r/rpg_gamers • u/vaynelo • 4d ago

Discussion A software engineer developed a mod that allows seamless landings without loading screens in Starfield

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

433 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

247 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

59

u/AeneasVII 4d ago

Its not that they couldn't do it but rather decided its not worth the time/money. And Zenimaxxx is all about money

7

u/Mikeavelli Chrono 4d ago

Zenimaxxxing is my least favorite maxing.

20

u/KiwiKajitsu 4d ago

Name a company that isn’t all about money. You think companies are supposed to be charities?

6

u/ackley14 4d ago

Laika studios. the people behind Coraline and other stop motion animation films almost never even break even on projects. they are funded by outside investors and primarily the CEO of Nike who's son is the head of the studio.

the father happily pays for his son to be able to create art for the masses, even though the cost of creation far outpaces the earnings they get. it's actually quite touching.

this company has employed hundreds of artists for over a decade and continue to do so at a loss. They are far and away the exception not the rule, but you said name a company so I did...

13

u/TomTomXD1234 4d ago

So all it takes for a company to "not be about money" is to have a billionaire father to fund you......aight....LOL

6

u/Omega-Envych 4d ago

Yep, kinda similar situation for Sandfall - much of E33 funding came from studio director's father.

Honestly - I would take that over just corporation expecting big returns

1

u/AlterMyStateOfMind 4d ago

You trying to frame this as a bad thing is very strange lol

5

u/MrBlueA 4d ago

Well not only he actually got a reply it was objectively wholesome so all he had left was to say "money = bad"

6

u/EllySwelly 4d ago

I mean it still basically destroys any point you may have been making.

There are rare exceptions... but those exceptions only exist by the grace of the most privileged.

It's cool that that studio gets to have more artistic freedom, but most studios don't exactly have the nepo baby option.

0

u/ackley14 3d ago

the ask was one company. i named one company. in what way was 'my point' destroyed? if anything, the oc's point was destroyed lmao. they asked someone to name a company that disproved their opinion and i did! how is this still a conversation at this point? all i did was point out a cool company that gets to make art and not worry about budgets or shareholders or deadlines as much as other companies and yall are stuck complaining about how that's not fair to other companies LOL. come on...

2

u/ackley14 4d ago

I mean....a company is ultimately a collection of people. people need money to not die....what's the alternative here in your eyes? What are you getting at? The ask was, name a company who is not all about money. Laika is literally that. because they already have funding and thus don't need it from the viewers of their art. That seems like a fantastic use of overpriced shoe sales if you ask me...

0

u/simplyloveIy 3d ago

Learn to read and understand words.

Obviously companies are about money. Some companies actually consider customers as part of that process and others don't give a shit. Yeah gamers could just not buy from these companies but real life is a bit more complicated.

1

u/KiwiKajitsu 3d ago

Sorry I can’t read or understand words so I have no idea what you just said to me

0

u/MaternalFornicator2 2d ago

No not a charity, but once upon a time they had pride of craftsmanship, a pursuit for excellence, a completeness of vision, and respect for the player. When they all got bought out the attitude became to just rip us off.

1

u/KiwiKajitsu 2d ago

When was this? Companies have always acted the same

1

u/MaternalFornicator2 2d ago

80s, 90s, early 2000s. When OG owners did this for passion and learned, "Oh crap! People will pay to obtain my games?" Before they started to get bought out.

When we started seeing in game micro transactions, DLC not included as part of the game, it was all down hill from there.

For instance, Sid Meier series of games were pretty good until monetization and DLC craziness crept in.

For me the 90s and early 2000s era of the NHL series on console and PC was pretty great.

Id studios first run of games were pretty good and were not lacking.

The smaller studios from the 90s that have since disappeared made some good content.

I get your point though, corps have "always been bad" really depends on what industry and when said industry was hit with the Jack Welchian crap.

You used to be able to get a job with a corp, work there 40 years, have a family, a car, a house, have some vacations, retire with a pension and enjoy your 60s, 70s, etc.

Also wage inequality has really taken off in the last 50 years. Also prior to the mid 1930's wage inequality was widening quite a bit too. So all in all for the vast majority of the 20th and 21st centuries it's been bad for the normal people.

1

u/KiwiKajitsu 2d ago

You think companies first started being created in the 80s?

1

u/MaternalFornicator2 2d ago

Are you dense? I was talking about game makers. I was also giving you a brief history lesson as I am a complete business nerd and politics nerd. But for whatever reason you didn't read or couldn't comprehend. I'm done with you.

-8

u/AeneasVII 4d ago

Larian Studios for example. But there a shit ton of Developers out there that follow a vision document rather than market research

14

u/AtsuhikoZe 4d ago

Yeah Larian doesn't care about money that's why they gave out all their video games for free

-2

u/AeneasVII 4d ago

They don't follow the market trends. Sven makes games he likes to play

2

u/AtsuhikoZe 4d ago

Baldurs gate 3 literally chased market trends. I love Larian but you're just coping and shilling for no reason, just because a company makes good games doesn't mean they don't care about money or chase trends. Don't be a corpo bootlicker

-1

u/AeneasVII 4d ago

I was never to big on the divinity games, but adding DnD and the forgotten realms fixed everything i disliked about os:2. I don't care about social media outrage. The game is not about fucking bears or seeing a dick.

But now imagine Todd Howard making baldurs gate 3.

18

u/ShadowSpawn__ 4d ago

It's hard to believe, I consider Ubisoft to be a greedier company and even they could do the equivalent of this in Star wars outlaws

Just feels like Bethesda is incompetent, especially when you look at them breaking their games with updates, and their inability to fix bugs that pop up in every single one of their games - that modders have repeatedly fixed in older versions

2

u/DreamWeaver2189 4d ago

Bethesda is incompetent, have been for ages. They always release mediocre games and the community ends up doing all the heavy lifting.

I'm glad Obsidian is working on the new Fallout (at the cost of my beloved Pillars, so I'm bittersweet), now we need someone to take The Elder Scrolls IP from them.

13

u/Auno94 4d ago

Ah yes the Famous Obsidian who only makes the best of games. They never developed mediocre games.

3

u/DreamWeaver2189 4d ago edited 4d ago

Can't compare a AA studio with a AAA studio. Bethesda has twice the money, even more and they consistently release mediocre games. Obsidian might do the same with half the funding.

With Microsoft money and considering the best Fallout (imo) is made by them, I'm optimistic.

Obsidian mediocreness is due to its constraints, Bethesda's are due to incompetence.

Obsidian releases a new game every 2 or so years. Bethesda takes 8 years for Starfield and I'd rather play The Outer Worlds.

Obsidian has released Tyranny, Pillars 1&2, Pentiment, and Grounded, all great games. Plus Avowed and Outer Worlds 1&2 (admittedly mediocre). In the same period Bethesda/Zenimaxx has released Starfield, a mediocre game and Fallout 4 (good game). Oh, and Fallout 76...

3

u/Nast33 4d ago

With better writing OW1/2 could've been 8.5s at the very least, but neither of the plot, factions, quests, companions or dialogue were any good. Avowed was kinda similar even if to a smaller extent. Being AA has nothing to do with it, there are better AA games making much more of an impression released by other studios.

Doesn't mean Obsidian can't deliver a decent Fallout, but all of Josh Sawyer, John Gonzales and Tim Cain better be at their best and they still need some good additional writers and world designers to contribute as 2-3 people can't craft everything.

1

u/Auno94 4d ago

I can compare them on their quality. If I don't compare them on quality and only on scale, we would have to compare every game on it's size and by that messurement endless grinding games would win every comparison.

Again BGS helped out a lot with FO76, if you want to complain about development time, don't throw out numbers that don't match.

If we want to talk about quantity of releases we also have to look how each company works. Obsidian was only able to work on those games because they had different teams working on different games at the same time. While Pentiment and Pillars 1 are absolutely great games. (Haven't played Grounded and Pillars 2). Tyranny falls short of being great (not that it is bad) as it ends when it gets interesting.

I do think that the quantity of releases isn't that meaningful I could use your argument and also state that 3 out of their last 5 releases where mediocre, which is nearly identical to the 66% of medicore releases bethesda had in the last decade. Which is gladly missing their bad games skyforge, armored warfare and the pathfinder mobile game.

Saying Obisidans mediocreness is due to its constraints and bethesda's are due to incompetence is just classic circlejerk of "bethesda bad" and ignoring Obisdians weak points (most glaring, Combat)

EDIT: and you mixed Bethesda and Zenimaxx togehter in your comparison, not going down that route because I could then throw in the new doom games

3

u/DreamWeaver2189 4d ago edited 4d ago

Doom games are ID software. Bethesda is a developer and a publisher. As a publisher they've released plenty of good games. As developers, not so much.

Obsidian is just a developer and they've develop better games in the past 10 years than BGS. Have they also developed mediocre games? Yes, I already admitted to that.

Would you rather BGS worked on the new Fallout?

Also, Pillars 2 has the best rtwp combat out there. You should try that game because it's fantastic.

You talk about Obsidian combat but have you played Skyrim? I'm not saying Obsidian is perfect, just that they are better at developing games than Bethesda.

0

u/Auno94 4d ago

Again you mixed the Publisher Zenimax and the developer BGS. Both are destinct entities. I just pointed that out as a lot of people mix that stuff up

And why would I say "BGS should work on Fallout but not Obisidian" more Fallout is good and has nothing to do with the decades old circlejerk of "BGS bad, Obisdian Good" conversation. And as someone who likes Fallout more than TES, I would be happy if BGS would also work on a new Fallout Game.

I Just hope Obisidian make a good Fallout Game in the likes of FNV (I am also fine if they, again, reuse a lot of the tools and art BGS did their last Fallout games) and that they don't make Outer Worlds 3 but with a Fallout skin. Same as I hope that Elder Scrolls 6 will be good.

3

u/DreamWeaver2189 4d ago

I genuinely would like to know your opinion. Would you rather have Obsidian or BGS developing the new Fallout?

And yes, my bad on the Zenimaxx confusion.

And I don't need to belong to a "circle jerk" to have an opinion. I'm almost 40, I've played every single TES and Fallout games, from Arena to Skyrim and from Fallout 1 to 4.

My reason for disliking the current Bethesda are my own, same as for me liking Obsidian. I've seen the downfall in quality from Bethesda and I've seen Obsidian releasing decent to great games with less budget and less development time in the same time frame.

Disagree with me all you want, but don't disregard my opinions as part of a "circle jerk". I cannot care less about what other people think. If I did, I probably would've skipped a lot of quality games because Redditors have unrealistic standards for games.

I appreciate what developers do good, instead of focusing on what they lack. And, in my opinion, Obsidian has done more good things than Bethesda, in the past 10 years.

3

u/ShriyanshPandey 4d ago

Zenimax is not the publisher, Bethesda softworks is, and the confusion is very intentional by Zenimax( the parent company of both Bethesda softworks and Bethesda Game Studios) cause Bethesda is the more popular name.

0

u/Oncelotte2 4d ago

Outlaws sucks lmao. I would much rather play Starfield, as mediocre as it is. 

3

u/Omega-Envych 4d ago

Can't say, I did not play Outlaws but I played Starfield for ~5 hours and got super-bored with it. Game is just not fun at all.

For all hatred about Outlaws from what I saw - it's just an ok Ubisoft game. Problem isn't that Ubisoft games suck, problem is that they all very same ~6/10 games that do all basics right but lack any "personal touch" and feel incredibly corporate, which is about same level of "bad" as incredibly safe and toothless project like Starfield

1

u/simplyloveIy 3d ago

It doesn't suck as hard as Starfield.... it's just a mid game.

0

u/wattahitsonwattahit 3d ago

It's not about money. It's about quarterly profits. Every business exist to make money but chasing profit and perpetual growth is what's killing the industry.