Bethesda’s Love-Hate Relationship with Loading Screens: A Necessary Evil?
For years, Bethesda Game Studios has been synonymous with immersive open-world RPGs, but also with something less desirable: loading screens. From the vast landscapes of Skyrim to the sprawling cosmos of Starfield, players have encountered countless loading screens interrupting their adventures. But why do these screens persist, even in the most technologically advanced titles? A former lead designer at Bethesda sheds light on this seemingly unavoidable aspect of their game development philosophy.
Bruce Nesmith, a former lead designer at Bethesda known for his work on Skyrim and Oblivion, recently discussed the issue of loading screens in an interview with VideoGamer.com. He emphasized that these loading screens aren't a result of laziness or a disregard for modern game design principles. Instead, they're a "necessary evil" born from the immense detail and graphical intensity that defines Bethesda's RPGs.
"Everybody who complains about them assumes that it’s done because we’re lazy or we don’t want to follow the modern thinking on stuff," Nesmith explained. "The reality is the Bethesda games are so detailed and so graphics intensive… you just can't have both present at the same time."
According to Nesmith, the complexity of tracking numerous elements within expansive open worlds, such as item placement and physics, necessitates these brief pauses. The alternative, attempting seamless loading, leads to unacceptable performance issues like "hitching." He added, "I can’t have the interiors of all these places loaded at the same time as the exteriors. That's just not an option. All the fancy tricks for streaming and loading and all that, you end up with hitching. So you’re actually better off stopping the game briefly, doing a loading screen and then continuing on."
While other developers may have found ways to cleverly mask or minimize loading screens in their open-world RPGs, Bethesda's approach prioritizes a level of detail that comes at the cost of momentary interruptions. As Nesmith puts it, "If you make a game that has less going on, it's a tighter experience and not a true open-world experience. So it's just one of those necessary evils, as it were, it's not that anybody at Bethesda ever wanted to do it. We just didn't have a choice, really, if the game was going to have the experience we wanted it to have."
This perspective aligns with previous sentiments regarding Starfield, where the immersion-breaking spaceflight loading screens are viewed in a new light. Perhaps the studio's commitment to intricate systems, even those that might seem purposeless, justifies the compromise of loading screens. Ultimately, the choice boils down to prioritizing detail and freedom over seamlessness.
So, are loading screens in Bethesda games a deal-breaker for you? Do you prefer a truly seamless experience, even if it means sacrificing some level of detail? Or do you believe that the depth and complexity of Bethesda's worlds are worth the occasional interruption? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!
