I do know you have no idea what you're talking about, and presume that moving on to other projects is the same as being reliant on modders. Utter nonsense.

-Quite some time? More like 2-3 weeks. Patch 1.3.7.0 introduced in the beginning of December introduced the LAA patch.

-How is a modding framework that other mods depend on prove your position?

Why would Bethesda rely on modders to fix any of their games when the said fixes only apply to 1/3 of the gaming market?

Is the unofficial patch imaginary?

If they aren't relying on modders, then they simply didnt give a damn and moved on. Consoles have to svck it up because modding isn't available. Simple.

If you have a point, get to it please.

I believe that I have made my point many times. But since you are incapable of understanding it, let's take this step by step.

Nah mate, I addressed it already.

-Bethblog published some spiel in April 2013 saying they're done with Skyrim, etc, and moving on to other projects. The last Skyrim patch was released in 19 March 2013 - the legendary patch.

-The USKP team have continued to quash bugs - their latest iteration for just the main USKP was September 21st.

A business moved on for other projects because they operate on a finite budget with finite resources. A modding team that operates on it's free time has continued to produce patches for the community to use - for which all users are grateful for.

Stop living in this theme park world you've created where developers all bow and scraqe and fix bugs endlessly for years on end.

Insulting people because their opinions don't align with your own isn't a great way to have a discussion. If all you wanted to do was spew your personal belief system without a rebuttal, you should have just made a regular thread without a poll.

I am not living in a "theme park world". I am simply stating that Bethesda is relying on modders to fix bugs that they didn't fix. Do not bring in irrelevant crap.

Which is an incredibly disingenuous thing to say.

Food for thought, and the end to this stupid conversation, if they were truly reliant on modders to fix bugs, PC would have never seen any of the patches they released over a year+ development cycle. Because hey, modders will fix it right?

Tood Howards philosophy seems to be to create the framework for the game (Vanilla) and let the modding community create the rest, this way, gamers get the custom game they like, its an individual thing, there is no right or wrong, only many shades of grey...

I can not care less about what you think, and obviously the modders would do it if it is within their power and if Bethesda didn't fix anything.

I have posted a very simple flowchart about this.

http://s21.postimg.org/i3v1t229x/mod_Fix_Flowchart.png

You are fooling yourself if you think in this day and age a videogame is meant to have every last glitch fixed.

If modders choose to go on some endless journey to chase the impossible, all the more power to them, but that is by their choice and not because Bethesda is relying on them.

Videogames with glitches are like hamburgers with ketchup or shoes with dirt on them or cars that need their oil changed. It is part of what you expect when you get the product, it is something that goes hand in hand with the product. A game without glitches is not really a videogame.

That's fine, you don't need to agree with me. I don't expect to convince a 9/11 truther how wrong they are, and in that same breath I don't expect to do the same for someone who believes there is some conspiracy that Bethesda relies on modders to fix the game for them, even though track records instantly disprove the notion time and again.

I still find bugs in older games when I go and revisit them, and many of them do not have the luxury of open-ended modding tools. Hell, even the first Witcher has bugs and their devs are lauded as truly caring about the fans. Going by your flow chart, the only options for CDPR regarding Witcher are "screwed, "devs only care about sales," or "mods will fix the game for them."

I can see that logic is not your strong suit. I suggest that you reread the flow chart until you get it. Or not. I do not care either way.

And by the way, 9/11 truth has nothing to do with this topic. You are just taking pot shots thinking that it damages my credibility because you have absolutely nothing to say, because I am absolutely right.

I still cant play Sword of the Stars II Bethsada!!!!

Better get on that Bethsada!

I think the comments that I am about to make will inflame a lot of people, but from what I've seen it's the truth...So here goes.

I think that no matter what people will be unhappy with Fallout 4, modded or unmodded, DLC or no DLC.

Just like with the new Star Wars movie, just like with everything that's came out within the last 8 years or so. People over hype things, and then are angry when the final product does not meet their expectations.

It probably goes father back then 8 years, but it's just within the last 5 or so that it's really became noticeable to me. Fallout 4 is a fantastic game, no. It's a @#!$ing fantastic game. And yet people hate it. They don't like the story, it's too liner, the evil options are not evil enough. There is no resolution. The company has become too reliant on mods, no! Too reliant on DLC!

Now the saying that you cant please all the people all of the time is very true, but I think Bethesda is to be commended on Fallout 4. I've stated this before. The game is not perfect, it is not completely bug free. But have you seen most titles that come out now a days? Every major release I've seen from a company has been bug riddled upon release. You see this most often with MMO's but in standalone games as well.

The story is fine, it's just not the one you may want. I kinda hope Fallout 5 is a dark game where the protagonist unites many different groups of raiders into a super-powered force and takes over a area of the former US. Maybe that game will be dark enough for some people. But then again other people will hate it because it's too evil...

The problem with the thinking that they rely on mods is that mods aren't available on consoles. As of yet. And still their games sell most and are arguably designed for consoles.
You can see the conflict between those facts.

You have a level of cognitive dissonance I have never witnessed in my life.

1) The 9/11 truther comment was an aside to the greater point, which went completely over your head because you either refuse to read or are so hell bent on being right, you're reaching across 50 states to build a straw man.

2) I read the flow chart and addressed it in the edit. Please, do the general community a favor and read.

You really are doing every lowly trick you can, aren't you?

Why don't you do the general community a favour and read the timestamps instead of going "hurr durr, 9/11 truther, you didn't read my post. hurr durr."

Okay princess.

Sword of the Stars II

Broken unplayable game.

_____________________

I guess the definitions have changed?

There have been games that come out that are unplayable going back to 1960.

But we are special cause its 2015.

Please read.

I have not played Witcher.

It is obvious that you're OK with bugs, programs/scripts not performing properly, etc. That's your choice. If there're bugs and there're no official/community fixes for them, then depending on the magnitude of the problem, it can be a minor annoyance, or a major issue. But the players are still screwed, the only difference is the magnitude.

You don't need to play the Witcher to get the point. That flow chart applies to every single game you can think of, and its self-defeating because it disparages every game as being either screwed, the developer's being interested solely in sales, or modder's fixing the game because the devs don't care and only want money.

That flow chart, if anything, demonstrates your naivete on the subject.

If one truly cares, one would always fix all issues no matter when.

If one cares about money, one would abandon the project and then do another one. How long the software maintenance goes on, is up to the people that own the company to decide. But either way, "money talks".

Since you are completely unable to see logic, I will put it in very simple terms in an attempt to help you understand it. If one truly cares for one's dog, one would always feed it, play with it, etc. If one cares more about the cuteness, then once it's grown up and no longer cute, one would not pay attention to it. Sure, they can pay lip service every now and then, but lip service is just lip service. All talk, no action.

Ultimately, you believe that a company "cares" for the fans, because they care even though they do not fix issues with the game and even if they do not give tools for the community to fix the issues. I can only say that I laughed out loud when you used the word "naivete".

It's not a bug, it's a feature!

Stockholm Syndrome.