It’s a major historically cross platform franchise, for one thing.
The Activision Blizzard merger and the UK’s serious reservations about Microsoft’s monopoly makes this news even more important.
Should this game be restricted to Microsoft platforms and not include the Sony platform , it would show that they are lying about being well intentioned and non monopolistic.
I thought the UK’s reservations were more over the cloud streaming market than console exclusivity.
But the reason I ask why this is “news” is because this little fact has been known for quite a while now.
I also wouldn’t really categorize The Elder Scrolls as a “historically cross-platform franchise” when only one numbered entry has shipped on anything other than PC or Xbox. Fallout would make more sense here.
Both Morrowind and Oblivion were released as Xbox exclusives, so it’s definitely not a “major historically cross plattform franchise”. Only Skyrim was released for both (though Oblivion did get ported to PS later).
Fallout is another matter though, since they’ve been released for both since Fallout 3.
It’s a major historically cross platform franchise, for one thing.
Also, there aren't a whole lot of game developers that do Bethesda-style games.
I haven't played any Mario games in a long time, and I don't know what they look like after consoles went 3d. But go back some decades, and they were side-scrolling platform games. There were lots of other side-scrolling platformers. The Mario series was a particularly good series, but it had lots of competition.
Well, there's that The Outer Worlds game that was billed as being kind of like Fallout. I was kind of disappointed with it, because some of what I'd call its weak points were really part of what make Bethesda's games for me. Bethesda has interesting perks that really alter gameplay, and The Outer Worlds has pretty bland perks that slightly bump stats. Outer Worlds is, strictly-speaking, open-world, but there's no reason to really retrace steps, so it functionally feels a lot more linear. Bethesda focuses on you wandering around the world and just stumbling across interesting things, and Outer Worlds has little to stumble across other than in cities.
However, it did get a good Metacritic score, so I expect that there were people who liked it. It was also pretty bug-free. And it is kind of in the same vein, but just didn't have what made me really enjoy Fallout titles.
More-broadly-speaking, I guess that you could call any open-world games a little like Bethesda's stuff. The Grand Theft Auto series, Saboteur, probably the Assassin's Creed series (though I've barely ever played those), the Mafia series.
EDIT: Hmm. Fallout: New Vegas and The Outer Worlds were both done by Obsidian, and Microsoft apparently acquired them as well five years back, so from a standpoint of people on other platforms (well, I'm on Linux, but can run the Windows releases via compatibility software), I can imagine that that doesn't make things less frustrating.
obinice@lemmy.world 3 years ago
It’s a major historically cross platform franchise, for one thing.
The Activision Blizzard merger and the UK’s serious reservations about Microsoft’s monopoly makes this news even more important.
Should this game be restricted to Microsoft platforms and not include the Sony platform , it would show that they are lying about being well intentioned and non monopolistic.
beefcat@lemmy.world 3 years ago
I thought the UK’s reservations were more over the cloud streaming market than console exclusivity.
But the reason I ask why this is “news” is because this little fact has been known for quite a while now.
I also wouldn’t really categorize The Elder Scrolls as a “historically cross-platform franchise” when only one numbered entry has shipped on anything other than PC or Xbox. Fallout would make more sense here.
Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee 3 years ago
Both Morrowind and Oblivion were released as Xbox exclusives, so it’s definitely not a “major historically cross plattform franchise”. Only Skyrim was released for both (though Oblivion did get ported to PS later).
Fallout is another matter though, since they’ve been released for both since Fallout 3.
tal@kbin.social 3 years ago
Also, there aren't a whole lot of game developers that do Bethesda-style games.
I haven't played any Mario games in a long time, and I don't know what they look like after consoles went 3d. But go back some decades, and they were side-scrolling platform games. There were lots of other side-scrolling platformers. The Mario series was a particularly good series, but it had lots of competition.
Chailles@lemmy.world 3 years ago
Not a whole lot? Are there even any?
tal@kbin.social 3 years ago
Well, there's that The Outer Worlds game that was billed as being kind of like Fallout. I was kind of disappointed with it, because some of what I'd call its weak points were really part of what make Bethesda's games for me. Bethesda has interesting perks that really alter gameplay, and The Outer Worlds has pretty bland perks that slightly bump stats. Outer Worlds is, strictly-speaking, open-world, but there's no reason to really retrace steps, so it functionally feels a lot more linear. Bethesda focuses on you wandering around the world and just stumbling across interesting things, and Outer Worlds has little to stumble across other than in cities.
However, it did get a good Metacritic score, so I expect that there were people who liked it. It was also pretty bug-free. And it is kind of in the same vein, but just didn't have what made me really enjoy Fallout titles.
More-broadly-speaking, I guess that you could call any open-world games a little like Bethesda's stuff. The Grand Theft Auto series, Saboteur, probably the Assassin's Creed series (though I've barely ever played those), the Mafia series.
EDIT: Hmm. Fallout: New Vegas and The Outer Worlds were both done by Obsidian, and Microsoft apparently acquired them as well five years back, so from a standpoint of people on other platforms (well, I'm on Linux, but can run the Windows releases via compatibility software), I can imagine that that doesn't make things less frustrating.