount that based on just your experience.

#28 Posted by Lind_L_Taylor (3966 posts) -

I liked New Vegas, but Obsidian had developers that were part of the Original Fallout series, so it 
made sense to let them build an expansion.  And it was good.  I think I liked New Vegas better than 
Fallout 3.  That being said, I don't think anyone outside of Bethesda should touch an Elder Scrolls 
game.  They get incredible writers, D&D guru-nerds, artists, & talented voice to build their games 
& you can see the labor of love that is Skyrim.  Hell, my whole fuckin' family is playing that game 
as we speak.  I just got back into it, one member started playing it for the first time, & another still 
playing it faithfully since it was released last year.

#29 Posted by Animasta (14712 posts) -

@yoshimitz707 said:

@Animasta: Anecdotal evidence works both ways. I had tons of bugs and hard locks in the 20 hours I played with New Vegas but almost no problems in the 80 hours of Fallout 3 I played. But the general majority seem to agree that New Vegas was much buggier than Fallout 3, I don't see how you can discount that based on just your experience.

no, I'm not saying it was less buggy in general (just less buggy for me).

I was just saying that I'm not an Obsidian apologist because I don't have as many crashes with new vegas as I do with fallout 3.

and because I think fallout 3 has terrible writing

#30 Edited by Zekhariah (697 posts) -

I'm not sure it will happen, unless Bethesda wants to put one out every 2 years (annualizing it would be insane).

If they did it with someone like a ex-soviet republic eastern european type developer (Piranha Bytes, Paradox, the ex STALKER people) with some oversight and help it would be at least interesting. Note, I left off CD Projeckt Red because (possible bias, loved Witcher 2) they do not need the help and it would be better if they had their own franchises rise in stature to match Bethesda.

#31 Edited by Animasta (14712 posts) -

@Zekhariah: Paradox what?

They make strategy games dude. I mean, there is an elder scrolls mod for Crusader Kings 2 coming fairly soon (I believe), but they would be the absolute wrong choice. Sure you don't mean the Mount and Blade dudes (who are turkish)?

Also Paradox is from sweden which was not an ex soviet republic

edit; also neither was Piranha Bytes because they were in west Germany

#32 Posted by Zekhariah (697 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@Zekhariah: Paradox what?

They make strategy games dude. I mean, there is an elder scrolls mod for Crusader Kings 2 coming fairly soon (I believe), but they would be the absolute wrong choice. Sure you don't mean the Mount and Blade dudes (who are turkish)?

Also Paradox is from sweden which was not an ex soviet republic

edit; also neither was Piranha Bytes because they were in west Germany

I don't necessarily want a new elder scrolls game to be a first person RPG.

But I had thought more of those companies where in the Czech Republic region (or had studios in those areas).

#33 Posted by punkxblaze (2990 posts) -

They should pull Arkane aside and be like "Hey wanna make another game ok here you go."

Though I dunno if Arkane would be great at handling a huge open world, both Dark Messiah and Dishonored have me believing they could pull off a serviceable TES game.

#34 Posted by Beforet (2929 posts) -

I would love to see an Obsidian developed TES game.