miscu

that's right

  • he/him/any

big trans cat lady / icon by chimeracauldron / banner by chimk81


bethesda has solid writing mainly in the big picture, they're less invested in the minutiae of individual people or the places they live in

the UC quests in starfield are a good sample of that. it's really obvious that they're going for a broad satire of any militaristic coalition trying to present itself as dignified or its colonies as truly meritocratic. they have a stupid little museum during initiation that pulls double duty of explaining the general history while highlighting the type of outfit they are: petty, domineering, and willing to throw whomever under the bus to salvage their reputation

over the course of their quests, you learn about their structural incompetence, the flagrant cloak-and-dagger undermining any notion of real diplomacy, that their empire is a shithole to live in for anyone not in top-level government, and that the corrupt leader they claimed to execute still pulls all the strings behind the curtains

it generally works. obsidian are better at nuance and character-building, but bethesda can do the surface level stuff


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @miscu's post:

huh. my experience is bethesda tends to do good episodic quests in isolation but screws up the overarching plot. questlines like Arefu, Andale, Republic of Dave, USS Constitution or any of the Dark Brootherhood questlines tend to be some of my favorites. Walk into a town and something's weird and messed up. can't get enough.

they tried on the shoe of NV-style flawed factions in skyrim and it didn't fit. since fo4 they've gone for this light absurdist tone on the macro-level story

they still play the major beats totally straight, but embracing parody gives it a lot more flavor than oblivion or fo3 had