Far Harbor is a good example

Not just corporate America, corporations around the world have it.

The difference is at least Telegram seems to care a bit more about privacy than Meta

I use Google Voice to text people

Not all of Europe, the further east you go the more telegram is used.

As I recently former teen who never had an iPhone, the only place I’ve heard it talked about is California, but in Midwest/South nobody cares.

I think that may be right for first person only

It’s not so much about the first personness of it. It is just that the only examples of games I can think of that meet what I’m talking about are first person. I never played Horizon or Zelda games(past the OG), but for the Witcher 3 and Elden Ring I personally never enjoyed them- despite genuinely trying, mainly because of the style of combat(an actually Bethesda games give you much more choice, but also more clunkiness in that) but also because of imo a lack of engaging freedom(or psuedochoice) in dialogue. Although, Witcher is definitely closer, but Elden Ring felt like an RPG only in that you had stats. Fallout: NV was not fun because of the stats, Fallout: NV was fun because it felt like you could immerse yourself and engage with a living world in a way that actually felt somewhat free. There’s a reason there are so many Youtube videos with premises like “playing Skyrim as chef” or whatever, it is fun to build your own stories, with your own character, in a world that it feels like they can genuinely interact with. FROM Soft games I think intentionally make you feel detached from the world, and the Witcher has you following the story of an existing character. The interaction and choice in Bethesda games is definitely often shallow, but at least it exists.

Yeah, I have played Morrowind(well actually TES3MP) and in terms of flexibility and story Morrowind is definitely great, my issue is that my least favorite aspect of Bethesda games are the tedious winding dungeons(why NV and Starfield are my favorite because they have the least of that) and Morrowind unfortunately has a lot. One aspect of Morrowind that I really enjoyed actually though, was the opportunity to be given information to actually take notes on(I wrote down directions quest givers gave for example) and Starfield was the only other Bethesda game I’ve played with a taste of that. Although unfortunately much less.

3rd person semi-RPGs with a vast, open world that are very similar to Bethesda games

With the “charm” of Bethesda game(that I don’t really know how exactly to describe) the only other recent games I can think of are Outer Worlds and Cyberpunk.

In my opinion Starfield has the best story Bethesda has written. Not entirely saying much, but the main story and the side stories are at least more interesting and less predictable that Fallout 4 and Skyrim quests.

I’m not saying it to justify it, I’m saying that not having loading screens doesn’t make No Man’s Sky a better game. I think Star Citizen is a better comparison to Star Field in terms of style- and is much more empty.

Except they don’t really? And I didn’t see that much. Starfield to me seemed like it was being advertised as for RPG fans, and that they would have a lot of dialogue. And that space was just a setting, not the main character.

Skyrim on the other hand…

Do you think to an extent it’s just familiarity? It is relaxing for you to go back to something you’re so familiar with, you aren’t surprised by it.

That’s a fair opinion to have, but my preference is actually exploring the towns. I love that Starfield removed many of the middle of nowhere winding dungeons that I got so bored of. (Dwemer/Nord ruins in Skyrim and office buildings/other skyscrapers in fallout 4.)

Bethesda games are always boring trash.

Compared to the average game? I don’t agree. Compared to entirely exceptional games like Fallout: NV, yeah. But you don’t have many options if you enjoy open world fps RPGs, and Bethesda games are sometimes the only passable option. I mean, I’d take Starfield over Elden Ring any day, because of personal preference, not because it’s a better game- but my own preference means I also couldn’t say it’s a worse game.

A step back in what sense? Technically? Yeah probably. Starfield is the first Bethesda game to have working ladders(one slight sort of exception in Fallout 4) lol. But in terms of story, and world building, I think it’s fair to say Starfield is much ahead in that.

They are completely different games though. Watchdogs 2 had less loading screens than Hitman 3, but that doesn’t really mean much to say.

It’s not, I was just explaining the developers motivation

You misunderstood my point completely. Someone selling anything has an incentive to be paid as soon as possible, not only because of inflation but because they can reinvest it. Someone buying a product likewise has the inverse where they have an incentive to pay as late as possible. But the volumes are obviously different, a game developer may gain millions in early liquidity because of preorders but the individual customer only loses $60-$70. This is why the developers push for pre-orders. Money now is worth more than money later.

No, its because of economics. Cash now is always worth more than cash later. It is better to be able to take any money and invest it now so you can get a return. Its the same reason companies want you to put money on your account or buy giftcards.