pcgamer.com

MysticKetchup, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

Starfield sounds like an okay game but all the PR responding to complaints sounds like an absolute disaster. Stop letting Todd answer these things directly

TechnoBabble,

I’ve flipped flopped my consensus about the game a couple times, but my conclusion is this…

Starfield is not going to be what you expected from Skyrim in space, at first. It will seem weird and claustrophobic and broken.

But if you give yourself a bit to acclimate to the world they’ve built, there is a surprisingly engaging game underneath.

I believe they’ve left most planets barren on purpose, so they can easily shove DLC wherever they want for the next 10 years.

“New facehugger planet, 20 hours of exciting quests and valuable loot! - $29.99”

That’s 100% going to happen.

abraxas,

So far, Starfield is exactly like Skyrim in space to me. There’s as many carefully crafted cities, and quite a few carefully crafted locales. There’s just a lot more space in Starfield (estimated about 500x more. Skyrim is 15sq miles, and those 1000 planets are each a couple square miles ingame). Sounds like there may be less hand-crafted content in Starfield than Skyrim, but that’s hard to tell.

I’m definitely not finding Starfield to be claustrophic. On the contrary, a bit agoraphobic.

dmrzl,

Are you certain that you know what Agoraphobia is? Tip: it is not the opposite of Claustrophobia.

abraxas, (edited )

I had agoraphobia growing up. I know exactly what it is. And I had moments of it exploring the planets. I found myself hugging to keep buildings in range and not wanting to stray out into the great wide open. For some odd reason, I got more of that in Starfield than in NMS.

I’m also still fairly early into the game, so perhaps I’ll spend more time indoors than I have so far.

EDIT, also, it kinda is the opposite of claustrophobia in some ways. There are some overlaps and nuances (both fears sometimes include fear of crowds). I had a grandparent with really bad claustrophobia who never used an elevator in her life. Ironically, we could relate on a lot. But they were still opposite issues.

dmrzl,

I don’t know, been agoraphobic for quite some time. Never had problems in elevators (alone), but trains or tunnels are the worst. Guess that’s why it’s hard for me to imagine how a game could ever transport that.

100,

I think there’s definitely more handcrafted content in Starfield than Skyrim, there’s also tons tons more dead space with nothing at all.

abraxas,

Some folks say there’s only about 25 hours of handcrafted stuff. I’m not late enough in to know for sure.

100,

Yeah no way. I’ve played longer than that and I haven’t even done the main quest.

abraxas,

I’m approaching that, but I have to admit I take my time and revisit towns a lot.

I’ve only gone to a dozen dungeons so far that were hand-crafted. There were literally hundreds of them in Skyrim. I’d love to get real numbers.

So far, I am enjoying the hell out of the game, if my lack of twitch reflexes is hurting that a lot. I keep having to juggle between ship upgrades (my Mantis keeps dying to small fleets more than 10 levels lower than me) and face-to-face. Usually by now in other Bethesda games, dying is rare. I’m too stubborn to drop the difficulty, though, so I suppose that’s on me.

There’s a pirate fleet in orbit around the planet I want to build my first output. Last 5 times I tried to go there, fleet keeps showing up and killing me. That’s somewhat annoying.

100,

Save in space often. There’s a semi common bug I’ve just run into that will cause your ship to vanish and it somehow retroactively removes it from all previous saves. No recreateable way to get it back. The only thing that saved me was a previous save where I was in orbit, still lost a few hours of progress.

abraxas,

Weird. I haven’t heard of that one yet.

Panurge987,

How can one person have a consensus?

another_lemming, (edited )

It’s only a problem when they can’t.

fadingembers,
@fadingembers@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

When they have dissociative personality disorder :D

30p87, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose

When the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there. They certainly weren’t bored.

Because it wasn’t just a rock, but the first time entering another natural body of mass in the universe, apart from our earth. Something that never happened before. In contrast, over a million players have discovered planets in Starfield by now, including all customly made content by Bethesda for the planets.
The astronauts where excited and happy as they achieved a huge step for humanity - somewhere I heard that before - while one could literally only achieve one small step for a human in Starfield.

Syrup,

Yeah, and it’s not like the astronauts just put up a flag and left. They took soil samples, set up sensors to measure tectonic activity, etc. Rocks are interesting when you can interact with them.

rgb3x3,

You mean pointing a laser at a rock for a few seconds until it pops isn’t interesting? /s

original_reader, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose

It’s not a bug. It’s a feature.

Catastrophic235,
@Catastrophic235@midwest.social avatar

What’s that quote from originally? I’ve always assumed it was Todd but now that I think about it I’ve never seen anything that would prove it, I supposed I’ve always just associated it with bethesda games lol.

DmMacniel,

It’s just a general software development joke. Eventually your customers will rely on that bug, because thats how it works right? So you can´t fix it later as it would break workflows thus that bug becomes a feature.

BeigeAgenda,
@BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca avatar

It’s probably from the 60’s or 70’s

lockhart,

It’s a running joke in programming

Yepthatsme, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

I have no clue what people are talking about? I have beaten it twice and surveyed an entire solar system and there was plenty. You can fly around to any point in most planets and moons and have stuff generate at each landing, within hiking distance.

I feel like the game is so big and good, the haters are just hating and being stupidly immature about it.

CraigeryTheKid,

Beaten it twice? like the main story? Honestly I forgot Skyrim had a story too. I always wandered for so long I forgot what I was doing.

vitriolix,
@vitriolix@lemmy.ml avatar

I think here we are reacting to the colossally dumb reasoning in the quote from the article. Astronauts had a few things to be excited about that gamers… won’t

totallymojo,
@totallymojo@ttrpg.network avatar

*Fast travel around to any point.

dangblingus,

Everything in the game is “within hiking distance” because that’s how the game generates planets. You don’t just “land on a planet”. You go through several hidden loading screens and arrive in a 1km x 1km square of planet.

Jakeroxs,

Your point is?

tomi000,

Thats exactly what they were saying

Kilamaos,

Ng+2 ? Any more change at +2 over +1, apart from the item & ship? Does the suit even improve ? And the ship ?A good mantis still is better I found

OldPain,

Didn’t this game come out like last week?

dan1101, (edited ) do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

I’m an Elite Dangerous veteran and have no problem with that. I think it’s more realistic.

I’m about 18 hours in and the illusion of variety hasn’t worn off yet. Plenty of things to find, with some travel time though. Unlock/upgrade your backpack boosters and it’s almost like Tribes though, as you go flying across the landscape in short bursts to keep moving forward in the air.

ipha,

Shazbot!

thanks_shakey_snake,

“It’s almost like Tribes” are the four magic words to get me interested in any game.

Rodeo,

New match starts and half the team instantly spams

“I’ve got the flag!”
“I’ve got the flag!”
“I’ve got the flag!”
“I’ve got the flag!”

ipha,

“I am the greatest!”

“No.”

“I am the greatest!”

WhatWouldKarlDo,

Yeah, I’m right here with you. I’ve explored hundreds of systems in Elite. I get excited when I find an interesting planet. It would be really weird and immersion breaking for me if every planet was interesting.

hypelightfly,

Oddly enough, it's misleading. Planets are covered with procedural generated POIs what he meant is that the environment of most planets is barren. I wish there were actually unexplored planets that weren't covered in POIs too.

lorty,
@lorty@lemmygrad.ml avatar

Starfield at least lets me have some fun on foot. Elite built their ground component in a very punishing way that made it very annoying to deal with.

storksforlegs, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose
@storksforlegs@beehaw.org avatar

So just wait for mods, then. Got it.

(I really do want to play this game, I like Bethesda games. But there are always inevitable shortcomings, which modders will fix.) Also by then perhaps it will be cheaper.

purplemonkeymad,

At least if a modder picks a random spot for their content it’s unlikely to conflict with any other mods.

BruceTwarzen,

I want to like Bethesda games. I liked fallout 3 a lot and their doom games, which is different i guess. But man, i'm not a trash collector that collects trinkets. It's not enjoyable to me. It doesn't matter where the setting is. And the fact that the characters still look like the game is made in 2010, with the same shitty zoomed in dialogue and awkward ass eye contact is just driving me away. This isn't some indie company that want to make thir dream game, this is Bethesda that wants to make a 80 dollar game with as little effort as humanly possible.

saplyng,
@saplyng@kbin.social avatar

Bethesda was only the publisher for Doom, Id software were the developers.

EvaUnit02,
@EvaUnit02@kbin.social avatar

Yeah, I'm rather bored with the wide-but-shallow approach Bethesda games take. Tons of geography with maybe 20% filled with things of consequence. I am uninterested in collecting 42,000 wheels of cheese or finding some random space hobo on a planet.

DrPop,

It really just feels like Bethesda needs to just build world so we can populate them however we choose. They know the public and modders like their framework so they create settings. Fantasy, Nuclear Wasteland, Space. They know modders keep games alive.

cdipierr, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose

“Dull on Purpose” is a hell of a box quote. Do you think that will be on the Game of the Year edition?

victron,
@victron@programming.dev avatar

I hope it becomes the game’s unofficial slogan.

ebenixo, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

Looked boring af, now getting confirmation it’s boring af

jsdz, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

The moon is boring, so every planet in the universe must be boring. Earth is mostly capitalist right now, so every planet with humans must be one form or another of late capitalist dystopia. A whole galaxy made of inert rocks, fast travel, and people eager to exchange gunfire with you.

I haven’t played it yet, but from what I’ve seen the setting looks even more bleak and depressing than Bethesda Fallout.

Skiptrace,

The setting is actually really cool. New Atlantis is actually quite utopian looking. I haven’t gotten too deep into the game yet, only about 3 hours so far.

jsdz,

New Atlantis does look pretty cool, but I worry that it seems a bit empty. From what info I can find it seems to have maybe half as many named NPCs as the average Skyrim city even if it is three times the size. But maybe there are many more and they just haven’t all made it to the wiki yet? I don’t know, it’s little things that annoy me. Like it’s the glorious spacefaring future and every city is still full of fast food franchises selling coffee in what look like exactly the same kind of disposable cups with plastic lids we use today? Maybe that’s a failure of imagination too small to complain about in itself, but it seems representative of how everything is when you look closely. Is it meant to be allegorically examining the social problems of our current world rather than presenting future humanity as doing something genuinely new? If so what’s it trying to say about that, exactly? Where’s the deep lore? Where are the characters you’d actually care about as people rather than video game NPCs that help you advance a quest? I was hoping for Skyrim in space, but to me it looks more like Fallout 4 in space. Never mind the reviewers who compared it to Oblivion and got my hopes up. The only thing it has in common with Oblivion is the Annoying Fan who I must admit is genuinely annoying.

Eh well, it’s a Bethesda game. I’ll probably give in and play it eventually.

BigBananaDealer,
@BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee avatar

this game is a lot more like KOTOR than any of the bethesda games. if you loved KOTOR you will probably love starfield

and people will always bitch about the NPC amount, whiterun is too little (but everyone is unique). well okay, we’ll add an actual city population but now everyone is just a random citizen (but it looks like a city size population)

TechnoBabble,

For all the problems the game has, the major thing they get right is the environment.

Almost every area looks more than great, some are industrial, luxurious, barren, creepy, outright hostile, or cozy, but they are usually always gorgeous.

The environments are what pushed me to keep giving the game a chance after the initial shock of not having a cohesive overworld.

Dubious_Fart, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

planets are as empty as todd howards soul.

PonyOfWar, (edited ) do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose

Absolutely makes sense for most planets to be rather barren. What I found a bit disappointing so far - keeping in mind I started yesterday and I’m only a few hours in - is how mostly when you land on a planet there is a key point of interest (an outpost, a mining facility, a city etc) at a landing site and then immediately a whole lot of randomly generated nothing around it. No roads or paths, NPCs, houses etc. I haven’t really been to a place where I got that Skyrim feeling of going out into the wilderness and finding interesting things. I hope that later on there are at least a few areas with more substantial exploration. Still enjoying the game though.

li10,

It could really benefit from some sort of vehicle as well.

I land on a planet, sprint 300m to the first point of interest, 900m to the next, 700m to the next etc. and most of it is just sprinting through nothing…

Feels like it’s just wasting my time, as there is literally nothing in between. I think a little hover bike would be a great addition to the game.

KoboldCoterie,
@KoboldCoterie@pawb.social avatar

I haven’t played Starfield, but that sounds like No Man’s Sky when it first released. A few points of interest per planet, nothing else of note to do there, and the entire planet just became a rather boring trip from point A to point B to point C and nothing more.

PonyOfWar,

It’s similar, though the the actual points of interest are way more fleshed out than in NMS and sometimes have unique quests etc.

Deconceptualist,

You’re saying that doesn’t describe the current state of No Man’s Sky? The only notable buildings I’ve found are the same 3 tiny cookie-cutter outposts dotted randomly all across most planets. Oh sorry, 4 now if you count the camps from the Interceptor update and happen to be on a dissonant planet.

I feel like it wouldn’t take much effort to do better so that’s sad if Starfield hasn’t.

NuPNuA,

The difference being that was NMS whole loop at launch. Exploring barren and mostly empty planets is just side content to a lot of directed story and side missions here.

HangingFruit,
@HangingFruit@czech-lemmy.eu avatar

that would be perfect, maybe a vehicle with scanner and some mining tool so you could analyse and collect few minerals along the way. would be great QOL improvement.

li10,

imo the entire game needs a once over to add in a ton of QOL improvements.

ursakhiin,

I will say, finding a vehicle and not being able to drive it was a bit disappointing. But otherwise, I just wish there were more resources on the barren worlds.

AndrasKrigare,

Absolutely makes sense for most planets to be rather barren.

This idea is something I’ve heard a lot about Starfield and is why I don’t think I’ll pick it up, at least until a big sale. To me, it seems like they made a fair number of design decisions around what “makes sense” rather than what’s fun.

PonyOfWar,

When it comes to the barren planets, it just adds a bit of immersion IMO. Nobody is forcing you to visit those rocks, and you probably won’t ever land on most of them, but it’s cool that you can. So to me, it’s not something that has a negative effect on my enjoyment of the game.

Makes sense to wait for a sale though. Mods and updates will no doubt vastly improve the game. Personally, I just play it on gamepass.

CMLVI,
@CMLVI@kbin.social avatar

I'm the same way. Even just going from the "lore" most planets aren't going to have colorful interesting cities in it with unique locations and things to do. A lot of the rocks are going to be desolate with nothing on it, because they should be. When you find something of interest in the desolate void of space, it's gonna be interesting. Every planet having the same formulaic procedurally shaped bar, merchant, and a fetch quest would have people foaming at the mouth about how Bethesda replaced their specific crafted environments with shitty generated ones with no soul.

colournoun,

Ah, I see you’ve played No Man’s Sky, too!

CMLVI,
@CMLVI@kbin.social avatar

I actually have never even downloaded it! Heard good things post-release, but it never really drew me in.

saigot,

I haven’t played it yet (A second play through of BG3 sounds more appealing right now), but in general for an singleplayer RPG I would prefer a small full setting to an empty large one. If the environment has almost nothing of interest in it, then I’m going to just be glued to the objective marker, which while not a deal breaker, definitely hurts the experience. In a more curated environment I would ignore the objective marker and go off in a random direction. This means my experience is more unique and gives a proper sense of exploration which can make the game feel bigger even though it is technically smaller.

NuPNuA, (edited )

Yout have to factor in the life sim-element of Bethesda RPGs too. You can theoretically become a mining magnate in Starfield using those planets and resource extraction outposts. That content is there for those kind of players. If you just want to do the directed side content, then as you say, you’d just follow the markets and not need to interact with it. Your exploration will be in the “dungeons” looking about for lore and loot.

NuPNuA,

Yeah, it’s all part of the freedom the game offers for what you want to do. If you want to be a cargo hauler you’ll rarely see a barren planet as you’re delivering to settlements. If you want to be a bounty hunter, you may see them once or twice when a bounty has holed up there, but if you want to be a space prospector, you will need to spend more time exploring and locating resources to set up extraction plants for.all valid methods of interacting with the universe with different needs for the barren planets.

raccoona_nongrata,
@raccoona_nongrata@beehaw.org avatar

deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • Talaraine,
    @Talaraine@kbin.social avatar

    I just figured they put it there for some modder to let people build their own bases.

    Pseu,
    @Pseu@kbin.social avatar

    A place can have a barren atmosphere and aesthtic while also having content to find, even if that content is more sparse or minimal, suited to that lonely environment

    That's exactly what they've done.

    A "barren" planet still has stuff. In the 5 minutes or so that I did random exploration I found a colonist hut that was razed by pirates with a hidden chest with like 3k credits, and a random vendor who was going a little nuts for being alone so long. Nothing incredible, but enough to make the place not feel dead on a random frozen moon.

    BigBananaDealer,
    @BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee avatar

    i found a random trader with their alien dog

    Erk,

    I wouldn’t shape any of your decision to playor not play on this particular detail. It really has little to no impact on the game whatsoever. There are a lot of really interesting worlds to explore, it’s really not worth the amount of discussion lately.

    Not saying this means “this is the game for you”. Just that this one facet shouldn’t enter into your assessment at all, in my opinion.

    HawlSera, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

    Bethesda, are you high?

    banana_meccanica, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

    They thought they had a brilliant idea, but it’s not. It’s a classic. The space is beautiful, of course, but it’s the interactions that make a game unique. No interaction, no party.

    Treczoks, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

    Just wait then DLCs start to populate the void...

    Apart from that, what I've seen on some YT videos is impressive - When they populate a planet, they really mean it.

    Otome-chan, do gaming w Bethesda says most of Starfield's 1000+ planets are dull on purpose because 'when the astronauts went to the moon, there was nothing there' but 'they certainly weren't bored'

    "1000+ planets are dull on purpose"

    No, they're dull because no human team could make 1000 planets worth of interesting content in a single game development cycle.

    Starshader,

    Chris Roberts : Hold my beer, for another 50 years.

    Rinox,

    Yeah, it’s already stale and expired by now

    Dubious_Fart, (edited )

    You know someone is gonna make a mod that generates random and unique bases from hab complex assets.

    And thats exactly why Bethesda doesnt put the effort in. cause they make the game, then the modders make it good for free… Or it used to be that, now they want to charge for mods and take a cut of the profits for shit they didnt make.

    Otome-chan,

    At a scale of 1k planets you're going to have to rely on reused assets and procedural generation. At which point people not into procedural generation say that it's "repetitive". Especially if you only gen once for everyone and not each run lol.

    AI generation of assets and code will theoretically eventually resolve this, but that's quite a ways off. They're not even usable for such with human assistance yet. And if you have ai generating the content, it's not really a human team making that stuff lol.

    SatansMaggotyCumFart,

    I knew one of the planet designers. His favourite part was coastlines.

    He was particularly fond of some fjords he made on the coast of Norway, I think he won an award for them.

    conciselyverbose,

    Slartibartfast?

    SatansMaggotyCumFart,

    Gesundheit.

    Dubious_Fart,

    They could at least make the random PoI’s interesting if there was some…randomness to them.

    Like, I walk into a PoI, I already know where the chests are, the locked doors, are, where the stupid fucking corpse in the shower is, etc etc. cause I’ve ran through this PoI 20 times.

    I dont know why at least the locations of chests and locked doors cant be randomized. Make things at least marginally interesting, instead of cookie cuttered to extreme.

    abraxas,

    While I agree, I’ve been saying that about NMS for years. Not that we want to be comparing Starfield to NMS, of course.

    Otome-chan,

    You can, but randomizing chests+locked doors is kinda complicated, and the more "interesting" your generations the harder it is to code and the more dev time it takes. And for a AAA game release you can't really do that.

    Key+Lock randomization is something that has been solved, and has been used most notably in procedurally generated zeldalikes. But that's still niche indie territory, and not used for major game releases.

    zalgotext,

    Hasn’t this game been in development for like 5 years? And they built it on an existing engine that they have tons of experience with. You could have said “they were limited on how much they could randomize POIs because of the old engine” and I would have believed you because that sounds way more plausible than “it’s hard to code, so AAA games can’t do it”. Like what?

    Otome-chan,

    The issue with procedural generation is the game has to be built for it from the ground up and in a modular way. AAAs try to make themselves appealing by using novel new high quality assets that aren't modular.

    I haven't played starfield so idk what they ended up doing, but from the sound of it they have pre-made assets/areas that they then place onto pre-generated worlds in a randomized way.

    To make one of these "areas" procedural in itself, they'd then have to code a whole system for that. With AAA/3D the hard part is making modular environments without it looking repetitive or ugly.

    My point isn't so much that it can't be done in a AAA game. But rather that it's risky to do (not all players like it), and you have to structure your development around it. Lots can go wrong, there's stuff you gotta sacrifice to make it work, etc.

    If starfield is on the old bethesda engine then that's even more of a reason. You can't just plug and play an entire procedural generation thing in there without some fairly large overhauls or just gluing on an unrelated system.

    In practice, bethesda probably took the lazy route: using their existing engine without major changes, then just making new assets for it, throwing stuff about a bit randomly, and calling it a day.

    That's the thing about procedural generation is: it's a lot of effort and sucks up a huge part of the game's development and comes at some pretty strict costs (repetitive looking environments/gameplay, reduced novelty, larger programming dev time to make it work). It can be done, but for a cost-cutting AAA studio they're not gonna bother.

    XenoStare,

    They already have once though. Many of Morrowind’s dungeons were procedurally generated in development then edited a bit after, that was the same engine. Same with Daggerfall altho that was a diff engine.

    Very different game but Amnesia: the Bunker has plenty of procedural generation as well.

    It’s not at all impossible for one of the largest game development studios to have some procedurally generated, essentially dungeon content. Doing a bit more than the exact same place copied and pasted would be a huge undertaking yes, but if they wanted to they could have. There are plenty of 3D rogue-likes out now as well. Returnal is AAA and haa procedurally generated levels, far more complicated than neccesary for Bethesda to do in order to populate planets in their game about planet exploration.

    Otome-chan,

    I didn't say it's impossible. Just that it's harder, takes deliberate effort, etc. For AAA games they don't bother with that kind of thing because it's larger expense and larger risk.

    Dubious_Fart,

    Just to wheel things back onto the road.

    I was never asking for fully procedurally generated dungeons.

    I just said randomize chest locations and door locks. It cant be that hard for a company that has been using the same game engine for almost 22 years to implement a node system to roll a spawn chance for a chest, or a door to be locked or not (with a higher chance of node spawns behind locked doors).

    Hell, they could have even gone the lazy way and just copy and pasted the PoI a few times and manually changed the cosmetics/appearances.

    With space and prefab buildings, they have the ultimate excuse for why every dungeon is identical (at least until you get into the underground caves…), but not every one of them should have the same dead body inthe same location in the same shower, the same succulent on the same shelf. move the body to a different location! Have a chance for a cluster of books to spawn instead of the succulent! Its a prefabricated hab structure, but that doesnt mean they come with such strict instructions as “Only succulent A on this shelf”

    maltasoron,

    Couldn’t they just have copied the locations a few times and changed up the doors and chests by hand? Seems like an easy fix.

    Otome-chan,

    yes. I haven't played the game so idk the details of what's up. but at 1k+ planet-sized spaces it's hard to have a team go over that by hand. Planets are large. But I have no doubt that bethesda team was probably super lazy as well.

  • Wszystkie
  • Subskrybowane
  • Moderowane
  • Ulubione
  • giereczkowo
  • Spoleczenstwo
  • Blogi
  • muzyka
  • sport
  • lieratura
  • rowery
  • esport
  • slask
  • Pozytywnie
  • fediversum
  • FromSilesiaToPolesia
  • niusy
  • Cyfryzacja
  • krakow
  • tech
  • kino
  • LGBTQIAP
  • opowiadania
  • Psychologia
  • motoryzacja
  • turystyka
  • MiddleEast
  • zebynieucieklo
  • test1
  • Archiwum
  • NomadOffgrid
  • m0biTech
  • Wszystkie magazyny