Could Elder Scrolls 6 Or The Next Fallout Feature Online Multiplayer?
(Last Updated On: April 8, 2017)

Bethesda recently posted up a job listing for an upcoming game that it has under its sleeve, and this job listing calls for a senior Core Tech Engineer whose job is to help bring and improve online multiplayer environments through development.

Bethesda’s games usually sees a player exploring a world in a single player focused realm that offers up multiple routes for a player to navigate. We usually don’t see that many online multiplayer games by the studio. According to publication site GameRant that could change very soon.

Many people believe that the next Elder Scrolls game or Fallout title could be candidates for this new job listing that sees “core engine technology” and “online multiplayer” at play in one of said titles.

Looking deeper into the job listing, it reads that Bethesda is looking for a Senior Core Tech Engineer to help maintain, optimize and extend core engine technology. The individual must be experienced in C++ programming and must be experienced in the said trait of online multiplayer.

A lot of people believe three things are to come out of this: A new game/IP that features online play, The Elder Scrolls VI featuring online support, or a new Fallout game featuring support for online.

In my honest opinion it would seem like online support would just glitch up the latter two games and add even more problems, given how broken Fallout 4 and the Elder Scroll V were at release.

Seeing that Bethesda is working on three upcoming games that are supposedly “big”, it’ll be interesting to see if the games will feature the aforesaid support. But, with Godd Howard saying that the titles will be “bigger than anything we’ve ever done. They’re a bit different, but definitely in the wheelhouse that people are used to from us.” We might just see online multiplayer support in an even glitchier Elder Scrolls or Fallout title, or maybe in a new series altogether.

What’s for certain is that Bethesda is looking for a Senior Core Tech Engineer, which more info on the job listing can be found by hitting up jobs/zenimax.com.


Ads (learn more about our advertising policies here)



About

Ethan was born in glitches, and pursues to find the most game breaking glitches in games. If you need to get in touch use the Contact Page.

  • Disqusted

    Yeah, I don’t trust Bethesda to make something that isn’t buggy as shit. I also don’t trust companies to make decent multiplayer anymore. They seem to either focus on one or the other. Some of us just want to play the same singleplayer game with a friend, without extra bullshit ruining it.

    Kinda reminds me of that Super Mario 64 mod that lets you have two players. Why can’t we get more multiplayer like that? Just for fun. No bells or whistles attached.

    Hell, there are multiplayer games that I want to play singleplayer, and can’t. Until someone makes a private server. Always seems like it’s up to random consumers/modders to fill the gaps.

    Oh yeah, and I hate how singleplayer games have been increasingly using MMO style systems. No thanks. Get some real gameplay.

  • Gozu Tennoh

    I usually wait untill the mods come out before getting any elder scrolls title (I dont bother with fallout).

  • Reven

    I doubt it being either. Bethesda already said that they have two large scale
    projects in the works before ES6 or Fallout 5 enter development. Heck
    we have only the confirmation that ES6 is in pre-pre-preproduction at
    best, so my guess it’s one of those two unknown project.

    • Disqusted

      Fallout Online. Yuck.

  • LurkerJK

    That would be a huge mistake

    The small vocal minority (including most of the media) that keeps screaming about wanting coop in these games have no idea what they are asking

    Adding mp will turn the game into a full fledged mmo and i doubt anyone playing Skyrim wants to play an mmo because if they did there is PLENTY to choose from

    You cannot be THE dragonborn in a mmo, you will be A dragonborn

    OPEN YOUR FREAKING EYES, stop trying to turn a game that is not multiplayer into a multiplayer game, there are other games that do that, you are KILLING a genre to add bloat to an already bloated genre, then the game doesn’t sell and another franchise dies

    • giygas

      They already tried it with Elder Scrolls Online and that game did so poorly, it went free-to-play before the devs could finish opening their champagne bottles. It was so shit that not even Todd Howard would stake his own dubious reputation on the game.

      • Disqusted

        I stayed the hell away from that. Games designed to be MMOs are almost guaranteed to be shit.

    • Disqusted

      I partly disagree, because some people just want simple co-op, without all the stupid MMO shit. I think people (or at least, I speak for myself) just want to be able to experience their adventures together with friends, without having the gameplay designed to revolve around that.

      The problem is if they change the singleplayer to suit the multiplayer, then it’ll detract from the singleplayer experience. I think that’s the mistake most devs make nowadays. But it doesn’t need to be that way.

      They could just let people connect to a friend’s game, and not really change anything else from the singleplayer experience. When was the last time we had a game like that? I can’t even recall. Doom 1? Quake 1/2? I remember being able to simply connect to a friend via dial-up modem, and we were able to co-op. Nothing changed gameplay-wise. We were just able to play together.

      Most MMO games are designed to dripfeed shitty content, focusing heavily on progression, or are chained down by some other horrible design systems. Especially systems designed to generate revenue to cover server costs. I’d like to be able to just co-op with friends without having to deal with all of that bullshit.

      I agree that there’s a problem if the story has something like, “there’s only one Dragonborn”, but I think online co-op doesn’t need to be lore/story friendly. It could easily just be a tacked on feature for people who want it. Better than nothing, right?

      Besides, if you still have to worry about lore, there’s always how Dark Souls does it, where other players are from a parallel world.

      I hear it’s a huge pain just setting up network stuff (you have to setup replication for everything significant that happens). So devs probably see it as, “if we’re going to bother, we should go all the way” and won’t just implement basic multiplayer, regardless of if people want it or not.

      And there will probably be people who want MMO style multiplayer… but I think as long as the devs have basic multiplayer, modders could take over the rest.

      • LurkerJK

        I think people (or at least, I speak for myself) just want to be able to experience their adventures together with friends

        there are a hundred games you can play with your games already, you dont need to turn a 100+ single player rpg into multiplayer so you can play 2 hours and give up because you are very unlikely to get another human to sit 100+ hours with you to play it unless you kidnap them

        Doom 1? Quake 1/2?

        both games mechanically made with multiplayer in mind and pretty much plot less and story less, they are as similar to skyrim as they are to a piece of broccoli

        Most MMO games are designed to dripfeed shitty content, focusing heavily on progression, or are chained down by some other horrible design systems. I’d like to be able to co-op with friends without having to deal with all of that bullshit.

        they are a skinner box, designed to get you addicted into keep playing it so you keep paying the subscription or pay microtransactions, a practice that the presence of multiplayer tends to attract, its very unlikely you can have multiplayer in place these days without the publishers forcing microtransaction and/or dlc in it, the low brain activity content is also caused by the fact that the mp crowd does not want to wait around listening to a 15 minute cutscene and that kind of content is easy to hand out, nothing like listening to a heart breaking revelation about the furry sidekick while some asswipe is bunny hopping around you

        You have games with coop that are not mmos like gears of wars and borderlands, something to point out about them is that they were DESIGNED to be coop games, it was not crammed into them

        but I think online co-op doesn’t need to be lore/story friendly. It could easily just be a tacked on feature for people who want it. Better than nothing, right?

        sure, you think that, what about the thousands of “i only play multiplayer” customers that are going to come to the game attracted by the coop you just added to it and demand for the story to be coop friendly ?, the vocal mp crowd (the media seems to be full of them for some reason) is never far from a mp game and they always demand to keep encroaching over the sp content

        there’s always how Dark Souls does it, where other players are from a parallel world.

        implementing that limits your design freedom, now you need to consider where they can appear, how the enemies react to them, what happens if they cause lag, who hosts the game and how to limit them and how to turn it off and how to balance or limit who comes in and out, what about appearances, what about rewards and etc etc, this is not something you can cram into, you need to think ahead to add it, you make sacrifices to allow it

        I hear it’s a huge pain just setting up network stuff (you have to setup replication for everything significant that happens). So devs probably see it as, “if we’re going to bother, we should go all the way” and won’t just implement half-assed basic multiplayer, regardless of if people want it or not.

        you think programming to unknown hardware is hard ? try programming for SEVERAL SETS OF UNKNOWN HARDWARE, at the same time, connected though several different unreliable connections, in different countries, while doing cartwheels, and someone just set your pants on fire

        adding multiplayer is a very significant undertaking, its not a throw away thing, the game design needs to allow for the mp to happen, specially in coop where the ai and all the heavily scripted scenes now need to keep in mind there might be other ppl around, its need to be designed for that, in most of the sp games that had mp added to them with mods were using a engine that supported mp from the start and are buggy as fuck

        also the mp component has so many things that can go wrong and is so prone to bugs that then sucks away a big chunk of support time to fix it post launch, all while some youtube jackasses are laughing their asses off about the shitty animations you thought were good enough (and will take thousands of manhours to fix) causing sales to take a dive down an abyss

        and once you spent the money, once you put the effort, you are going to let it be a throw away thing ? no, you make them play it, add micro-transactions to it, maybe you can turn it into an esport, maybe build momentum for an mmo! (im thinking on mass effect 3 at the moment but there are other examples), the publishers come up with all sort of bullshit, they paid for that shit and you are going to play it damnit

        Its fine for you to want to play games with your friends but always be aware that there is no freaking way adding it will not affect the rest

        • Disqusted

          You kinda just repeated what I said, that they’re not going to put multiplayer in unless they focus on it, because it’s not worth the investment/time/effort.

          My point was modern multiplayer is often full of shit. When I look at the comments here, everyone seems to be assuming that any multiplayer HAS to be like an MMO. I’m saying it doesn’t need to be like an MMO, it doesn’t need to ruin the singleplayer.

          People tend to assume something is gonna be bad because they’re using their current/past experience to judge, ie. based only on their existing knowledge. I personally think there’s always the possibility of doing something differently and having it not suck. Of course, I don’t expect Bethesda to succeed at that.

          Games nowadays focus TOO MUCH ON PLOT AND STORY to the point that it affects gameplay and gameplay options. You’re saying “multiplayer can’t be added because Skyrim isn’t like Doom/Quake”. I’m saying multiplayer can be added as an OPTION, for people who DON’T CARE that it’s not LORE FRIENDLY. You don’t HAVE to play it. It can be done in a way that DOESN’T AFFECT THE STORY in any way.

          I’m pretty sure I’ve played games/mods with half-assed multiplayer. You can just connect and play with a friend. That’s it. No special features or adjustments to cover the multiplayer aspect. That’s what I’m talking about. You’re assuming they need to go all the way and implement it properly. I’m saying I don’t think they need to. If they set up the basic framework, modders can take over the rest, for people who are interested.

          As you said, there are other factors that deter devs from just slapping in basic multiplayer like they used to. I have a decent idea of the extra workload. But at the same time, there are singleplayer-focused games that have really shitty and near-pointless shoved-in online aspects that people don’t really care about. So it’s not like devs don’t waste time on stupid extra shit.

          If it’s an AAA game with a tight schedule and limited time/resources, then it’s not likely to have extra features built in outside of the scope. I understand that. What I’m thinking of is more along the lines of devs with more freedom who may tinker with multiplayer capabilities in their free time. My point still stands that multiplayer isn’t absolutely synonymous with all the negatives everyone’s associating with it.

          And there aren’t a ton of other games. Friends and I have been searching through Steam’s multiplayer games for years and years and there still isn’t anything I or anyone else I know wants to play together. We bought a few games that we ended up not liking and never play. Other games have too much bullshit we don’t want to deal with. We usually end up just playing some emulated arcade game instead.

          • LurkerJK

            And there aren’t a ton of other games. Friends and I have been searching through Steam’s multiplayer games for years and years and there still isn’t anything I or anyone else I know wants to play together.

            None of them ?, not a single one of them is good enough ?

            Broforce, divinity original sin, magicka, borderlands, left 4 dead, alien swarm, orcs must die, terraria, starbound, heroes of might and magic, starcraft, civilization, diablo, castle crashers, spelunky, grand theft auto, warframe, saint’s row, rayman legends, path of exile, killing floor, natural selection, counterstrike, gauntlet, payday, guns of icarus, team fortress, helldivers, trine, hammerwatch, the isometric laracroft games, serious sam, rainbow six, splinter cell, borderlands, just cause 2 mp, earth defense, tabletop simulator, smite, paladins, overwatch, the division, dead rising, resident evil 5&6, dead space 3 and so many others, none of them work

            I’m curious, What makes you think cramming multiplayer into a single player game with a sledge hammer is going to fill the void in your friends hearts ?
            Why wouldn’t it end like any of the others?
            I think the problem that you have is not your lack of mp games

            People tend to assume something is gonna be bad because they’re using their current/past experience to judge, ie. based only on their existing knowledge.

            Are you kidding, am i supposed to not learn from previous experience ? doing the same thing twice is not going to end in the same outcome ?

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pxG4yd8U3U

  • The games will still suck so.

  • Pratim Gupta

    Elder Scrolls and Fallout are not created as Multiplayer games, ESO is an one time creation, these games are Singleplayer RPG and should remain such, don’t change the formula. these 2 games formula are not compatible with multiplayer

    • Disqusted

      *Modern multiplayer. Because it tends to be burdened by rubbish game design systems that suck balls.

      I think it’s completely fine to leave the formula as is and just allow people to connect and co-op. Don’t change anything else. But nobody seems to do that anymore.

      • LurkerJK

        Imagine you go to a coffee place and ask for a coffee, when they serve it they add milk, sugar, cinnamon and all kind of shit without asking you

        You say “why didn’t you just let me chose what to put in it?”

        and you get the answer “well all the ppl around you liked this, why don’t you ? just let it happen”

        You are coming into a game without multiplayer, being perfectly able to chose ANOTHER game WITH multiplayer, and forcing it upon US which DO NOT want multiplayer, we do not want the sacrifices it involves, we do not want to deal with the crowd it brings, we do not want to feed the publisher’s insatiable online only drm bullshit with a side order of microtransactions greed, but then you tell us “it changes nothing, just let it happen”

        • Disqusted

          What I was saying is more like, you go to a coffee place and ask for a coffee, and they give you the option of having milk or sugar or cinnamon, or just drinking the coffee as it is.

          I don’t get how you aren’t understanding that. I think you’re just so used to multiplayer being burdened with bullshit that you assume it’s the only way to do things. You’re saying multiplayer HAS to come with online DRM, HAS to come with microtransactions. How the hell can you even assume that? It’s completely possible to have multiplayer WITHOUT those things.

          Of course, then it becomes a matter of extra workload for the devs, and as I pointed out in my other comment, it’s not impossible or unlikely for devs to waste time on something like that.

          And again, I emphasized, I don’t expect Bethesda to make anything decent. It’d be nice if they had multiplayer code left in for people to build on, without affecting the single player experience. But I can’t imagine Bethesda not screwing that up.

          I was talking more about games in general having the possibility for multiplayer that does not affect the singleplayer experience.

          Again, I emphasize, the mere presence of multiplayer DOES NOT magically equal microtransactions, DRM, MMO systems, etc. It is COMPLETELY POSSIBLE to have the multiplayer WITHOUT those things.