Elder Scrolls VI - What to Learn from Witcher 3
 

PCGamesN writes what they think The Elder Scrolls VI should learn from The Witcher 3.

Thanks Farflame!

More information.

I love these kinds of articles. Bethesda doesn't 'learn' - they simply repeat the same thing time and time again. If something pops up that they think they can use, they'll blatantly copy and incorporate it, usually in a clunky, cumbersome, and inferior fashion. FO:NV had plenty of things Bethesda could have 'learned' as well; instead we got Fallout 4, a masterfully vapid RPG, with limited dialog, practically non-existent C&C, and a beta minecraft-wannabe tangent to already shallow gameplay.

Perhaps there should be more articles discussing what Bethesda groupies should instead learn once and for all: War Bethesda, Bethesda never changes. Stop daydreaming otherwise and either a) relish in the complacent mediocrity or b) stop buying their games.

Well, I'm not sure what they "need" to learn in terms of business - seeing as how Bethsoft games are massively more successful overall.

That said, I do think they could stand to improve the writing a lot. I think we can all agree on that.

However, people should try to appreciate the "ultimate freedom" formula that Bethsoft are going for. It's hard to create a narrative like the one in Witcher 3 when the main character is so undefined and it would be quite counter to the intention to have pre-established relationships that have a lot of history, like we see with Dandelion, Triss and so on.

As for combat, we're - yet again - faced with two very different games. Geralt has a pre-defined arsenal that's never going to change - and Witcher 3 doesn't offer the wealth of alternatives that Skyrim does. It's a lot harder to have dual wielding, archery, stealth, and so on be equally fluid and well executed as sword + 5 signs.

Certainly, I don't want the next Bethsoft to be as limiting as Witcher 3 in that particular way, in the name of smoother animations.

However, better combat is never a bad thing.

As for mini-games, I like them well enough - but don't really consider them essential. It's not something I would like to see them dedicate resources for - unless they can truly spare them.

The Bethsoft development team is relatively small for an AAA game. I don't know how much they've expanded since Skyrim and Fallout 4 - but those two games were made with just about a hundred people. I believe ES6 will have a similarly sized development team.

I would prefer if they focused on doing what they usually do - which is refining their formula and expanding it within their own vision.

Copying other games in an effort to emulate success is hard (and, in this case, anything but required), as Witcher 3 demonstrated with its subpar open world exploration features including those dull-as-dishwater Ubisoft PoIs.

I think Witcher 4 should steer clear of that, unless they learn how to do it properly, and focus on the narrative and fantastic cast of characters.

I think ES6 should focus on freeform open world exploration and the rich arsenal of toys - though I would definitely want them to focus more on better writing for the future.

That's not to say there's nothing to learn here - I just don't think it's necessarily the right choice - given the people involved. You must understand what you're doing before you go copying it.

I don't know why people insist on having superficially similar games compete all the time - and have only one game that's everything to everyone.

That's not how that works. We have more than one great game here - so why not enjoy both for what they are - instead of enforcing copy-cat design?

Of course, I don't expect the modern gaming press to understand what they're talking about - but there it is.

Not sure if this article was already discussed somewhere or it's yet another that puts two completely different RPGs into the same basket.

Bethesda and Elder Scrolls do not need to learn anything from TW3. TW3 is the best Bioware game not made by Bioware and it's designs have absolutely nothing in common with Bethesda.

Well… that was predictable. :)

Witcher 3 vs Elder Scrolls comparisons greatly annoy me

Advising to learn from the TW3 combat system. Good article.

As long as Elder Scrolls VI doesn't learn it's a movie to watch and not be played.

Two things I wish for:
- don't (further) simplify things
- keep it moddable
Then the awesome mod community will spoil us with everything we need (and more).

Don't fix anything that aren't broken!

In terms of combat I would want to feel the weight of weapons more. If my character is swinging a two-handed sword then I really want it to look heavy and make an impact. The Dark Soul are amazing at this.
I would also like more weapon variety with new animation sets, like being able to fight with a spear.

They wont learn anything as simpler/refined is better is Bethesda's motto.

I feel like ES6 should have every DLC feature of previous games included the base game because we've already bought those and the new game shouldn't be inferior to the old game in any way.

We'll probably see base building in every Bethesda RPG from now on. It was a huge success for Fallout 4, and looks like it will be simplified, and expanded for Fallout 76.

Personally I hate it after my fifth game, and use auto building mods now.

Link - https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/u…tab=user+files

I don't exactly hate base-building - but I don't see the appeal of it, either.

But if other people enjoy that, fine.

While I haven't played Assassin's Creed: Origins, I have heard it said they borrowed a lot from the Witcher 3 - and it's a better game because of it. So it can happen. Why not ES6?

The things they should learn strive more toward narrative structures, hub quest design centered around story nodes - and most underrated of all Witcher's features: great facial animation. Seeing the micro expressions of Geralt as he listened spoke volumes.

They probably don't need to copy Witcher's exploration, Bethesda usually does pretty well with that. If anything, we need less map markers.

W3 had a lot of good aspects. But folks here forget that it was really a Batman game, complete with "detective vision" and an open world that was more about moving from one defined set piece to the next.

I really enjoyed W3, just pointing out that it was more an interactive movie than an open world RPG.

I also missed dungeons in W3… most encounters were out in the wilderness.

Reminds me of when someone claims Skyrim is mostly just a hiking simulator. People love to spout that bullshit too. :)

Meh. In W3 you are stuck playing Geralt. You have a range of combat options, and a basic “choose your own adventure” choices for story outcome.

Take away the swords and put Geralt in a bat suit and cape and no one would call it an RPG.

Cool, but I hope you're not looking to be taken seriously.