The lead designer of The Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim has discussed the difference in design philosophy between Bethesda games and Larianās Baldurās Gate 3.
My point was that Skyrim didnāt ruin RPGs because there still exists demand for RPGs and quality content. Without seminal games like Skyrim, you donāt get proper investment in games like BG3.
Without seminal games like Skyrim, you donāt get proper investment in games like BG3.
What are you even trying to say? BG3 wouldnāt exist without Skyrim? did you ever play Diablo 1 or 2? World Of Warcraft during Burning Crusade or Wrath Of The Lich King?
Skyrim didnāt bring anything new. Skyrim is just a drop in the ocean, with no impact on Baldurās Gate 3, as there were tons of greater and more impactful games before that.
Now weāre talking about money? Do you have the slightest idea of how much of a cash cow WoW have been for Blizzard since 2004? In 2010 WoW had more than 10 millions subscribers. $100m a month, not counting the price of the expansion packs.
What about GTA? 400 millions copies sold.
Skyrim could have failed miserably, youād still be able to play BG3 in is exact same form as today. Skyrim is no exception. As a matter of fact, Skyrim wouldnāt exist if it was not for previous successful games.
You named two games that are entirely different. Those two made their money on multiplayer. Skyrim is a single player RPG experience that encourages mods. Skyrimās success as a single player experience enabled games like Dragon Age Inquisition and Witcher 3 and Divinity OS2 to get the funding they needed to become fully realized.
Skyrim is a triple A RPG. I havenāt made one change to my argument. My argument is not even my argument. Itās the āStanding on the shoulders of giantsā metaphor. If you like what you see today, then you have to give credit to the works that impacted the current environment.
BG3 has nothing to do with Skyrim. The gameplay has nothing to do with it. The story has nothing to do with it either. BG3 exists because of BG1 and BG2. You would know that if youāve ever played one of those game. But you didnāt because you are to young to know shit. As a matter of fact, every Larianās game exists because of Baldurās gate. The world didnāt begin the day you grab your first controller you know?
Now, if we stop talking about gameplay and talk about money like you did, BG3 never had to wait for Skyrim to be a success, as there were tremendously successful games before Skyrim already.
Keep repeating yourself if you like, it wonāt change how wrong you are.
Divinity OS2 to get the funding they needed to become fully realized
Divinity
Get the funding they needed
Lol donāt talk out your ass just cuz your point is running out of steam. I donāt wholly disagree that Skyrim wasnāt a massive impact in gaming, but it wasnāt this massive turning point for RPGs to suddenly become popular.
Skyrim was an ambitious project that somehow didnāt bite Bethesda in the ass. It taught tons of valuable lessons including laying the grounds for the great open worlds we have now. Nobody in 2011 was imagining games having the scale of open world we see in shit like Elden Ring, but Skyrim showed a glimpse to the future.
The flip of that being that Skyrim didnāt save RPGs from disappearing and they were already a massively popular genre and to say that future RPGs relied on its success, especially 12 years down the road, is a huge overstatement that reeks of fanboyism.
I think we made some progress in my point, so I just want to try to drive it home. The original argument was āSkyrim was a blight on the games industry.ā
The reason I am trying to say that āSkyrim is influential on modern RPGsā is to disagree with the blight comment. I believe there are many ways that modern RPGs benefit from Skyrimās contribution to the genre.
If Skyrim were truly a blight, weād have more like the new Assassins Creed where itās a massive world with little content to discover. To me, the problem with that argument though is that Skyrim and Assassinās Creed are still pretty fun without the narrative content.
So, what the point of your comment about Skyrim then ?
Maybe you should begin with that before saying Skyrim had any influence on BG3, donāt you think?
My point was that Skyrim didnāt ruin RPGs because there still exists demand for RPGs and quality content. Without seminal games like Skyrim, you donāt get proper investment in games like BG3.
What are you even trying to say? BG3 wouldnāt exist without Skyrim? did you ever play Diablo 1 or 2? World Of Warcraft during Burning Crusade or Wrath Of The Lich King?
Skyrim didnāt bring anything new. Skyrim is just a drop in the ocean, with no impact on Baldurās Gate 3, as there were tons of greater and more impactful games before that.
In the form it is today? No. You donāt get $100M to develop the game if you donāt have previous titles selling 60M copies.
Now weāre talking about money? Do you have the slightest idea of how much of a cash cow WoW have been for Blizzard since 2004? In 2010 WoW had more than 10 millions subscribers. $100m a month, not counting the price of the expansion packs.
What about GTA? 400 millions copies sold.
Skyrim could have failed miserably, youād still be able to play BG3 in is exact same form as today. Skyrim is no exception. As a matter of fact, Skyrim wouldnāt exist if it was not for previous successful games.
You are overly and pointlessly focused on Skyrim.
You named two games that are entirely different. Those two made their money on multiplayer. Skyrim is a single player RPG experience that encourages mods. Skyrimās success as a single player experience enabled games like Dragon Age Inquisition and Witcher 3 and Divinity OS2 to get the funding they needed to become fully realized.
lol
What does Skyrim, a first person realtime 3D game has to do with Baldurās Gate games? Absolutely nothing.
So whatās the point of even bringing it in the conversation, if by your own words I am not allowed to bring different type of games?
Stop making U-turns every time I tell you things you donāt want to hear.
Skyrim is a triple A RPG. I havenāt made one change to my argument. My argument is not even my argument. Itās the āStanding on the shoulders of giantsā metaphor. If you like what you see today, then you have to give credit to the works that impacted the current environment.
I wonāt because itās BS
BG3 has nothing to do with Skyrim. The gameplay has nothing to do with it. The story has nothing to do with it either. BG3 exists because of BG1 and BG2. You would know that if youāve ever played one of those game. But you didnāt because you are to young to know shit. As a matter of fact, every Larianās game exists because of Baldurās gate. The world didnāt begin the day you grab your first controller you know?
Now, if we stop talking about gameplay and talk about money like you did, BG3 never had to wait for Skyrim to be a success, as there were tremendously successful games before Skyrim already.
Keep repeating yourself if you like, it wonāt change how wrong you are.
Lol donāt talk out your ass just cuz your point is running out of steam. I donāt wholly disagree that Skyrim wasnāt a massive impact in gaming, but it wasnāt this massive turning point for RPGs to suddenly become popular.
Skyrim was an ambitious project that somehow didnāt bite Bethesda in the ass. It taught tons of valuable lessons including laying the grounds for the great open worlds we have now. Nobody in 2011 was imagining games having the scale of open world we see in shit like Elden Ring, but Skyrim showed a glimpse to the future.
The flip of that being that Skyrim didnāt save RPGs from disappearing and they were already a massively popular genre and to say that future RPGs relied on its success, especially 12 years down the road, is a huge overstatement that reeks of fanboyism.
I think we made some progress in my point, so I just want to try to drive it home. The original argument was āSkyrim was a blight on the games industry.ā
The reason I am trying to say that āSkyrim is influential on modern RPGsā is to disagree with the blight comment. I believe there are many ways that modern RPGs benefit from Skyrimās contribution to the genre.
If Skyrim were truly a blight, weād have more like the new Assassins Creed where itās a massive world with little content to discover. To me, the problem with that argument though is that Skyrim and Assassinās Creed are still pretty fun without the narrative content.