Elder Scrolls VI: Bethesda Must Evolve 

Thank you for your very thoughtful comment Vince. I agree on all points. Especially the part about Bethesda losing too much veteran talent. I think that ultimately had a lot to do with how Starfield turned out.

I’m sorry you wasted dozens of hours of your life you’ll never get back on an artistically dead video game. The only people who deserve any sort of credit at Bethesda anymore are the environmental and world design teams. Everything else is a mockery to anyone with artistic comprehension any good taste

I just played skyrim for the very first time (I know you're jealous) and I find it hard to believe that Bethesda made it. It's twelve years old, but it's the best game I've played in years.

@@ColorsFadeGaming 19:23 i understand this is now an older video for you, but i just wanted to point out, that bethesda has never used motion capture in their games, the games you talked about that have beautiful character models in the cutscenes are just that, they are prerendered cutscenes, in bethesda games they are going straight off of the in game character model which is a dramatic difference from pre-rendered cutscene which is what all of these other games use. it looks good for what it is, but they don't do pre-rendered anything in their games, which is why it's so uncanny valley in comparison to every other game out there, so in truth what your really asking for bethesda to do is pre-render their character's cutscnees. but the issue with pre-rendered cutscenes is that you can't see any new changes to the character model that don't already exist in the game, so say you do download a mod that makes your character good looking but diffrent from the pre-rendered cutscene, it won't reflect what your character looks like in that pre-rendered cutscene because it's based on what existed in the game before the mods, which means ultimately you can't view the changes on your character during these cutscenes, it would be like getting that piper mod you showed in this video and when a conversation starts, it shows the pre-rendered NPC model without the makeover from the mod. so this is the reason why they don't do the pre-rendered stuff in their games, it would be the same issue if you were to install a mod that dramatically changes the landscape and then when your in a conversation cutscene suddenly it goes back to the vanilla look instead of that mod in the cutscenes. 19:40 also thought i would mention, they don't ask modders to do anything, they allow modders to do as they wish, idk where people get this idea that bethesda is forcing modders to fix their games? like it's such a stupid argument that lacks meaning and a realistic point of view, now the modders do fix their games, that's not being debated here, it's this assumed idea that people get it into their heads that this is the reality when it's some shit you made up in your own mind to help you cope with the issue or something like that. modders will fix or make changes to bethesda games regardless what bethesda wants, just saying, bethesda isn't going to these modders houses and holding a gun to their heads and forcing them to fix their crappy game lol.

@@user-tp5yb4hr4w You are mistaken. Character model mods work fine in Baldur's Gate 3 because pre-rendering and motion capture have nothing to do with how a character is rendered in the pipeline. Your own character appears in many cut scenes, and players have used all kinds of visual mods on them, and they don't break cutscenes. It would behoove you to understand how a rendering pipeline works before making such erroneous statements. Also, you completely misunderstand the modding point. Of course Bethesda isn't going to modders homes and "holding a gun to their head" - what an absurd statement. But you can bet they're *not* investing time and money in certain features (like the UI) because they fully expect modders to change (aka "fix") it. Anticipating modder involvement is not the same as mandating it. And it's that anticipation that causes Bethesda to shirk their duties as developers. SMH

I agree, it's crazy.

@@ColorsFadeGamingit won’t happen. They’ve always done 1st and third person together without fault. You don’t fix what ain’t broken. Not saying third person can’t be utilized better, but they won’t scrap FP

Go watch skyrim gameplay with third person mods. It can be done

@@Arutima your right, however it should never be excluded to only use the one perspective in their games, choice above all is best for the players playstyle.

​@@Arutimaits not Skyrim though. Its the Witcher. Or Elden Ring. The key part of the Elder Scrolls is the immersion. First person is a part of that. 90% of people play in first person. There exists really good first person melee combat as well (Chiv, Mordhau). Its just a bad take mate. Accept it.

i like both options for sure, i don't like it when a game locks out the option, so this is why i love both options, because it pleases both sides of the people in which they prefer in the game, and i choose to use both options in bethesda games and i prefer having both options, because sometimes it's better played in 1st or 3rd depending on the situation.

Maybe next time it will actually take place in Morrowind lmao

Morrowind wasn't restricted by voice actors. Sadly the voice acting of Oblivion and Skyrim were the biggest bottleneck of giving expansive lore/dialogue. Morrowind, Daggerfall and Arena all being text-based gave the games a lot more depth in conversation.

couldnt stand fallout 4 voice acting for the main character etc, was a massive downgrade from good writing options

I was utterly baffled by that take. Almost made me stop watching the video

You reinforced his point. Cyberpunk's first person felt stifling

First person gimps melee combat way too much. Elder Scrolls setting has so much untapped potential, they could make a very nice and casual combat more akin to soulslikes but without the difficulty ofc, since the target audience for these games are dad gamers that play on their couch when the wife goes to sleep. If TES6 is Skyrim 2, it's gonna be a massive fail. Too many great rpgs with amazing combat and gameplay have been released since 2011 for them to just go with the same boring combat.

They actually did that with Starfield. They hired the clutter mod person from Fallout/Skyrim. But that's the only one that I know about. I don't think hiring modders fixes their major problems, sadly. They have some serious bone-deep issues with their dev process. Doing a video on that soon.

​@@ColorsFadeGamingYeah Elianora... She was always on Bethesda's payroll. She's now nothing but a marketing plow to say "Hey look we work with modders, see ? We're one of you now".... Instead they used them to make microtrasnaction shops.

I'm on my first play through of Skyrim and honestly the only thing that keeps me from using mods is that I want to get the achievements on my first play through. Next go around, I'll use mods but not yet.

Starfield and its design decisions really make it obvious that Bethesda never quite understood what made their games good.

I'm playing Skyrim since its release and never installed a single mod

That's the other way to swing, is to focus entirely on a revamped first person mode, and that will be my next video, because I have a lot of ideas.

I wouldn't say "never" though. Baldur's Gate 3 ended up being 100% worth it. So did Far Cry 6. And despite the console issues, I had almost no problems with Cyberpunk 2077 and loved playing it at launch. I'm not sad I bought Starfield on preorder, but I am disappointed it wasn't a better game. I would have still bought it even if I'd waited to see the user reviews. A game has to get some really bad reviews for me to shy away from it (like Redfall did, which I was going to buy, but did not.)

@@ColorsFadeGaming BG3 is top on my wishlist. I only have 1050 Ti gpu. So in my case, I can play 60$ BG3 and have a good time. But not 70$ Starfield. It was very unoptimized. I can play witcher 3 very smoothly and very few loading screens. All I see is the Witcher 3 graphics are also very good. Starfield graphics are not better but downgraded compared to Witcher 3. My thoughts are "I am late to play but it won't matter if there are only good games to play. It was better than riding a hype train and crashing badly." Just bought GTA4, GTAV and RD2. BG3 will be next year.

Its' becoming apparent that Emil is a huge impediment to any future success. Thanks for commenting GreatTea!

Emil has always been that way. Ken Ralston was the driving force that kept him and Todd in check. He left and those two started whittling down mechanics, story boarding, and RPG elements. It started with Skyrim.

@@kendo2377 That's very true..

I certainly don't want an AC clone. I'm sorry if my video gave you that impression. What I want is *more* immersive, interesting combat, and I think 3rd person does that better. But, I concede, there's a chance for 1st person to be really well done as well, and that will be my next video.

Yeah, that's exactly what I want.

Haha, I love it. That's funny (because it sounds like it could be true). And you're right - nobody relevant can hear me. But I still gotta speak my mind. /shrug. Thanks for watching though!

@@ColorsFadeGaming I've probably spent 15K hours with Bethesda content so far, including CK, GECK, XEdit, and Notepad++. But Bethesda finally killed my dreams, they are just the worst (and I'm waiting for paid mods with alien races and vehicles). At everything. I mean, I hate EA, but at this point I would prefer to play a predatory and stupid online shooter from them than a Bethesda "RPG". BTW: I was working in the CK for Skyrim while listening to your video.

@@PixelMurder I hear you. That's why I had to make this video. I am dreading what they're going to do with Elder Scrolls 6 now. Skyrim is so awesome. I'm like you man - I am absolutely certain I've spent more hours in Bethesda games than all the other games in my library combined. But they have lost their way. Oh well. At least we still have Skyrim and Fallout 4. I'm currently doing another Fallout 4 run and it's so much fun. Still, to this day. And with a few mods it looks gorgeous.

I also like Oblivion and if TES6 sucks, I just play Skywind 🤣 I think Avowed could also become awesome. We‘ll get a KingdomComeDeliverance2 and a Witcher4. I think at that point they have to put out an amazing game to not completely fade over time.

Irony of things is you're most likely true, only recently Kurt Kuhlmann and Will Shen left Bethesda... Kurt worked more than two decades in Bethesda, he's the lore head of TES and they fired him. There was also Bruce Nesmith who left a year before... Bethesda now only has Todd and his best friend the joker Emil Pagliarulo.

I think it's just something about your main method of defense being a roll. It's kinda lame. There should be multiple ways. Blocking, parrying, relentless aggression, spacing, perfect timed blocks, and dashing (not rolling that looks lame, just do those fast bloodborne / Witcher 3 dashes) That was my main problem with the souls games. You'd always eventually run into a enemy that couldn't be parried or had unlockables and your only real tool against them was rolling. Felt really bad

This video dumb.

That's where I'm at too. 3rd person allows so much more movement and attack options. First person combat is boring. But I guess that's what people want.

Fallout 4 really is the best of what Bethesda has done. I, too, was initially turned off by the settlement building, and that's why I didn't buy it at launch. I bought it 8 months later on sale. By then it had been patched and several useful mods had come out. I was entirely wrong about the settlement building. It's actually really fun *and* it ties into the story so well. But the reason the game is so good is because Bethesda really focused on the stories of the factions and the companions. Until Baldur's Gate 3 came out, I could definitively say that no game made me enjoy the companions as much as Fallout 4. Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 were great for that, but Fallout 4 took it to another level. The personal quests for each companion were really well done, and on top of that, you get a nice perk from each one when you max their affinity, which made it worthwhile to take each one along as a companion, at least long enough to maximize their affinity. But that's the funny thing - if you're like me, you might take them along thinking, "I just want their perk," and by the time you max their affinity you've come to love them as characters. They're fantastic. And then there's the factions, which I think are the best that Bethesda has ever done. Between the Minutemen, Brotherhood, Railroad, and Institute, there's a lot of different ways to go with the game and each faction offers a really unique perspective into the game world. It's still the king for me. Though Cyberpunk is making a run at that top spot. This latest update and DLC have been awesome. Oh, and I'm still firmly in the isometric camp. I will never stop loving those games. But Witcher 3, perhaps more than any other game, has sold me on the 3rd person perspective for a single protagonist RPG. If you're making a game where the player is only playing as themselves and not taking any companions along, or is only going to take one companion along, then that 3rd person view is the best. The minute you start adding party members though, that's when I prefer isometric. Like, god, I wish the Mass Effect games had been isometric, turn-based games. I'd love them.

I think it's a moot point, because I don't think that (a) they would even attempt it and (b) they necessarily have the talent to do it well, but I wanted to raise it as a point because of that very fact: that in 3rd person you can do so much more with movement and weapon attacks. But hey, at least making this video earned me a lot of hate, so there's that. (Who said the idea marketplace was a good idea?)

Thanks for that comment Mark. Appreciate it. I don't feel like the McGuffin part of the game was the problem. McGuffins can work when the writing is good and the characters are fun and compelling. Raiders of the Lost Ark is a great example. And Star Wars. McGuffin wasn't the real problem here, it was the execution. From little things to big things, the execution is off. And that creates this cumulative, snowball effect, where it's one annoying, frustrating, eye-rolling misstep after another, stacking on top of each other until peak frustration is reached. And that's not fun gaming. This game could have been awesome. At this point though... I don't really trust Todd Howard. After this and Fallout 76, I think it's far more likely that Elder Scrolls 6 is a major faceplant for Bethesda.

I really like your video. You nailed it. We really need more choice and better AI for NPCs. Also the world needs to be built with love and loads of handcrafted content. However I disagree that we need 3rd person only to make the combat better. There was a lot of fun with that immersive first person hack and slash. TES games were never about complex or stylish combat. They could go this way as you suggested, but there are many other ways to improve it. For example with more gore, cool finisher animations, cripple effects… Kingdomecome Deliverance has very good first person combat. I think that system wouldn’t fit TES6 but that’s an example that 1st person combat can be very fun as well.

I think it’s pretty apparent that “safe options” don’t exist in art. You can run for a while on saved up goodwill but that’s not a long-term strategy. A game studio unwilling to take risks is doomed to fail, see: the current state of big publishers, Skull and Bones, Kill the Justice League, Call of Duty Remake 1-3, Forspoken…

I've been thinking about this point a lot lately, especially after seeing Archaelund enter Early Access. It's a game that is played in first person until combat begins, then it switches to isometric turn-based. I'm not saying Elder Scrolls should do that (far from it) but it does make me think about the idea of switching POV for certain things. Far Cry 6 did the reverse (which I found irritating and clunky). The game is played from 1st person, but in camp it switches to 3rd person view. So what would an Elder Scrolls game actually feel like if it were first person in towns and 3rd person in the world? Like, the opposite of Far Cry 6? How would people react to an automatic switch like that? The more I think about it, the more I think it might be pretty good.

@@ColorsFadeGaming there are a lot of mods that make first person combat in Skyrim more enjoyable, and like I said it switches to a different system so it doesn't effect third person gameplay. but if first person combat had to go, this is absolutely how it should be done. just a smooth transition into third person for souls/creed combat, then back to first person when combat ends. I do like the idea of Assassins creed traversal, though I just don't think its a realistic expectation from Bethesda

@@Alistair_7609Oh, totally - not a realistic expectation. I agree. But I wasn't going to let that stop me from making a video about what they *should* do. I think we all know they won't do any of this. Starfield shows exactly they're going to do; it shows they're attitude toward their players. They're going to do the bare minimum to get by, and if the players complain, they're going to blame the players for not understanding the genius of their game.

Everyone forgets that Fallout was an isometric game, or that Grand Theft Auto was a top-down 2D game. /shrug

Which is exactly the problem with Skyrim. You can switch to third person, but there's no advantage to it; there's no extra moves, abilities, or anything to take advantage of the viewpoint. I'd love to see them push their gameplay forward, but sadly I think Starfield has shown us that is not happening.

But Dragon's Dogma is 3rd person.

@@ColorsFadeGaming I know but im using it as just an example of good combat. Sure you have the standard light & heavy attack but then you can have a charge or a large spinning sweep. I would love to actually see it work in first person but that could be a challenge. Plus you can do F*cking combos ! I lost my mind when I started a large hit string by accident, makes you engage more with combat. But idk maybe if they do it’ll be fine.

@@derrickjohnson4952I see. I don't think you have to worry. After Emil's latest comments from Bethesda, I don't think they have the desire or attitude necessary to enact change. They're perfectly happy making dated games and telling players they just don't understand how to enjoy them. And yeah, combos and things like that can make melee combat so much more engaging.

@@ColorsFadeGaming 🤦🏾‍♂️ I don’t why Bethesda is committed to not changing, the ego is to big to except criticism. But avowed from obsidian might have good combat idk

The reason to remove it, from my perspective, would be because you cannot properly implement all the moves/abilities in combat that you could do in 3rd person, if you truly went the 3rd person route. The only reason both methods work now is because Bethesda codes to the lowest common denominator, which is the first person view. It's a simple "swing sword/thrust sword/block with shield/cast magic spell at target" system that is about as basic as one can get. To do anything more you have to commit to 3rd person.

The limit to four options was dumb, I'll give you that. But the character interactions were the best they'd ever done. And that was the best set of companions. From Nick to Piper, to Cait and Codworth, etc., they were all great. Varied personalities and it was cool to get a unique perk for maxing affinity.

@@ColorsFadeGaming That`s fair. I think Starfield has the best dialogue system but they still need improvements on companion story, writing, face animation, etc... Generally everything. I just don't think they will sadly. I`m losing hope TESVI will live up to expectations it seems BGS doesn't care about competing anymore and are making games like its 2010s

Probably true. Though modders have done some really interesting things with Skyrim.

I'm very surprised you did not bring up Rdr2 when talking about reactivity and reputation.

You can have "some" of them, sure. But to me, it still feels like video games are really far away from making first person melee combat really kinetic and fun (Cyberpunk was the first I saw that made me excited to play melee). Things you can't really do in 1st person are things like Whirlwinds. And you lose so much of the spatial awareness in 1st person view, because you don't have that peripheral vision that real life allows (and 3rd person provides). Too many first person combat games, especially when you add more than a couple enemies, turn into the same situation: backup to keep everything on front of you, and then hack away. And that's just... boring.

@@Kilo-sn3yl Haven't played it (beyond the first couple hours). I need to, I know. It's just that start is so SLOW...

@ColorsFadeGaming You actually make a really good point here. And I agree on your take about the rpg creeds having really good combat. Most people think they're hack and slashes

And that is totally my fear. But I think you're right. If there were odds to place in Vegas, I'd put odds on it being ass vs. being any good.

PS: And why even suggest completely banning first person? What's wrong with the option to choose?

The FOV is the biggest hindrance to doing anything complex in 1st person. Think about Ciri's dash attack in Witcher 3. Doing that in 1st person would be a nightmare. But techniques like that could be awesome in a Elder Scrolls title for fighter types.

@@ColorsFadeGaming Yea I don’t buy that, ESO has been out for long time and you can dodge and do a similar dash attacks all in first person. Like as a nightblade you can get an ability where you teleport to someone and it can either do a lot of damage or some damage and stun the target and it works well in first person. Same with that one dragon knight ultimate ability where you leak in the air for a brief moment and slam down on your enemies. I d think ES6 can and should do more for its combat but I don’t think locking it to third person really fixes it. Like what worries me is a further reduction in class building, not having real choices or a way to distinguish your character, no interesting companions, being shoved into another chosen one role, lack luster faction, no evil factions that you can join, a boring world, and another stealth archer situation where that build is the most powerful. Improvements to combat would be great but I don’t think if the gets many of those issues fixed then the game will be trashed on anyways. Like I play BG3 sometimes and I like getting immersed in the worlds and stuff but when I’m I a fight while I don’t hate it it’s not my usual cup of tea. But I stay due to the world and the intrigue I have with the story.

@@PalletEater214You and a few others gave me something to think about in these comments, and I'm committed to building a video looking at ways to improve 1st person combat. I think it can be done. And I love to problem-solve. So keep an eye out for that one.

Check out AC Origins. Still uses first person once you draw the bow.

@@ColorsFadeGaming that goes against what you said about being only third person

@@sol1581 I don't understand. AC Origins is 3rd person. Your comment seems like needless pedantry.

@@ColorsFadeGaming a switch from 3rd to first when drawing your bow is still a switch from 3rd to 1st. 1st person is necessary for an elder scrolls game

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word "hypocritical." I'm proposing a design decision with clear benefits to the gameplay, that's all. I don't actually work for Bethesda. I have zero influence to "force" anything on anyone. Chill a bit, okay.

@ColorsFadeGaming instead of opening your response with an insult, why didn't you address the issue. You CAN 3rd person only! You don't have to use 1st person. In that you lied! There is no problem, it's fake click bate content. Bethesda does NOT force you to play 1st person. YOU on the other hand decided you are allowed to force everyone else to play the way you want them to play. That is the hypocrisy I was discussing. Tell others what they can't do while doing it at the same time. Doing one thing but saying another. Perhaps you should go out and buy a good dictionary.

@@billlyell8322 You clearly just want to be angry at me, so go ahead. If that will make you feel better, be angry. I can't make you see the point of the video. I'm sorry you can't understand what I'm saying.

@ColorsFadeGaming address the point! You know you can play skyrim 3rd person. Why do YOU have the right to stop me playing it 1st person? Answer the question and stop deflecting. Is that to difficult for you???

​@@billlyell8322I did address the point - in the video. Did you not watch? Or did you just get 10 seconds in and decide you want to rant at me? The basics of my argument are this: 3rd person offers a much wider variety of combat maneuvers than 1st person can allow. 1st person's FOV limits what you can realistically see & do with melee combat. Bethesda has used the same 1st person mechanics for decades: slash & block. That's it. It's simple, boring, and outdated. Again, watch the entire video. If you disagree with my arguments after watching the video, then fine, let's have a discussion about the specific points, instead of you just ranting at me at the top of your lungs in my comments section. In the video, I went on to show a bunch of ways 3rd person is superior to 1st person when it comes to melee-oriented combat, and I explained my reasons for believing it would make for a superior ES experience. This includes magic abilities as well. I was a die-hard 1st person advocate (which again, I address in the video if you would take the time to watch). But after being exposed to some very good 3rd person games I changed my mind about how I felt. That's what can happen to people who are open-minded: given an influx of new evidence, we can change our minds. And I have. The issue you seem to be ranting about is that players can already switch between 1st and 3rd in Skyrim, so why would I advocate for 3rd person only in ES6? And again, I ask you to watch the video. Yes, you can play in 3rd person in Skyrim, but because the game is built for 1st person, the same overly simplistic mechanics are used whether you're in 1st or 3rd person. Block & slash. That's it. My argument - my very simple, straightforward argument that you would see if you only watched the video - is that I believe you can do a LOT more with combat by switching to an entirely 3rd person POV because (here's the evidence portion of the argument) other games have already done it. And then (in the video, which you won't watch) I make my case for these specific mechanics on a case-by-base basis by showing how other games use 3rd person mechanics in their games. To me, as a person who analyzes video games and their design and mechanics, the only way switching between 1st and 3rd person really works is if the mechanics are simple. Once you start to introduce more complex mechanics, you're forced to pick a POV and stick with it. And that's what other video games do. Bethesda has gotten away with allowing the switch because their mechanics are simplistic. My argument is that more complex mechanics would make for more fulfilling combat, but to do that they'd have to pick a 3rd person POV and stick to it. Does that address the point well enough for you?

What I want is some fun combat. But more than that, I play Skyrim with fast travel off (via mods) and the Campfire/Frostfall mods installed (I even have a series here on my channel, along with Fallout 4, so you can see exactly how I play these games). Everything I do with Bethesda's games is to make them more immersive, not less. However, first person perspective is not what makes a game "immersive." It's the cohesiveness of all its interlinked systems: the writing, characters, quest design, world building, geography, etc. First person is just a viewport into that world. The world itself, and how it's constructed, is what makes something "immersive." First person can aid in making a game feel more immersive, but ultimately how immersive a game is will depend on how it's component systems mesh together. Case in point, Doom is a first person game. But would you classify it as "immersive"? There's no food, water, or sleep requirements. No systems for disease, fatigue, weather, nothing to slow the player down. Getting wet doesn't matter, etc. Armor and power-ups drop all over the place. There's nothing about that game that makes it "immersive." Because immersion isn't about a viewport. The simple fact is that 3rd person perspective offers far more capability for sword & magic combat. First person works great for shooters because the bullet hits its target far from its launch point, so the geometry of the players is more spread out. But with sword combat (and magic, with AoE spells) positioning of relative bodies is far more important, and 3rd person will always be superior because of the geometry involved. But don't worry. I'm just a content creator with an opinion. Starfield has shown us exactly what Bethesda intends to do with ES6. I'm sure the combat will be just as simple and boring as everyone hopes. Because if the responses to this video are any indication, Bethesda has a lot of fans who do not want to engage in any meaningful combat.

Games do it all the time, "dude."

@@ColorsFadeGaming - Glad you are not in charge of making the game then

@@jasonabcEnjoy the mind numbingly simplistic, boring, and uninspired combat that's coming then. Because that's what Bethesda is gonna give you. Slash, block. Whoopee.

@@ColorsFadeGaming - I agree if its anything like starefield i wouldn't buy it. I just wouldn't want it to be locked down to just a 3rd person game when you can switch modes. I personally like first person and you can have both.

@@jasonabcThe problem with building combat to support both is that you have to simplify it. It becomes a case of "lowest common denominator." Both styles have completely different strengths and offer different advantages. But in order to support both, you have to reduce the mechanics to the things they can each do, and thus you end up with the simplified mechanics that Bethesda games have. I'd like to see something more interesting this time out, but I'm sure we won't.

Thanks for chiming in @hoihoi8. Nice to hear from someone who worked there. Seems like the future of games is elsewhere. Larian, CDPR, etc. Will be sad if Fallout 4 is the last great game Bethesda makes.