Also while it’s neat that they made the game as pretty as they did, this is at the end of the day an isometric turn based crpg. It shouldnt be that hard to scale down.
It’s not exactly isometric considering you can tilt and zoom the camera and get it all the way down to over the shoulder adventure style, allowing you to see off into those beautiful vistas. It has some performance issues even on PC in some places like the mountains and the namesake city.
it’s not really what’s good or not, some devices function weird with some stuff. I’ve had the game open for the whole day or more and the only I ssue I had, before upgrading to 32GB (Had 16) is that the game went to the swap after alt tabbing for some time since it seems like nowadays 16 is nothing if you have 20 tabs open (don’t judge me), discord, telegram, nvidia broadcast (takes 1 gig) and some other shit. In any cast, after switching back it took 2-3 minutes of moving stuff to the ram again and it all worked well.
Now that I have 32 GBs of ram I have had zero issues with the game, I believe it takes something like 6-7GB.
For reference I have a 5800 and a GTX 3080, but this is more of an issue with the API calls they are using and how is the processor runing those calls and how they interact with memory.
Here I am wondering when I’ll get three hours in a row to play a game. No kids even just life but wife around so things get limited compared to living alone. Mean if a safe and reload works, least that doesn’t take too long.
Yeah I only go on for the occasional community day if I like the shiny just so I can transfer it to a game that is actually fun to play. Trouble is I’m running out of fun main line games now too…
I really hope Gamefreak/nintendo can get their house in order, the IP deserves so much better than it’s gotten the past few years. Arceus was an encouraging development, I hope they build on that.
Concurrent players on launch is really only a metric of hype - from what I’ve seen so far in discussions, the game itself is shaping up to be a pretty big let down
Kinda seems like people hating just to hate. It's a Bethesda game in space, albiet with slightly more menu travel.
It's a fine game. I wouldn't say it's a let down unless you're expecting fully fledged landing and docking systems. I've actually been pleasantly surprised.
From the grapevine, it's less that it sucks, more like it's meh. 7/10 and all that. Exactly what you'd expect from Skyrim / Fallout 4 in space, but somehow more bland in terms of characterization and storyline.
Same Bethesda shallowness and jank. People who just like exploring a big universe and doing repetitive stuff mindlessly will enjoy it, people who want more choice and character interaction with a compelling story probably will not.
It's kind of like the old Bethesda / Bioware split, except that Bioware's basically dead now, and Larian's doing what they used to do, but possibly better in some ways. Then there's Obsidian who used to be like Bioware / Bethesda but better in the past, but nowadays they seem content to just try to copy Bethesda while adding some "quirkiness" and hoping it'll work.
I am also kinda upset that people can't post reviews on steam, it feels like cheating the system. The game is out, over 200 000 people are playing it, why can't we see its score? How is it different from any other big launch? Should all early access games not be reviewable until they are out, meaning some can't get a score for years and years?
I haven’t played the game, only been watching a streamer play it, but I think arguments like “it’s boring on purpose” are dumb.
Trying to convey the vastness of space and how small you are seems also somewhat undermined, if you’re just constantly fast traveling everywhere, and it seems like you’re made out to be the most important person in the universe, since everyone is screwed without you, but that’s just most games.
It’s dumb because that’s a fringe argument that I hear people reference as absurd more than I’ve ever encountered it. In fact, I have yet to see one person make that justification. I’m just assuming that argument exist somewhere because so many people have complained about it.
Starfield is yet another example of gamers getting outraged over a perceived reception, no matter how large or small that group actually is. I’m sure there are people out there making really bad defenses of the game, but the people who are angry at those people are much louder and far more numerous. 
Most people who are playing and enjoying the game are probably perfectly capable of seeing and articulating some of the issues, but just because a game has issues doesn’t mean it’s “literally unplayable“ or whatever people like to say now. 
I don’t know I just find these back-and-forth so repetitive. Every single game release you see this. The answer is Starfield is a perfectly fine, flawed game, that different people will react to differently. Just like any piece of media.
I spent all morning dunking on the game’s issues and Bethesda’s design philosophy with some friends… But ultimately I’m having a ton of fun with the game, glad I broke my rules and purchased it early, and finding it basically fulfills the things I wish both outer worlds and no man’s sky had delivered on. It’s a good game, and it is exactly what it says it is (as far as I know. I haven’t paid a lick of attention to the ad hype): a Bethesda style open world rpg.
I don’t really want to like it over the small studio titles that it clearly builds on, but them’s the breaks. If you’re looking for a Bethesda style open world RPG set in a sci fi world, then this game will probably be fun for you, and if you think all Bethesda style games are garbage and can’t get past their very odd design choices, then why are you ranting about starfield since obviously it’s going to be that.
Lotta people just love to hate Bethesda. Including me really… but this ain’t it.
As a very committed SC backer, I do not think that quote was directed at SC, I think that was just an honest assessment of the amount of work that handcrafted planets would have taken.
You are all saying that both games have boring, procedurally generated planets. Sounds like both games were designed with boring elements people don't want. Just because ED is more boring, doesn't mean Starfield is good.
The point isn’t that ED being boring makes Starfield good. The point is that space exploration is mostly boring, and ED exemplifies that well. If I wanted unrealistic space exploration, I’d just play No Man’s Sky.
A disclaimer: I havent played the game and probably wont for a few months to a year when its on steam sale so I’m going to just speak based on what the article is saying and experience with other games.
I think its a tricky balancing act to make when it comes to creating an open world game where you travel through space. Different games have approached it differently with some games opting to scale everything down super small and letting you suspend disbelief(like outer wilds) but that wouldnt work as well on a game like this. Other games go for the hub approach where your ship is a hub that connects you to different open maps on different planets. This approach also works in letting you travel the stars and lets the story do the heavy lifting of conveying scale, but it doesnt mesh with the bethesda open world style. Likewise it can also sometimes turn your ship into just a metroid style elevator and so instead of feeling how big the universe it you effortlessly fast travel across the galaxy. Other games fill the space by making big procedural generated never ending expanses, but that can be hit and miss and not really what a lot of people want in a game like this one.
I understand wanting to pad things out a little bit to prevent things from feeling toy like in the way that Outer Wilds did, but it does run the risk of just being boring and uninteresting and leave you wishing for a more “gamified” tighter experience or at least less openness and more zipping to the places that matter. That said if exploring is worthwhile it could make it less of a bummer. I think Wind Waker and breath of the Wild are good examples of this. Wind Waker’s sailing was notoriously long and boring when it came out, however while most of the islands are small rocks, they all have something. Some secret, some rabbit hole leading to something interesting, a piece of heart, a chest of ruppies, SOMETHING. If you engage with it and mark your map along the way, and explore then the mostly empty map becomes a little more engaging.
Likewise Breath of the wild’s map isnt full of little side stories and secret villages or anything so if you decide to go off into that distant peak it will usually be self motivation. That said the game does reward you every time even if it’s not a huge reward. You will find ruins of some mysterious lost nation, you will find ruins referencing past zelda games, and shrines, and even a stupid little korok puzzle. The little gamified reward for exploring the area makes it less barren and worth exploring. So if it’s more Wind waker island, or breath of the wild and less Mass Effect 1 I can see this empty areas working.
vg247.com
Najstarsze