Bethesda General Discussion Thread

[Delterius]

He describes Skyrim as boring

i mean its true

 

[Desiderius]

200 hrs in or so, give or take mods.

Oblivion was twenty so improvement.

 

[Flying Dutchman]

This example I mentioned in my large post:


The source for it is here: https://youtu.be/WJmYoPUr85U?t=2236

There, Todd is talking about feeling pride in gaming.

<Snipped>

This was an awesome post, thank you.

 

[Delterius]

you made me do this

 

[TheDiceMustRoll]

This example I mentioned in my large post:

In one presentation where Todd was imparting his game design 'wisdom', he talked about a mobile game he was playing and showed how flashy and congratulatory the graphics are when a level is completed. Todd explains how pumped-up and good about himself that makes him feel, and that it gets him to play more, treating this like a design revelation. With the way Todd described things, I'm pretty sure a lot of the audience would have thought he must have been joking, given how simplistic that suggested he is, but I think he was being very sincere about it. If a person is actually affected by such things like that, they're a simpleton chasing after 'reward' sensations like a sociopath.

The source for it is here: https://youtu.be/WJmYoPUr85U?t=2236

There, Todd is talking about feeling pride in gaming.

Todd says that his favourite ego-stroking design to make players feel great is that of completing a level of Peggle. And then he plays a clip of the level-passed celebration in Peggle, and then expresses how it makes him feel from a player's perspective. My reaction to hearing that was 'you can't be serious' because that's so mindless. But he was serious.

What does this prove? Every major game company in the west hired psychologists to help them figure out of how to get people to buy shit and effectively market more. Todd isn't wrong in the slightest here, you're an idiot who doesn't understand how the business works. It turns out humans are engaged by presentation.

He doesn't give examples of esteem coming from something the player actually did, overcame, built, or figured-out, or some meaningful reactivity to the player's personal unsolicited decision in a game environment, but from an artificial trigger that will manipulate only simpletons who take esteem in things that aren't real. I think that says something about Todd, and that it also explains some things about BGS game design.

Literally every video game isn't real. You aren't progressing, leveling up, accomplishing anything, whatsoever. The only video games where you can take pride at being objectively good at is a handful of RTS games and fighting games.

How low a level of comprehension of one's environment is required to be manipulated by that, and to a significant degree, and to see striving for a shallow gimmick as positive game design? And what in BGS games does Todd regard as his implementation of that design mechanism - A clunky fight with a dragon that is mostly just bashing it head-on, without strategy or skill?

The vast majority of video games that get praised get praised for their technological advances, "game feel" and other nonsense. This isn't just a Bethesda thing. Look at the most profitable video game of all time: GTA(online).

Here's another example of what I said from that video, which I didn't mention before:

Todd says it's the #1 rule at BGS. But it's a nonsensical slogan. A great game has to be made before it can be played. And I can't figure-out how that slogan would have some revelatory meaning to it.

And before a game is made to be played, the idea has to be there. So, creativity has to be there first. And when playing a game you're making to test things out, and coming-up with new ideas while doing that, the new ideas are had and implemented (AKA they're made) before they're played within the game.

Great games are made, and then they're played. So, "Great games are played, not made" isn't a truth, but is missing understanding of a major part of the equation for a great game - and great things aren't made from falsehoods. It seems like pretending something that is dumb is profound - which is what I hear in a lot of what Todd says, hence I previously said: "He speaks like a simpleton who thinks the most mundane, unspectacular, and often detrimental ideas are somehow revolutionary, and seems pretty clueless, to me".

It literally means that you make games people actually want to play and enjoy, not garbage that some idiot on the Codex would like. End of the day the highest selling and most popular games are legit fun to play, easy to get into, and have a low frustration bar. An entire generation of human beings grew up thinking that Skyrim, Minecraft, etc are the bestest games ever. Again, this is easy to understand, please stop being an asshole.

I was asked to give "a single, documented, example", without specification as to what the example should be of, after I had just mentioned a few different things. But I then gave many examples for things - just not the sources for them, as I haven't catalogued in which presentation or interview Todd said a particular thing. Now I've given a couple examples with the sources for them, exceeding the requested quota by 100%.


I'm surprised that the stupidities in Bethesda's designs need pointing-out, because... how are they not just obvious to people? I think that, for whatever reason, BGS games are the safe-spaces for a lot of people, and criticizing the things that are there to be criticized about them can be taken personally.

When playing an Obsidian game, is what the game is telling the player, the thoughts, ideas, personalities, situations, presented to them, do they seem patently absurd, unintelligent, contradictory, and just all-around cringily stupid? They don't to me. The same goes for most any other game I've played. But they do to me in a Bethesda game, which I feel have a stupid / lobotomized sense to them.

oh. its an obshitian fanboy, sorry I thought you were something worth taking seriously. Back to PoE you go

 

[Ol' Willy]

End of the day the highest selling and most popular games are legit fun to play, easy to get into, and have a low frustration bar.

One of the most popular games in the history of PC games

 

[Delicieuxz]

I suspected this would be one of those cases where a person's request for information is disingenuous and the moment you give them what they ask for they'll have a fit and start trying to find excuses for that information.

This example I mentioned in my large post:

In one presentation where Todd was imparting his game design 'wisdom', he talked about a mobile game he was playing and showed how flashy and congratulatory the graphics are when a level is completed. Todd explains how pumped-up and good about himself that makes him feel, and that it gets him to play more, treating this like a design revelation. With the way Todd described things, I'm pretty sure a lot of the audience would have thought he must have been joking, given how simplistic that suggested he is, but I think he was being very sincere about it. If a person is actually affected by such things like that, they're a simpleton chasing after 'reward' sensations like a sociopath.

The source for it is here: https://youtu.be/WJmYoPUr85U?t=2236

There, Todd is talking about feeling pride in gaming.

Todd says that his favourite ego-stroking design to make players feel great is that of completing a level of Peggle. And then he plays a clip of the level-passed celebration in Peggle, and then expresses how it makes him feel from a player's perspective. My reaction to hearing that was 'you can't be serious' because that's so mindless. But he was serious.

What does this prove? Every major game company in the west hired psychologists to help them figure out of how to get people to buy shit and effectively market more. Todd isn't wrong in the slightest here, you're an idiot who doesn't understand how the business works. It turns out humans are engaged by presentation.

Todd isn't wrong in the slightest... when it comes to catering to idiots with his bad game design. But maybe that's what you identify as. Your comments certainly make that argument on your behalf.

I guess you must be a proponent of exploitative loot-boxes in games too, because they're also based on psychological manipulation. And rigged match-making intended to push players to spend money on in-game items to be competitive.

What is your argument here: That if something is based on psychology it's legit and quality by default? So, strangers luring kids into white vans with promises of candy is a good thing because it's done by the power of psychology? That isn't a sensible argument, but an apologist one.

The whole issue with manipulative game design is precisely that it uses psychological tricks to manipulate people.

He doesn't give examples of esteem coming from something the player actually did, overcame, built, or figured-out, or some meaningful reactivity to the player's personal unsolicited decision in a game environment, but from an artificial trigger that will manipulate only simpletons who take esteem in things that aren't real. I think that says something about Todd, and that it also explains some things about BGS game design.

Literally every video game isn't real. You aren't progressing, leveling up, accomplishing anything, whatsoever. The only video games where you can take pride at being objectively good at is a handful of RTS games and fighting games.

So you're saying you think solving a puzzle or doing anything that isn't physical isn't real. I think I can see why you're such an ass-licking sycophant of a hack like Todd. I bet you learned all about crap game design from him.

An accomplishment in a game is still something the player has done. Overcoming a challenging is something real. Experiencing world reactivity to player choice is also experiencing satisfaction based on something the player actually did. Feeling good about yourself just because there are glittery pixels on the screen saying 'ur winner' is just you being manipulated by a gimmick because you're a simpleton.

But you're apparently the kind of person who those things work on, and so I guess it's no coincidence that you're a sycophant of Todd's.

How low a level of comprehension of one's environment is required to be manipulated by that, and to a significant degree, and to see striving for a shallow gimmick as positive game design? And what in BGS games does Todd regard as his implementation of that design mechanism - A clunky fight with a dragon that is mostly just bashing it head-on, without strategy or skill?

The vast majority of video games that get praised get praised for their technological advances, "game feel" and other nonsense. This isn't just a Bethesda thing. Look at the most profitable video game of all time: GTA(online).

Graphics don't relate to a type of 'reward' gimmick such as I talked about, and technological advances aren't exactly shallow gimmicks in game design. But games with great graphics and shit gameplay are regarded as having great graphics and shit gameplay - people don't really confuse the two aspects. And a game which strokes the player's ego with a non-interactive screen isn't even offering gameplay in that moment.

Here's another example of what I said from that video, which I didn't mention before:

Todd says it's the #1 rule at BGS. But it's a nonsensical slogan. A great game has to be made before it can be played. And I can't figure-out how that slogan would have some revelatory meaning to it.

And before a game is made to be played, the idea has to be there. So, creativity has to be there first. And when playing a game you're making to test things out, and coming-up with new ideas while doing that, the new ideas are had and implemented (AKA they're made) before they're played within the game.

Great games are made, and then they're played. So, "Great games are played, not made" isn't a truth, but is missing understanding of a major part of the equation for a great game - and great things aren't made from falsehoods. It seems like pretending something that is dumb is profound - which is what I hear in a lot of what Todd says, hence I previously said: "He speaks like a simpleton who thinks the most mundane, unspectacular, and often detrimental ideas are somehow revolutionary, and seems pretty clueless, to me".

It literally means that you make games people actually want to play and enjoy, not garbage that some idiot on the Codex would like. End of the day the highest selling and most popular games are legit fun to play, easy to get into, and have a low frustration bar. An entire generation of human beings grew up thinking that Skyrim, Minecraft, etc are the bestest games ever. Again, this is easy to understand, please stop being an asshole.

Wow, a #1 rule that says that games should be fun and enjoyable? Why hasn't every other developer thought of such an obvious secret guiding principle? Just make a game fun - that's the secret!

A slogan that doesn't make sense isn't needed to hold onto the idea that a game should be fun. And having such a slogan for that idea, if that's what you want to go with for its meaning, just underscores that Todd and crew are lacking in intelligence and skill. You know what would be a much better slogan to express that a game should be fun? This: Make sure the game's fun. But I think that the word 'game' on its own already alludes to the concept that it's supposed to be fun.

Obviously, Todd hasn't always accomplished that goal of having a game be fun. So, maybe that isn't what his slogan means. Maybe it's just a moronic slogan but you think it's brilliant because Todd said it.

If giving thought-out criticism of your man-crush and the sloppy games he makes is "being an asshole" to you, then you're just a fanboy and need to get over it.

I was asked to give "a single, documented, example", without specification as to what the example should be of, after I had just mentioned a few different things. But I then gave many examples for things - just not the sources for them, as I haven't catalogued in which presentation or interview Todd said a particular thing. Now I've given a couple examples with the sources for them, exceeding the requested quota by 100%.

I'm surprised that the stupidities in Bethesda's designs need pointing-out, because... how are they not just obvious to people? I think that, for whatever reason, BGS games are the safe-spaces for a lot of people, and criticizing the things that are there to be criticized about them can be taken personally.

When playing an Obsidian game, is what the game is telling the player, the thoughts, ideas, personalities, situations, presented to them, do they seem patently absurd, unintelligent, contradictory, and just all-around cringily stupid? They don't to me. The same goes for most any other game I've played. But they do to me in a Bethesda game, which I feel have a stupid / lobotomized sense to them.

oh. its an obshitian fanboy, sorry I thought you were something worth taking seriously. Back to PoE you go

I'm not even close to an Obsidian fanboy. I just used them as an example because they've made games in the same genre and format as Bethesda. But a difference between Obsidian and Bethesda's attempts are that Obsidian's doesn't present as though crafted by a paper-thin mind with all kinds of disorders.

 

[TheDiceMustRoll]

if you think that slaying an orc in a video game or figuring out a sliding block puzzle or whatever is a "real accomplishment" it's no wonder you have fucking diabetes you fucking idiot

 

[Delicieuxz]

if you think that slaying an orc in a video game or figuring out a sliding block puzzle or whatever is a "real accomplishment" it's no wonder you have fucking diabetes you fucking idiot

Cry more, sissy. Maybe play some shit games to make yourself feel better. Remember that you shouldn't ask questions that you don't actually want the answers to / can't handle hearing the answers to.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Since the acquisition of Bethesda Softworks by Microsoft has been finalized, it might be an appropriate time to bid farewell to a company that began as a developer of sports games for the Commodore Amiga:

Gridiron (1986)

Wayne Gretzky Ice Hockey (1988)

Hockey League Simulator (1989) and Wayne Gretzky Hockey 2 (1991)

 

[TheDiceMustRoll]

if you think that slaying an orc in a video game or figuring out a sliding block puzzle or whatever is a "real accomplishment" it's no wonder you have fucking diabetes you fucking idiot

Cry more, sissy. Maybe play some shit games to make yourself feel better. Remember that you shouldn't ask questions that you don't actually want the answers to / can't handle hearing the answers to.

It's time for your insulin shot, diabeeto

 

[Bigg Boss]

Why is it when you call Bethesda shit someone automatically thinks you prefer Obsidian when they are also basically shit? Why can't everything (except UnderRail) be shit?

 

[Feargus Jewhart]

I suspected this would be one of those cases where a person's request for information is disingenuous and the moment you give them what they ask for they'll have a fit and start trying to find excuses for that information.



Todd isn't wrong in the slightest... when it comes to catering to idiots with his bad game design. But maybe that's what you identify as. Your comments certainly make that argument on your behalf.

I guess you must be a proponent of exploitative loot-boxes in games too, because they're also based on psychological manipulation. And rigged match-making intended to push players to spend money on in-game items to be competitive.

What is your argument here: That if something is based on psychology it's legit and quality by default? So, strangers luring kids into white vans with promises of candy is a good thing because it's done by the power of psychology? That isn't a sensible argument, but an apologist one.

The whole issue with manipulative game design is precisely that it uses psychological tricks to manipulate people.



So you're saying you think solving a puzzle or doing anything that isn't physical isn't real. I think I can see why you're such an ass-licking sycophant of a hack like Todd. I bet you learned all about crap game design from him.

An accomplishment in a game is still something the player has done. Overcoming a challenging is something real. Experiencing world reactivity to player choice is also experiencing satisfaction based on something the player actually did. Feeling good about yourself just because there are glittery pixels on the screen saying 'ur winner' is just you being manipulated by a gimmick because you're a simpleton.

But you're apparently the kind of person who those things work on, and so I guess it's no coincidence that you're a sycophant of Todd's.



Graphics don't relate to a type of 'reward' gimmick such as I talked about, and technological advances aren't exactly shallow gimmicks in game design. But games with great graphics and shit gameplay are regarded as having great graphics and shit gameplay - people don't really confuse the two aspects. And a game which strokes the player's ego with a non-interactive screen isn't even offering gameplay in that moment.



Wow, a #1 rule that says that games should be fun and enjoyable? Why hasn't every other developer thought of such an obvious secret guiding principle? Just make a game fun - that's the secret!

A slogan that doesn't make sense isn't needed to hold onto the idea that a game should be fun. And having such a slogan for that idea, if that's what you want to go with for its meaning, just underscores that Todd and crew are lacking in intelligence and skill. You know what would be a much better slogan to express that a game should be fun? This: Make sure the game's fun. But I think that the word 'game' on its own already alludes to the concept that it's supposed to be fun.

Obviously, Todd hasn't always accomplished that goal of having a game be fun. So, maybe that isn't what his slogan means. Maybe it's just a moronic slogan but you think it's brilliant because Todd said it.

If giving thought-out criticism of your man-crush and the sloppy games he makes is "being an asshole" to you, then you're just a fanboy and need to get over it.




I'm not even close to an Obsidian fanboy. I just used them as an example because they've made games in the same genre and format as Bethesda. But a difference between Obsidian and Bethesda's attempts are that Obsidian's doesn't present as though crafted by a paper-thin mind with all kinds of disorders.

Templar does this shtick way better, you just sound fat. Also, the most profitable video game is Minecraft, it has sold over 200m units.

 

[Delicieuxz]

if you think that slaying an orc in a video game or figuring out a sliding block puzzle or whatever is a "real accomplishment" it's no wonder you have fucking diabetes you fucking idiot

Cry more, sissy. Maybe play some shit games to make yourself feel better. Remember that you shouldn't ask questions that you don't actually want the answers to / can't handle hearing the answers to.

It's time for your insulin shot, diabeeto

So, are you most upset because the data actually shows that Todd is a mindless hack with no appreciable game-design sense, because you realize that you resemble to a T the hypothetical simplistic moron in the examples I gave, or because it's you who asked the questions which produced these realizations? Or, are you equally upset at all three?

 

[Ravielsk]

Personally, as I've gotten older, I just have less patience for 'branching' narrative elements in RPGs. For me, strategy games and roguelikes have more meaningful 'choice and consequence' as games than narrative RPGs do. Having grown up with these things since a friend gave me a pirated disc of Fallout 2 in middle school, I am just used to all the lame tricks used to try to portray "choice and consequence" that are, in practice, totally shallow and do not really hold up to repeat playthroughs. The illusion of C&C is always more compelling than the dull reality of it. The "C&C" in a game like Planescape: Torment or FO1/2/NV are just quite shallow compared to potentially profound choices that you might make in a strategy game, tactics focused game, or roguelike. Just changing what text file displays and what .mp3 file plays or showing a different .png at the ending slide is just not compelling in a game context.

This is too true. Shamefully despite hardware development accelerating game design has effectively stagnated around 2007 and either stayed there or regressed. I wrote this in another thread but I suppose it bears repeating, when I was a kid I was assuming that eventually RPGs will adopt a sort of GSG logic engine into them where the whole game world would operate under one unified system that you the player would merely be able to nudge towards one result or another. So instead of having two quest lines that would ask you to either join the lich or help the village governed by an "if" statement the game would treat the village and the lich as two warring states in Crusader Kings 2 trying to undermine each other. The conflict could be naturally resolved without or with the players help with a variety of changes to the game world state.
So far the only game that I have seen even attempt anything like this is Kenshi and even there it feels more like a accidental result rather than a conscious design goal.

If you pick almost any novel written by a halfway competent author -- even any airport novel that isn't written for women -- you will have a more interesting and compelling story experience for a low price with a minor time commitment. I think there's a place for writing in games, but the whole select-from-a-menu school of narrative design is just not very compelling.

The core cause of this problem is the mantra "gameplay first" and its many varieties. Game designers have effectively tricked themselves into believing that the only and primary thing for all and any games is to have "quality" gameplay. This is both stupid and counter productive as many games that feature objectively bad gameplay(such as by you mentioned Kotor series or Risen series) are often often fondly remembered specifically because of the story and are recommended on that basis. Essentially "gameplay first" is like insisting that books need to be written with "protagonst first" mentality, where the protagonist has to be written before the setting or the plot or that movies should be made with "special effect" first mentality where first we decide what special effects we use before we start filming or picking out the cast. In both of those examples sticking with a "X first" sounds inherently stupid because we all know that not all books can be about the protagonist alone and that not all movies are about special effects but despite having several decades of videogames where the "gameplay" has taken a second or third seat in the car we still pretend that its the be all and end all for every game.

The effective result is that even with games that are meant to be explicitly narrative focused experiences the writer/writers have effectively 0 influence over the development and more often than not are brought in only at the very tail end of development to concoct some kind of shallow excuse for the series of levels to go in a certain order. With that kind of setup having a good story or even a unique story is pretty much impossible and doubly so today when writers are asked to just write "lore" quips for the players to very slowly farm to get some fake sense of accomplishment and "aha moments".

 

[Delicieuxz]

Templar does this shtick way better, you just sound fat. Also, the most profitable video game is Minecraft, it has sold over 200m units.

That just means you have as shit judgment as Dice. And who knew there were more hardcore Bethestards at Codex than on even Bethesda's own forums?

The only time profits were discussed in this conversation was to say that they're irrelevant to the topic of game design quality - which should go without saying. That also doesn't mean that a game with a lot of sales doesn't have good game design. But in the case of Todd Howard games, yeah, it's tended to be the case that they don't.

I've never seen Todd as being regarded for having good sense. He speaks like a simpleton who thinks the most mundane, unspectacular, and often detrimental ideas are somehow revolutionary, and seems pretty clueless, to me. He's made every next Bethesda game more dumbed-down than the previous one, demonstrating himself to not actually know how to be creative, but only destructive and develop downwards by obliterating depth and meaningful complexity from games he works on. And he's always avoided commenting on ZeniMax' business practices, saying he isn't involved in that stuff, he just focuses on making games - indicating he knows there's something rotten going on but wants to keep getting bags of money while ignoring any responsibility he has from being a willing party to that rottenness.

So, Todd liking the guy who gave him tons of money while Todd looked the other way concerning his actions isn't a strong testimonial to Altman's character.

Bethesda's games would probably also be a lot better if Todd hadn't working on them. That guy only seems to only know how to take things away from better game design until there's nothing special, quality, or meaningful remaining in the designs of the games he makes.

It seems interesting to me that you think someone doesn't have integrity if they won't go "yeah the guy that signs my paychecks is a greedy piece of shit ))"

Todd Howard:
- was a varsity athlete in high school
- directed morrowind, one of the most beloved RPGs on the Codex
- directed Oblivion, one of the best selling RPGs on Xbox 360
- directed Skyrim, the best selling RPG of all time
- saved the Fallout franchise from awful console spinoffs and obscurity with the best seller Fallout 3
- directed Fallout 4, the best selling fallout game of all time(30+million copies and counting)
- only ever plays a human male barbarian in DnD and other RPGs
- got you to buy Skyrim four times, laughed about it, and then released another version of Skyrim for the switch
- got Microsoft to buy Skyrim and the entire company
- basically responsible for putting serious RPGs on the consoles

Is this you also saying that Nickleback is one of the best rock bands of all time?

Nickelback - 50 million albums sold in 15 years
Rush - 40 million albums sold in 47 years

Did Todd even know about the deal with Microsoft before it happened - didn't he say the deal was a surprise to everyone at the studio and they were all hearing about it at the same time as the public?

Your response to my saying that Todd's a hack with no particularly demonstrated talent for making good games, which is a list of how much money he's made the company, makes the point: If there existed a list of creative or design-quality accomplishments, you'd have cited them, instead. But there doesn't exist such a list because everything in a Todd Howard game is maximum dumbed-down, to appeal to the lowest-common-denominator casual gamer. A Todd Howard game lets the player's imagination go wild. Actually, it requires the player's imagination to go wild because there's so little creativity and quality in the game itself that it can't much be enjoyed unless the player imagines that there's actually good writing, good quests, good combat, good animations, a good UI and menu system, good graphics, good character-building, etc.

Todd's made the company a lot of money. And he's a shit game designer who seems to only know how to reduce things into banality, and Bethesda games would probably have been far better if he hadn't worked on them.

And Oblivion and Skyrim aren't even RPGs, they're Action-Adventures, so they couldn't be "best selling" RPGs.

 

[Feargus Jewhart]

That just means you have as shit judgment as Dice. And who knew there were more hardcore Bethestards at Codex than on even Bethesda's own forums?

The only time profits were discussed in this conversation was to say that they're irrelevant to the topic of game design quality - which should go without saying. That also doesn't mean that a game with a lot of sales doesn't have good game design. But in the case of Todd Howard games, yeah, it's tended to be the case that they don't.

Are you saying Nickelback isn't FUCKING ICONIC tho?

 

[TheDiceMustRoll]

Del, Del,
You fucking smell
Stuck in diabetic hell
Numbing fingers
Cakepan sheets
The doctor has come to take your feet
So drink that cola
And enjoy those fries
While you say that todd just lies

 

[Flying Dutchman]

Templar does this shtick way better, you just sound fat. Also, the most profitable video game is Minecraft, it has sold over 200m units.

Infinitron in addition to Subverse avatars, I would like to formally petition a "You Sound Fat" response icon.

Actually, a @Wesp icon would be great to, when someone is actively contributing to making existing games better. The Will-o-the-Wesp, as it were.

 

[luj1]

Bethesda hasn't made a PC game in 17 years.

 

[Delicieuxz]

Del, Del,
You fucking smell
Stuck in diabetic hell
Numbing fingers
Cakepan sheets
The doctor has come to take your feet
So drink that cola
And enjoy those fries
While you say that todd just lies

It's sounding like you might speaking from an intimate experience with diabetes, just like you wish you could do with Todd Howard. Quirky coping mechanism. Glad I don't suffer from whatever disease is driving it.

So, yeah, Bethesda games are devoid of talented design, AKA are generally crap, and, sure, Todd's a liar. I don't think I said he was before - I said he's a talentless hack (which is what's driving you crazy), which he is. But since you bring it up, well, I don't think anyone other than you is confused about the fact that Todd Howard is a liar - which, coincidentally, is another behavioural trait of psychopaths and sociopaths. The picture keeps coming together.

 

[TheDiceMustRoll]

Del, Del,
You fucking smell
Stuck in diabetic hell
Numbing fingers
Cakepan sheets
The doctor has come to take your feet
So drink that cola
And enjoy those fries
While you say that todd just lies

It's sounding like you might speaking from an intimate experience with diabetes, just like you wish you could do with Todd Howard. Quirky coping mechanism. Glad I don't suffer from whatever disease is driving it.

So, yeah, Bethesda games are devoid of talented design, AKA are generally crap, and, sure, Todd's a liar. I don't think I said he was before - I said he's a talentless hack (which is what's driving you crazy), which he is. But since you bring it up, well, I don't think anyone other than you is confused about the fact that Todd Howard is a liar - which, coincidentally, is another behavioural trait of psychopaths and sociopaths. The picture keeps coming together.

One of the major symptoms of diabetes is that you get your horrible opinions from youtube videos by the way. look it up

 

[Delicieuxz]

Del, Del,
You fucking smell
Stuck in diabetic hell
Numbing fingers
Cakepan sheets
The doctor has come to take your feet
So drink that cola
And enjoy those fries
While you say that todd just lies

It's sounding like you might speaking from an intimate experience with diabetes, just like you wish you could do with Todd Howard. Quirky coping mechanism. Glad I don't suffer from whatever disease is driving it.

So, yeah, Bethesda games are devoid of talented design, AKA are generally crap, and, sure, Todd's a liar. I don't think I said he was before - I said he's a talentless hack (which is what's driving you crazy), which he is. But since you bring it up, well, I don't think anyone other than you is confused about the fact that Todd Howard is a liar - which, coincidentally, is another behavioural trait of psychopaths and sociopaths. The picture keeps coming together.

One of the major symptoms of diabetes is that you get your horrible opinions from youtube videos by the way. look it up

Uh-huh. You don't need to justify your retardism to me. But maybe to your psychologist who could be trying to figure out whether it caused your reality-denialism in favour of a Todd-fetish, or if your fetish for Toddler-the-liar is what's led you to become very retarded, in a classic medical case of Bethestardism.

Either way, your retreat from every truth, that Todd is a hack and liar included, adds to your cringe-factor.

 

[TheDiceMustRoll]

Del, Del,
You fucking smell
Stuck in diabetic hell
Numbing fingers
Cakepan sheets
The doctor has come to take your feet
So drink that cola
And enjoy those fries
While you say that todd just lies

It's sounding like you might speaking from an intimate experience with diabetes, just like you wish you could do with Todd Howard. Quirky coping mechanism. Glad I don't suffer from whatever disease is driving it.

So, yeah, Bethesda games are devoid of talented design, AKA are generally crap, and, sure, Todd's a liar. I don't think I said he was before - I said he's a talentless hack (which is what's driving you crazy), which he is. But since you bring it up, well, I don't think anyone other than you is confused about the fact that Todd Howard is a liar - which, coincidentally, is another behavioural trait of psychopaths and sociopaths. The picture keeps coming together.

One of the major symptoms of diabetes is that you get your horrible opinions from youtube videos by the way. look it up

Uh-huh. You don't need to justify your retardism to me. But maybe to your psychologist who could be trying to figure out whether it caused your reality-denialism in favour of a Todd-fetish, or if your fetish for Toddler-the-liar is what's led you to become very retarded, in a classic medical case of Bethestardism.

Either way, your retreat from every truth, that Todd is a hack and liar included, adds to your cringe-factor.

Is it just because he can afford insulin and you can't?

 

[Feargus Jewhart]

Uh-huh. You don't need to justify your retardism to me. But maybe to your psychologist who could be trying to figure out whether it caused your reality-denialism in favour of a Todd-fetish, or if your fetish for Toddler-the-liar is what's led you to become very retarded, in a classic medical case of Bethestardism.

Either way, your retreat from every truth, that Todd is a hack and liar included, adds to your cringe-factor.

Is Insulin really this expensive? Have you considered dieting? Every post you do just makes you sound fatter. At this point I'm convinced you're approximately 300lbs.