[etempleton]

My guess is that because of the success of Fallout show Microsoft is trying to spin up resources to make another Fallout game as soon as possible while also keeping Elder Scrolls moving forward. Bethesda has always been a one game studio, but perhaps they will try to hire up to become a two game studio or they could go beef up Obsidian to pivot into a Fallout New Vegas to or other non-numbered Fallout game.

The casualties of this are two financially under performing studios.

[lupusreal]

If Microsoft plans to bring a lot of new people into a Bethesda game, I hope they invest in new engine tech and QA. Old Bethesda fans know what to expect by now, but newcomers with any modern game experience are going to be in for a rude surprise if the next Fallout game ships with typical Bethesda quality.

They've had this problem with their last several releases too, but I think the TV show will make it a lot worse.

[etempleton]

Starfield was much better than past Bethesda releases, but I agree.

[laylower]

No it was not. It was bland, linear, empty and it felt like an asset flip of fallout 4.

At least fallout 3 and NV had some great RPG elements.

Fallout 4 and Starfield were not great.

The graphics engine was dated 10 years ago, it's now comically underwhelming.

[etempleton]

QA was better. The game was released with significantly less bugs than their previous entries.

And you can say what you will about the engine upgrades, but they are there.

[FractalHQ]

It’s the same old shitty engine that needs to be sent to the recycle bin if they hope to have any chance of making a modern AAA game that doesn’t feel like it’s stuck in 2015.

[johnnyanmac]

Does a technical community like HN really not understand how legacy code works? The Creation engine in 2024 has about as much relation to Embryo as UE5 does to UE1. There will be some core math that hasn't changed in 30 years, but the engines are night and day.

[etempleton]

It is not. It is a significantly upgraded engine.