There needs to be a strike and a boycott of video games. I believe everyone is absolutely sick of being beta testers for unfinished AAA game releases.
I have been a Diablo fan for years but my last straw was Diablo IV. Not only is the game incomplete, Blizzard is going to charge for yearly expansions. If there was actual content in D4 to start, I would have gladly bought an expansion later. If future seasons anything like Season 1, Blizzard can fuck right the hell off.
What is sad is that Blizzard threw so many employees under the bus by having them lie about the game as well. That is seriously fucked.
I don't think a strike really has anything to do with that. It has to do with treating the workers better.
Now if that also came with extending the time for releases (yes, even the really long AAA development cycles) that could probably improve the quality of said games.
Proof of exactly how important unions are. I never got into gamedev because of its well-earned reputation of being a meatgrinder full of underpaid, overworked devs who never get credit and are the first to be laid off.
It’s for voice actors’ IP rights for AI and non-existent residuals, according to the article. It’s basically about the same issues as the writers/actors strikes.
Though it’s interesting because games have a legitimate use for AI voiceovers. I hope they can negotiate for per-title AI training and residuals, and not just eliminating AI altogether. The potential situational and reactive voiceover seems amazing for games - or even just having an NPC speak your unique name.
IMO the devs could stand to unionize and strike too. God knows gamers all have a backlog and many would hopefully support them for the long haul.
"Eliminating AI" would probably just mean that game studios would stop using SAG actors entirely in the future. There's limits to the power of unions like these.
Unfortunately, that has been proven false many many times. Even if by some miracle online communities manage to organize to that extent, and they manage by some miracle to actually follow through with it... it is still a drop in the ocean compared to the casual market that doesn't care at all.
I think 180k people disagree with you each day playing starfield.
Tho I myself agree that lots of recent AAA games don’t value their 60$ price or whatever. The low effort and quality put into them at launch is just not worth the money.
Maybe sometimes in the future when they are fixed and on discount they could be better value.
Tho hogwarrs legacy for example did not see any update since 4-5 months. And it’s still cursed with bugs. Maybe it’s what we could see with other recent releases too.
I think 180k people disagree with you each day playing starfield.
As a developer myself, I consider Starfield to be a fairly finished product in terms of quality. The outstanding bugs I’ve seen are uncommon and the type I would expect to end up in a production product.
My complaints about Starfield are fairly specific. I don’t like how they built the bounty and forgiveness process, as it’s a bit unpredictable and simultaneously gamable. I can pirate a ship and rack up a $650 bounty, or get a $30000+ bounty pirating the same ship. The way stealth works is comical (if not buggy) in that it’s stealthier to be seen throwing a grenade into a room and running than to shoot someone from hiding. But those (presumably) aren’t bugs or incompleteness, they’re side-effects of the designed systems working as intended.
I’m not a developer, for the record, but I was also pretty impressed with Starfield’s lack of bugs. It’s still got some, but it’s definitely at the ‘normal and acceptable’ level. Not how Bethesda usually releases games.
It’s not about the bugs. I have no idea what bugs are in the game.
The game was advertised as “next gen” priced as a high quality AAA, then it’s just not next gen, it’s last/previous gen with s* optimisation, and bad physics on many parts. And not delivering well on the rest either.
NikTek did some videos on starfield. The channel is mostly news as meme or similar things : youtube.com/
It’s a bit extreme, but we can see the care put into the character, weapon and static object physics and interaction is nothing. It’s year 2000 type of quality, even then there was maybe better character physics.
They didn’t even bother to add a brightness control in the game. No hdr (even if I can’t run it, is a f 60+$ game !). And the start screen could have just been a style, to be “empty”. But with all of this, it’s more likely they just didn’t bother.
And there is plenty more complaints on the game quality.
The game was advertised as “next gen” priced as a high quality AAA
I mean, they were very clear that it was Creation Engine 2, a new iteration on the Creation Engine. What were you or anyone expecting except another iteration on the Creation Engine?
it’s last/previous gen with s* optimisation, and bad physics on many parts
This is a surprise or a disappointment? Nobody plays a Bethesda game for the physics.
And not delivering well on the rest either.
What “the rest” did they not deliver well on? Consensus seems to be that if you like Bethesda games, you love Starfield. If you don’t, you don’t. I mean, I don’t buy the fancy new Madden Football. You know why? I don’t like Madden Football. When Madden 2077 comes out with a new “throw the ball” engine, I’m not getting all amped up that this is finally the Madden Football I’ll want to play. They promised us Skyrim in Space. They gave us Skyrim in Space. The only let-down is that it didn’t have nearly as many “signature bugs” as I would expect from Skyrim in Space.
It’s a bit extreme
Extreme is an understatement. I love CP2077, but they made terrible design decisions and most gamers would have been happier if we got a little less “physics realism” and a lot more game at release. Call me old school, but I feel like “Realistic Physics Simulation” is something that doesn’t belong in most games, and it’s often the cause of bugs and detracts from the game itself.
but we can see the care put into the character, weapon and static object physics and interaction is nothing
You probably want to separate all those other things from interaction. You kinda shoehorned that in at the end of the rant about physics. Even that Nik guy focuses on physics mostly (and drugged out people dancing).
It’s year 2000 type of quality, even then there was maybe better character physics.
I’m thinking you’re a fairly young gamer. You clearly don’t remember year 2000 quality. Morrowind came out in 2002 and Vampire Bloodlines cames out in 2004… Starfield definitely feels like a game 20 years newer than those.
They didn’t even bother to add a brightness control in the game
…full tilt, here? Sounds like you’re looking for a year 2000 game. More and more games leave out brightness control the last decade because you can do it at system level on tv or computer. When I see one of those brightness control gauges, I think “early-mid 2000s”. Bioshock 1 comes to mind.
No hdr (even if I can’t run it, is a f 60+$ game !).
That’s a very cherry-picked feature. HDR is not “the big buzzword of the future of gaming” or some shit, it’s just a color range technology. Big deal? The lack of native RTX/DLSS (otoh) is a bit disappointing, but not exactly unique to Starfield. Most new games don’t have it, and it generally has to do with vendor/API lock-in (something I can respect)
And the start screen could have just been a style, to be “empty”. But with all of this, it’s more likely they just didn’t bother.
Or it was just a style to be “empty” since that was a signature of Skyrim and they were trying to give us Skyrim in Space.
And there is plenty more complaints on the game quality.
Go on. None of your complaints have had to do with game quality so far. They were that it isn’t a Physics Simulator, and that it doesn’t have certain vendor-lock video features you admitted you can’t even run on your system.
I don’t call such a game “finished”.
I think you need to look up what “finished” means. None of your complaints are about an incomplete nature to the game, but for decisions not to include things that were unnecessary to the game’s vision. This isn’t “they left out major questlines halfway through to save money” or “they were 6 months short on QA time”. This was “I want a physics simulator with my cheesy poofs!”
EDIT: Just to add a bit more. I find it interesting everyone wants Bethesda to be a physics simulation. Nobody expects that of a Diablo, or a Baldur’s Gate, or even a GTA. A few FPS games added it. So what? Truth is, people are falling into this “FPS rut” where every game is expected to have (and lack) the features the a few FPS franchises spearheaded. I literally spent my entire life avoiding FPS games because I hate them, and everyone bitches at the good and original games for every time an FPS has a feature they don’t.
You know what else doesn’t have a physics simulator built in? Microsoft Excel.
Sounds like you’re looking for a year 2000 game. More and more games leave out brightness control the last decade because you can do it at system level on tv or computer.
I’m sorry, but not everyone has a high brightness display. Adding a brightness gauge can be very useful for those people.
The rest is just nonsense and Bethesda fanatism. Like
if you like Bethesda games, you love Starfield
Is one of the worst take possible to save your wallet.
Like if they come out with a broken game at 150$ you are going to buy it because you like Bethesda? I cannot agree with this, and lots of steam comments neither. People are complaining about issues with the characters, broken launch mission launch bugs and bad quest variety.
And maybe you need to take a new look at what “finished” means in a dictionary. Because quest breaking bugs and missing features don’t seem to mean “finished”.
I’m sorry, but not everyone has a high brightness display. Adding a brightness gauge can be very useful for those people.
Sure… but that’s not an indicator if a game is complete or if it’s “like a circa 2000 game”. I don’t fault you for wanting a feature that’s not present. But that’s not an objective measure of the game.
The rest is just nonsense and Bethesda fanatism. Like
You know how you can tell someone is approaching toxicity? They fault people for liking things. I disagree with you, therefore I must be a stupid fan who would accept anything.
if you like Bethesda games, you love Starfield Is one of the worst take possible to save your wallet.
Not sure what you mean here. Bethesda flagships are equational games. You expect “X”, so if you want “X”, you give them money for “X”. I dunno about you, but I used to “demo pirate” games because you never knew what you were getting and nothing sucks like blowing $50+ hoping for “X” and getting “Y”.
<span style="color:#323232;">ME: "I want Skyrim in Space"
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Them: "Here you go, Skyrim in Space"
</span>
I call that a breath of fresh air. You’re actually holding that against them and me. Why? Have you never bought a game that surprised you unpleasantly?
Like if they come out with a broken game at 150$ you are going to buy it because you like Bethesda?
That’s the opposite of what I said.
Let’s put it this way. I don’t like McDonalds. But I know people who do. When they order a Big Mac, it is exactly the same every single time. So if you’re craving a Big Mac, you will never be disappointed when you buy a Big Mac. I’m not saying a McDonalds fan should drop $150 on a flaming bag of crap. I’m saying that you don’t get a “flaming bag of crap” when you order a Big Mac. You get a Big Mac.
Bethesda didn’t come out with a broken game at $150. They came out with Skyrim in Space. If you don’t like McDonalds, don’t buy McDonalds. But stop treating people who happen to like McDonalds like there’s something wrong with them, or like they’re zealous superfans.
People are complaining about issues with the characters, broken launch mission launch bugs and bad quest variety.
Do you know what moving the goalposts is? It starts with the line “It’s not about the bugs. I have no idea what bugs are in the game.”. Make up your mind, because we’ve had a fairly heated discussion where you chose to make no meaningful statements about bugs. You don’t get to just drop that line, now. And you were smart to do so, because overall consensus seems to be that Starfield is overall less buggy than the new Gold Standard AAA (BG3). I’ve been playing it since release, and have found exactly ONE frustrating bug (related to outpost building), significantly lower than my gaming expectation of ANY game over the last 20+ years.
And maybe you need to take a new look at what “finished” means in a dictionary. Because quest breaking bugs
Let me reiterate your words: “It’s not about the bugs. I have no idea what bugs are in the game.”
…and missing features don’t seem to mean “finished”.
As a developer, someone whining to me that my product isn’t “finished” because it doesn’t have this silly feature they want that was never on our roadmap is annoying as hell. Can you imagine that? Is your house “finished”? I don’t see an indoor pool or sauna, so it can’t be.
First, you can disagree with my opinion and it’s totally fine.
Not sure what you mean here.
Sencond stop commenting every line out of the context of my answer. It makes your answer extremely long to say nothing.
I was saying that the arguments didn’t make sense other than “buy it and ignore the issues” mentality, now maybe I understand better your point.
For my my point? It’s on the Niktek channel.
Whatever the game is. It could cost 60$ whatever I don’t care if it’s bad or not, it’s just a game. What I care about is if the game is worth that amount of money. And in my opinion it isn’t, or maybe if you just want to play a sandbox with loading screens.
If you want game faults it’s mostly on the technical, immersion + developer implication in story telling.
Just look at the latest video on that channel (don’t if you don’t want to get spoiled) : It presents a part of the game where you get chased. You are supposed to get fast to your ship with your crew. The crew does run, but it stops at tables, people… Like everyone is chill jogging. And there is just some cries just for “ambiance”. The run is interrupted by 4 loading screens. When in the ship it’s like nothing happened outside and everyone is chill around the chaser. And keep in mind it’s a f story mission!
I myself cannot call such thing exciting (for a chase part) or something good quality.
Nvidia issues were present on “lower” spec cards with plenty enough vram. Not even sure if they fixed anything. (youtu.be/lGL3fczSXaI?si=C2bAg_k77CAkhfcN) Nvidia could also have been at fault (nvidia deivers aren’t always perfect).
Starfield is overall less buggy than the new Gold Standard AAA
Call finished whatever you want, but a game slightly better than others recent releases isn’t “finished” just because it’s better. It’s a company experimenting at what extent they can screw you before they get hurt. And companies have been doing this for a lot of time, each time, screwing up people’s preorders and hopes.
Now if starfield has everything you need, it’s fine. But if it doesn’t have everything someone else needs to play it at a good quality, the it isn’t fine by my standards of quality.
I’m sorry to feel that way. Looks like sticking to the topic isn’t working. Cheers.
One point, though. You punctuate your point with a statement that sounds like you think no game is to your “standards of quality” if there exists a gamer somewhere in the world who doesn’t get what they want out of it. Seems a weird type of measurement. I usually consider “mostly positive” on Steam a fairly decent bar for quality. But you can consider whatever you like, of course.
Potatoes? You mean PCs with < $1000 GPUs?
I'm not touching Starfield until I can play it at 1440p 60 fps with decent graphics (yes, actual 1440p, not "720p upscaled to 1440p" bullshit. Neither that nor 30 fps are acceptable to me).
If Bethesda can't be bothered to fix performance and I will need to wait years until I decide to upgrade so be it - I have plenty of great games in my "to play" list. By that time the will also be lots of mods to choose from to make Starfield worth it.
It's crazy to me that they make the same game for almost 20 years but still can't make it work. The ai seems to get worse every game, computers get better and better but it still runs the same.
Just from a a couple of nights playing Starfield. The combat ai does seem more interesting then with enemies jumping off ledges to get to you etc but not but a whole heck of a lot. L
That's the plan. I haven't actually properly played F4 yet either lol (tried years ago but dropped due to performance issues). Probably will do it soon after spending a month modding it.
Don't know how much free time you have, but I couldn't be bothered anymore for FO4 on nexus. I just downloaded one of the bigger/better collections and ignored/deactivated the creepier/boobier mods.
Already more than enough of a hassle to get that working, with vortex sometimes not installing stuff properly, pre-cleaning files, etc.
I just enjoy that stuff lol. I only stopped my last Skyrim playthrough because I kept updating my mods and adding new ones and at the one point it just broke all of my saves. I took it as a sign to move on to other games.
Same, but realistically once you start heading towards the 500 mods range, it's almost impossible to get it working reliably.
At one point I had 200+ mods on skyrim, and the mod cycles and before/after conflicts on vortex looked like mandelas. I did enjoy 'completing' the vortex mod manager game. That's when it's 3AM, you're fed up, you give up trying to figure what's wrong, and just click randomly and uninstall/reinstall mods until vortex shuts up, and it somehow just works. Bit like winning the lottery.
The thing with No Man’s Sky is that it’s supposed to be in the vein of old pulp sci-fi which was usually quite scientifically inaccurate and more fantasy and philosophy.
When’s the last time you played? I ask because there are “dead” systems - no conflict, no economy, not even a space station. If you haven’t played in a while, you might want to boot it up again. A lot has changed!
It’s game of the century in my book. These complaints are shallow. I spent 20 hours exploring and these complaints hold no weight. There is plenty, go find stuff. I have 2 huge ship’s just from exploring planets. I have full legendary gear. All from planet hopping.
Exploring planets is cool as fuck especially when you go across environments.
Moons are especially fun and hold all sorts of secrets.
If you find a note about a secret base, pursue it.
Bethesda did a good job. I have played SC and SB2 and while I like how they do space travel, the rest of their game sucks by comparison. Bethesda really knocked it out of the park.
Bethesda did a good job. I have played SC and SB2 and while I like how they do space travel, the rest of their game sucks by comparison. Bethesda really knocked it out of the park.
This. Just exploring the first POI after leaving the tutorial I thought to myself, “This is how SC, NMS, and ED should have done their ground FPS exploration and combat.” The FPS gameplay is much better than Fallout 4/76, Bethesda improved that aspect a good amount. And with any Fallout/Scoll game, I love the clutter loot. I’m now 42 hours into the game, lots of new Bethesda style detailed POIs to discover and explore. People complaining about empty moons/planets are ignoring the hand crafted content and focusing on the unpainted mod canvas… or to give them a bit of a pass they have never played ED, NMS, or SC as those have lots of empty moons as well.
Did they pay you to write this?
Are you forcing yourself to enjoy the game because you paid so much?
Or am I insane?
I feel like im in Truman Show, noticing the facade crumble and all the streamers and reviewers acts like the game is fine.
I see streamers encounter serveral game breaking bugs and then instantly praise the game again.
The game is basically Bethesda trying to mask the limitations of their game engine.
I mean good for you that you like it but I spent 10hrs and then refunded (Thank god for Steam). Im not paying 100 bucks for Fallout 4 with space skin. I can not fathom how people accept this quality in 2023.
And for that price.
If someone is interested in my “shallow complaints”:
It’s not as open and “huge scale” as people seem to think it is. It’s kind of “fake open” if that makes sense. You cannot get into your ship and fly 800m east to your mission. If you do that, a new instance is loaded and your mission is not there. You have to run those 800m.
The ships are cool but you don’t need it. You just fast travel with a loadingscreen everywhere anyway. I saw the inside of my ship twice in 10hrs (not counting the cockpit view).
Navigating the menus are a nightmare. Inventory management is difficult.
Laziest intro I’ve ever seen. “Hello stranger, take my ship. No reason. Ok cool. Bye.”
Very little improvement graphics-wise. The explosions are 2D sprites lmao. In 2023. For real. New Atlantis looks horrible.
Performance is shit. I get 40fps in towns with a “UFO rated” computer on userbenchmark. Nvidia card.
NPC’s teleporting around, getting stuck everywhere halfway through floor, corpses flopping around, ships clipping through stations.
IMO that really does not effect the scale of the game, it’s not limiting the amount of places you can go at all, just hop somewhere else on the planet and you’re gonna find similar things. You arent really meant to use the ship for such a small distance aswell, and the instanced wall to wall distance is really quite far for being on foot.
Eh, it was your choice to fast travel. They included a ton of fast travel options cause not everyone either has the time for the game otherwise or they just does not care about the flying around in space part as much. But the option to not fast travel, and to instead use your ship is there 100% of the time so I don’t understand complaining about it, it’s just a matter of choice.
I personally found the menus really easy to use and get used to, but I was on controller and not kbm, cant speak to how kbm feels.
What you are describing as a lazy intro is the exact intro that bethesda fans want in these games, quick and over with so you are quickly released into the world to figure things out on your own, it’s what bethesda does every time.
But yeah agreed on the technical aspects, except for new atlantis looking horrible. If anything looks borderline horrible for me, it’s the borderline uncanny valley faces everyone has.
Gotta love how anyone who has a good time with a game is either a shill or has stockholm.
I pirated the game and won’t have the funds to buy it any time remotely soon. I 100% agree with the commenter you responded to. It’s a fun game, there’s a lot to do and I’ve often been feeling like this game has the guts that 2077 was missing (and I had a mostly bug-free 100% playthrough before a lot of major patches. For me, patches have just been mod-breakers lol). I only bring up 2077 because of just how often over the last few days I’ve thought “they’re accidentally delivering the promises 2077’s marketing made”. I remember when Night City was promised to have fully scheduled NPC routines (which doesn’t really exist) but it’s actually somewhat present and there’s a quest that introduces it as a “necessary” mechanic.
I’ve been very pleasantly surprised with the faction and trait interactions. I classed as a space scoundrel who is wanted and I have parents - my parents show up in random pleasant places like the zoo, my space scoundrel or wanted trait I believe got me captured and now I’m undercover working to infiltrate and take down a space pirate faction. In my own time I became a space ranger who started working for a corp in Neon doing espionage. Oh and like the previous commenter said, I’d followed a secret moon base and became a notorious pirate hunter which I’ve decided to take up the mantle of, so I’m technically double undercover lol.
Last little thing on interactions, it’s been cool that the news has minor reportings on the important things you do. After I found said legend and lived up to it I’ve been hearing about attacks on space pirates that I’ve done. Smaller questlines have meaningful NPC changes.
I have some counter-points to yours, but I do have gripes of my own with the game I’ll list after.
“not open”
What you’re trying to say is there’s no sub-orbit flight. You only fly your ship in orbit or in deep space. As a byproduct there is no way to manually fly your ship 800m. What you can do for 90% of quests is go to the planet map, click a new landing zone and land closer, skipping any exploration the game is trying to encourage. (The 10% of quests I’ve encountered are gas-detection on colonies. Rescue quests I can fast travel, unsure about flight). They didn’t really market that you could, and frankly while the idea of flying my ship above colonist settlements and open firing on them sounds awesome I see why it’s not possible. They took Elite Dangerous and dropped the interactive transitions for docking and landing. We’ve been aware of this since it was announced so I don’t really see the issue here.
Also there may be a lore reason they came up with, as there have been mentions of ships larger than certain sizes straight up just can’t land on planets at all.
“ship aren’t needed”
I’m going to say no, subjectively. You can fly quite a bit if you want to, it’s just faster to plot courses and for less populated galaxies there’s not much reason to stick around. For actual gameplay, ships to make a difference though. The default ship is a good start and moderately upgradeable, but it’s nothing compared to fighting in a dogfighting ship. Dogfighting ships are quite useless for cargo transport though, so if you are trying to ship people you’d be hard pressed doing it with the default ship. In a galaxy you can travel to any waypoint you see, bypassing the map menu. There is a lot of menu-diving, and I’ll list some issues I have with that in a bit.
“lazy intro”
I’ve seen a lot of complaints about the intro. To be honest, I don’t agree. So you’re a miner that finds a mystical space rock that makes you feel things, then some people happen to show up looking for a large dozen of them to unlock the secrets of the universe. Cheesy? I guess. I appreciated that it was much faster getting started and out into the open world than their other games (still a little on rails slow). If anything, I’d argue that it gives much more player freedom for imagination. In Fallout you’re searching for a person and you have a dedicated goal. In Skyrim it’s the same as the chosen one.
In Starfield you’re vision from the magic rock could be entirely meaningless if you wanted it to be and never deal with it again. The fact that you were just a space miner with no background fits perfectly with the RPG genre and solves the issue that people have been complaining about for Bethesda for years (that they’re not “true” RPG’s). Meanwhile we get an actual blank slate with a decent story premise and it gets called lazy and boring. Fuck that man, the concept was fine and you can be whatever you want to be for once.
“graphics/performance”
Seems kinda odd complaining about graphics? Unless I’m tweaking for gains I don’t FPS meter, just visual smoothness as a reference. 5800x3D and a 10gb 3080 on ultra save motion blur with RT, on medium. No DLSS mod or FSR. I haven’t felt the need, as performance has been solid and stable - at least it’s consistently the same in the same areas. It’s a pretty game, but I wouldn’t say crisp. Better than RDR2’s TAA but worse than 2077’s current state. Some spots have some fuzzing/film grain of some kind, might be an atmosphere effect since it doesn’t seem present on all planets. Some areas are definitely lower FPS but on a variable refresh rate monitor it’s not been noticeable in any negative extents. Low FPS has only ever been on planets/settlements, space and dogfights have been pristine. Performance hasn’t ever gotten worse than 2077, which for me was ~25fps prepatches (sub the x3D back then). Neon and New Atlantis are generally lower fps than an indoor smaller map but no poor frametimes, no chugging or stuttering. It’s just the difference between 165hz and 60hz. The only actual “lag” I have seen is NPC scripts, which sometimes after longer play sessions hang and can get a few seconds of desync. For one line, then it’s fine again.
That said, I shouldn’t have to need high end hardware to have a good experience with the game. I feel like that’s a separate issue, though. The game has been stable, completely crash free, and performance is consistent across how it performs - small maps are consistently smooth and heavier areas are noticeably lower FPS but not in a bad way. I did mention this is a pirated copy, right? I’d expect to have an abysmal experience with performance and yet…
“clipping”
One barista started levitating up to the ceiling when I was ordering a coffee, stopped at the ceiling. Once or twice an NPC has been facing a different direction during conversation. Once in a while an NPC will be walking into a wall, when I’ve wanted to steal I’ve “pushed” NPC’s and they just repath themselves and its fixed - though rescue missions do suffer from this a bit. With some 30+ hours of playtime (on save at least), I’ve not seen any ship clipping or hitting stations. I’ve been to some heavy fleet areas like UCS and pirate bases and they are all just normal?
Like overall, I have some issues in similar ways but I have been enjoying my time with the game a lot. Pleasantly surprised compared to what I had been reading online.
Menu diving is definitely a pain, mostly the map. There’s ways to mitigate it, but it’s a small convergence of minor issues that make it feel like one larger one. So, the scope of the game is so large and missions are not categorized by planet. Transitioning between missions to check the map is long and the alternative is menu diving. Sometimes you go to a planet just to land, talk to someone, and leave. Now, that is on me if I choose not to stick around but I’m also so full of quests that I’m worried adding any more will leave me with more planets with objectives I can’t find. (I do like the abundance of quests, I really wish they had given a planet or at least galaxy category for missions).
Also regarding menus, I just wish the hotkeys were consistent. Have the scanner out? No hotkeys will work. Hotkeyed into a menu? Have to press tab to back out and select a different one, can’t press a different hotkey. Minor timewaste but it adds up and gets annoying.
Quest streamlining - only ran into it once but in short, I was captured at a low level and followed its questline and got stuck in an auto-save encounter where I had a -10 advantage in the dogfight. I tried about 30 times, gave up went back a save before that grav-jump and went on elsewhere. It would have been nice to have been given some more information along the way, say the rough estimate of the level I should be for the quest. However, that has actually only happened one time and every other quest has been fine in this regard, so I think I may have just been low level in a high level unavoidable encounter. Ah, this quest also put me into an NPC bug “The people of New Homestead need these supplies!” for a little while. Resolved upon completion, though. || Quickly while on the topic of quests, the colonists “place gas sensors” quest is semi-bugged as no waypoint appears. Lots of gas spews, no interactions (unless maybe I’m missing a perk point for it!) People did say that if you find the right gas spot an icon will appear, so MMV for this one.
A minor gripe, it’s not really so much an issue as it seems to be an oversight. As I’ve mentioned, there’s multiple ways to travel. You can fly, select a waypoint and travel to it. Small cutscene and you’re there, no map. You can go into your map, select a plant and set a course - you will be orbiting the planet. Or you can select the planet and view it and select a settlement to land at - you will be outside your ship. However, you cannot fly to the planet, select the planet, then land. Selecting the planet has you bring up the planetary map, where you then select a settlement… This is the course of action that results in your first bullet-point of no sub-orbit flight. Because we cannot select a planet to land on directly, we must use the map to travel. Also because of that streamer we saw that you also can’t fly to pluto to land on it because we can’t do that with any planet.
I personally don’t have an issue with that aspect of it, my gripe comes down to the flow of gameplay. Like the menu diving, inconsistent hotkeys, I’m just not sure why they added some time buffers and menu-reliant methods when they also have existing ways to do the same thing. It’s one of those things where it seems like by trying to accommodate doing something any possible way they ended up nerfing each way of doing it? That said, my friend made a good point - would you rather spend time at the destination or getting there? Currently, the game is maybe 30% (quest dependent) getting there and 70% being there. Sometimes you go to a location via grav jump, hail and dock, do a couple things and leave. Sometimes you grav jump talk to someone and leave. No matter what, you are going somewhere, doing something, and then leaving. So are you going to be happier spending your time doing frivolous things to get there, or would you showing up and spending your time in the area?
So far, my complaints have all been related to the flow of the game. Most of my time is really spent engaging in the world, talking, collecting, it’s genuinely fun. Then I get a quest and it asks me to go to some far away planet… well, do I have anything else left to do here? Do I leave and come back? If I leave I’m going to find something else and then I won’t come back for some time. Then I start trying to reference the missions and the map and that is where
So far honestly my biggest actual bothers me issue has been the egregiously long animations for getting into and leaving the cockpit. Hold E during a dogfight? You’re fucked. Accidentally forget to add something to cargo? Go make some tea, it’ll be a while. I’m being a little facetious but seriously, a 5-7 second long stand/sit animation is just too much for something I’m doing constantly, especially if it’s prone to happening on accident.
My second biggest issue that I think most people have been talking about is rooted in that quests don’t have a view all on map/make all active/most sensibly, categorize quests by planet (or galaxy). Goddamn, I have spent a lot of time in Neon trying to figure out which quests if any are still available there, or searching for another quest that is somewhat nearby another. I’m trying to follow sensible trade routes and plan accordingly, but there’s just so many to sift through and cross referencing them is a pain. That said, it seems like they have combated this by trying to push that that does not matter. If you are in the Sol system and need to go to Neon or further right, just plot a course or go directly to the planet and land on the waypoint. If you have no contraband, you land in the settlement outside your ship/in the city. There’s no need to stay within Sol/near Alpha Centauri because as long as you’re ship is within range, grav-jumping is as instantaneous as a loading screen.
That’s about it, honestly. Carrying capacity has been generous, 140kg per follower and 2 being pushed on you right away. Ships with 1,000kg can be had easily. Storage is pretty freely given, 300kg at the lodge (which has all the crafting right there), default ship has ~600kg (450 cargo + 150 captain + ~150 random storage?). I’ve been trying to take it easy and not grab all the junk to exist but only from looting bodies and actual usable materials. I’ve got 4 ships and 100k credits and still more to sell. The game is genuinely lots of fun, very detailed with lots of interactions, it really does feel alive especially compared to 2077 which I enjoyed but saw it’s shortcoming for.
That’s how I feel for Starfield. I see some shortcomings (frankly, that will be fixed with mods probably. I forsee a lot of animation skip mods.) being an otherwise extensively large, and so far well crafted game with meaningful decisions for your character. Actions I’ve made have actually made a difference and affected me later. And while bugs are gonna vary for everyone, my experience so far has had very few bugs that actually matter. To be honest, even if every 2nd body was flopping around after death I wouldn’t care? It literally does not matter? I really don’t care that once in a while an NPC is facing a different direction while they talk to me. Intended? Probably not. People in the real world also don’t always face you or even look at you while they talk, so I don’t see the issue.
So, there you go. Now either I’m a shill whose been paid by Bethesda (I could really use it right about now), or a pirate whose been blinded by the shiny new so I must be missing all the terrible qualities of the game.
Or, could it just be that it happens to be a slightly more fleshed out Bethesda game. It has some fairly minor shortcomings, performance aside, but it’s also a fun light RPG. (I really have to stress, I see lots of complaints about performance online but ultra+RT medium on my hardware has been stable and fine, and I love high refresh rates. I have 165hz for a reason.)
Anyway, sorry not sorry for the length. I’m just tired of seeing people enjoy things and getting called a shill for it. It’s disingenuous considering there are actual issues with the game to complain about.
all the streamers and reviewers acts like the game is fine. I see streamers encounter serveral game breaking bugs and then instantly praise the game again.
Could it be that, like myself, these streamers have found that in their playtime these bugs are pretty minor compared to the rest of the game that’s been fun and engaging? Two things can be true, you know. I can enjoy the game and say that it’s strong and well developed while simultaneously saying that it has shortcomings regarding how they relied on the map for travel. But just because they relied on the map for galactic travel doesn’t mean that my excursions on planets are any less fun, it just means that it’s a little less fun to get there than it is to be there.
What you can do for 90% of quests is go to the planet map, click a new landing zone and land closer, skipping any exploration the game is trying to encourage.
This didn’t work for me. If you do this, a new instance is loaded and my mission does not show up.
It’s kind of difficult to explain this without telling you the whole thing.
Here goes…
Build outpost randomly.
Meet Bounty Hunter in close-by container.
Bounty Hunter asks for help with bandits, and to meet 1km east.
I get a marker on my map and on HUD.
I think “fuck, im not running 1km.”
I go back to my ship and open map.
I put my landing marker close to mission marker.
Click to fast travel.
Loading Screen.
Ship lands.
Get out of ship.
Look around. It’s a whole different map.
No marker on HUD.
Think “wtf”.
Fast travel back to my outpost.
My mission is there again.
Ah I see, I understand! Yeah that’s essentially a version of the colonist bug I encountered. It seems certain parts of the game want you to play through it. Mine “works” a little more than yours though, since I was rescuing someone fast traveling would defeat the point. But showing up somewhere is definitely something you’d expect to work for a bounty.
For what it’s worth I often find myself feeling like I don’t want to run 1km, but it’s only 5 minutes and I get there before I know it. The distances of the POI’s feel so far, but most are around 400m and it seems to go by in about 2 minutes. For moons it’s full cause you can complete the surveys quickly, but for planets it’s a good opportunity to finish them up without feeling like I’m wasting time I could be spending on quests.
Anyway, sorry you had to question your sanity and thank you for indulging my curiosity!
Did they pay you to write this? Are you forcing yourself to enjoy the game because you paid so much? Or am I insane?
No need to go for insults just because you disagree with someone. I love this game so far, it’s been a great deal of joy. For full disclosure: I paid for the $30 USD upgrade package from the gamepass version of the game to get the early access and have not paid full price yet. If script extender mods don’t work on the gamepass version of the game, I expect to purchase he game on Steam for whatever price it is at that time.
I don’t disagree with you on several points, but that doesn’t mean a it’s bad game. As I already stated, I recommend the game and I feel it’s a good game.
Here are some of my thoughts:
The ships are cool but you don’t need it. You just fast travel with a loadingscreen everywhere anyway. I saw the inside of my ship twice in 10hrs (not counting the cockpit view).
One of the things they said repeatedly during pre-release media is that the game has so many aspects to it that you can ignore entire parts of the game by design.
Don’t care about ship combat? Then don’t take ship combat missions, that’s OK.
Don’t care about outpost management? Then don’t make outposts, that’s OK.
Not having to use your ship very often is a feature, not a bad thing. I’ve taken several combat missions and transport missions. I’ve messed around with smuggling a bit. I’ve explored around in my ship and gotten several random encounters. It’s a fun part of the game, but anyone who doesn’t enjoy it isn’t forced to go through it.
Navigating the menus are a nightmare. Inventory management is difficult.
This is probably my 2nd biggest complaint about the game. The UI design is, in my opinion, just not great to use on PC. It seems everything I want quick access to is about 2 menu levels deeper in than it should be…
Laziest intro I’ve ever seen. “Hello stranger, take my ship. No reason. Ok cool. Bye.”
Yeah, but this doesn’t represent the entirety of the game. Many of the quest lines have me very interested in them.
Performance is shit. I get 40fps in towns with a “UFO rated” computer on userbenchmark. Nvidia card.
This is probably my biggest complaint about the game. That said: I agree that the graphics/performance is not great, but please do not ever use nor support UserBenchmark. They are a joke, and cannot be trusted to actually review anything.
NPC’s teleporting around, getting stuck everywhere halfway through floor, corpses flopping around, ships clipping through stations.
I expect many people will tell you “It’s a Bethesda game and it’s to be expected,” and they’ll be right. But you’re also in the right to keep calling Bethesda out on it. Giving massive companies a free pass on these things isn’t ok.
That said, none of these glitches have broken the game for me. I’ve yet to had any game experience ruined by it. Most of them I chuckle at and then move on. If anything, I think it adds charm to the game. One of my favorite things to do in Skyrim was put pots on people’s heads and watch them walk around, or to shout at them and watch their plates get stuck in a chair and vibrate around. (I’ll refrain from commenting about certain Starfield-related shenanigans for spoiler reasons.)
Did they pay you to write this? Are you forcing yourself to enjoy the game because you paid so much?
Or am I insane?
Please for the love of god can we not turn beehaw (and lemmy as a whole) into YET ANOTHER space where people enjoying a game to whatever degree they please is somehow truly impossible to believe that you question your sanity??? Just learn how to have a conversation for crying out loud!
Naw man you’re being needlessly abrasive and theyre right to call you out on it. No need to take people in bad faith and call them shills or act like someone having a different opinion than you is CRAZY!
People aren’t annoyed at you for asking if you’re insane, they’re annoyed at you because you apparently don’t know that it’s possible to do that without insulting everyone who disagrees with you.
Protip, if you ask someone a question, and then follow that up with “Or am I insane?”. You’re heavily implying that they in fact are the ones who are insane.
Maybe you legitimately didn’t know that. In case you didn’t, now you know.
Seriously? On the very slim chance you’re actually just this clueless about polite communication,
Did they pay you to write this? Are you forcing yourself to enjoy the game because you paid so much? Or am I insane?
It’s not the third line of that that people object to, it’s what is implied by the entire statement. We assume you don’t consider yourself insane, because that’s obviously hyperbole, which means you do seem to think that anyone who disagrees with you is either a shill or stuck in a sunk cost fallacy.
Consider the alternate phrasing of that entire statement, eg. “I’m just not seeing it. Am I insane or something?” And then the rest of your post. Nobody would be nearly so irritated with you in that context.
Alright. In text maybe you are right.
Im a firm believer that if we like, sat in a bar discussing over a beer, and you could hear the tone of my voice and read my face, no-one would be offended.
“in my book” is a valuable phrase there. I also wouldn’t call it anything that extreme (and I like it) but it’s a good game, it’s not a stretch that someone might absolutely adore it.
I am confused by a lot of complaints about the game I’ve seen, namely “it feels barren”, “id rather have 3 good planets over the 1000 procedural generated ones”, and then theres the people with the same complaints they have every time bethesda releases something. I have seen only like 1 trailer for the game, kept away from all the press and whatnot and somehow I feel like I still had a better concept in my mind of what this game would be like than most others did? So many complaints I can just address as “it’s a bethesda space game, and this is what it’s supposed to be like”.
Many people don’t like fallout and elder scrolls, and that’s fine, but if you dislike those games why buy this one? Especially why in the hell would you PREORDER this one?
And secondly a lot of people ive seen talk about this have obviously never played a true space game before. I’ve played no mans sky, elite dangerous, empyrion, heck I’ve played most of them and they are all barren, that is the point. And if bethesda had hand crafted these planets we would have maybe idk, 5 planets id wager that we could actually explore, which is the total opposite for what bethesda wanted to do here.
So many complaints of this game I just feel are “well yeah, obviously” that I’m struggling to find the actual issues in the game. My only thing that bugs me so far is how I can’t fly around on the planets surface, and the lack of a dune buggy.
I spent five hours exploring Nesoi where my house is yesterday, largely so long because there were a few unique biomes to check out and then I happened on a random quest that had interesting stories and voiced lore snippets and things, and took me some time to complete. Also hooked into another off world quest that I’m not done yet but has been really fun.
I would put it on a very similar level to NMS, in that the world does get samey after a while… But there are biomes on the planet, so at least I can find mountains and deserts and things. Looking forward to whatever mods or dlc increase the baseline biodiversity on lush worlds but I think five hours contendedly exploring a single planet is a pretty good stat at launch to be honest. Plus the quests are actually fun and good and there’s combat with more than one kind of enemy.
My bar for their games is high and its been exceeded. I would be happier if it had every feature I can dream up but if I wanted a game that had an infinite scope and an endless development cycle I’d just pay $10k for a ship in star citizen and hope it releases before I die. Thankfully I’m able to enjoy a game made by one of the most lauded and successful video game developers in the world and not be a curmudgeon about it.
Not trying to be a dick, just seems like everyone else is. Don’t buy it if you need x feature and it isn’t there, maybe they will learn a lesson and make the game you wanted them to next time.
Feel like you’re misinterpreting what I’m saying, that statement is not to excuse bugs.
Demand better
Bro I am pleased with the game? I am having fun and I think it’s a good game, as the other guy who replied to you said my bar for this game has been either met or exceeded. I hold bethesda to the same bar as other devs, and people painting this to be as bad as the fo4 or f76 launches are just wrong from everything ive played and seen. Any bug I’ve had has been purely visual and did not hamper my gameplay, and in 20ish hours I’ve had one crash. And this is on linux even, which makes how stable the game has been even more impressive. Gameplaywise too I think it’s great fun.
you help make the entire video games industry worse.
For the record I would like more games like this one. I am the target audience for this game, I enjoy it, and if more devs made games like it I would be happy.
For the record I would like more games like this one. I am the target audience for this game, I enjoy it, and if more devs made games like it I would be happy.
That’s interesting. My personal impression was that, since the success of GTA3 and Skyrim, basically every AAA title has to be some kind of open world sandbox game with as many features as possible. Personally, I really dislike that; I want a tight narrative and strong core gameplay, and I couldn’t care less for stuff like crafting and base building. (I’m also a bit saddened by the way Bethesda took Fallout 4 and Fallout 76 in. I want to play RPGs, not looter shooters.)
Some studios, like Larian and Obsidian, are still making these games, so I’m happy with that. I really enjoyed Outer Worlds, even though people were criticizing it for being too confined (or maybe especially because it was confined). I’m hoping to get around to BG3 and DOS2 soon. But it feels like we’ve had a drought for more than a decade.
So anyway, I found it surprising to read that you feel there aren’t enough Bethesda-like games, because it feels to me like everyone is copying them. Of course, they are masters of their craft, so maybe the problem is that other studios just aren’t any good at it :P
My tastes have shifted a bit, kind of due to how bethesda has taken their games past few years. First rpg i fell in love with was new vegas, I adore that game and was really at first disappointed in how they handled fallout 4. But even though it wasn’t what I thought I wanted, fallout 4 does what it does better than any other similar game imo. That looter shooter gameplay loop with the settlements hooked me in after a little while, and now I’d rather have a game like that with complete freedom to do anything i want. It’s like comfort food for me that I can keep coming back to, don’t ask how many hours I have in fallout 4 lol.
Not to say I don’t enjoy those other games, I plan on getting baldurs gate 3 soon, my friend kind of sold me on it tonight, looks great. Outer Worlds man, I really want to enjoy but I’ve never gotten past 10 hours in save. As you said, it felt too confined for a game that gives you a freakin spaceship. You give me a spaceship, and I’m going to want to land anywhere and go anywhere, and that’s what Starfield does for me. I told a friend recently that Starfield is what I wanted Outer Worlds to be, but for the record i do fully intent to try and finish that game.
What were your favorite parts of outer worlds if i can ask?
So anyway, I found it surprising to read that you feel there aren’t enough Bethesda-like games, because it feels to me like everyone is copying them.
It’s funny you say that, cause I feel like no one else is doing what they do, atleast to the same caliber. We discussed outer worlds, other than that the only similar game I’ve really enjoyed was Kingdom Come Deliverance. That game is great, but it is pretty different, and doesn’t hold the same replay value.
What were your favorite parts of outer worlds if i can ask?
My usual way of playing RPGs is exploring the whole map, picking up every side quest I can find, and then doing them in an order that feels logical. Outer Worlds made that really rewarding: it’s actually possible to feel like you’ve covered the whole map and and all the content is interesting and fun.
Also, the story and the characters are great, and the game mechanics don’t get in the way (like how there are only three types of ammo and just no lockpicking minigame).
I think I liked the companion quests the most, because they really flesh out their characters.
The DLCs do turn into a bit of a slog near the end, when you’re just running through corridors shooting at stuff. But afterwards, your companions will want to talk about all the horrors they experienced, so at least you can share that feeling with them :P
It’s funny you say that, cause I feel like no one else is doing what they do, atleast to the same caliber. We discussed outer worlds, other than that the only similar game I’ve really enjoyed was Kingdom Come Deliverance. That game is great, but it is pretty different, and doesn’t hold the same replay value.
Kingdom Come: Deliverance is still on my backlog :) I started a playthrough a few years back, but the cut scenes were so long that real life kept getting in the way :P I only got to the castle after you flee from your village. Does it open up a lot after that?
I was disappointed in the exploration in outer worlds if i recall right, it felt closer to a bioware game like kotor than it did a bethesda game. Which is not inherently a bad thing, I like bioware games, just not as much as bethesda. This conversation does make me want to replay & reexplore this game, i recall loving how it looked visually.
he game mechanics don’t get in the way (like how there are only three types of ammo and just no lockpicking minigame)
I totally get that being a strong point for some, i however appreciate the complexity from things like starfield now having like 3 separate kinds of shotgun shells, not including all the other ammo.
I totally recommend Kingdom Come deliverance, it’s one of my favorites. The map opens up a good bit after the intro, and given that fast travel is risky in the game it makes it feel even larger. Yeah, the cutscenes can get real long, but i was pleased with the story and the voice acting so i didnt mind too much, even if Henry can be a little dull at times.
Haha, I’m also not getting any notifications because my app doesn’t support them yet xD Better late than never!
it felt closer to a bioware game like kotor than it did a bethesda game.
Now that you mention it, it does! I really liked the KotOR games, so that’s probably why Outer Worlds clicked as much for me as it did. I did try replaying KotOR a while ago, but I was bothered by how old it felt. I’ve never finished Mass Effect though, so maybe I should. And Dragon Age: Origins is said to be the last “real” Bioware RPG, so that’s also interesting.
It’s just too bad those games are all so old. I’m currently playing Fallout: New Vegas because I’d never finished it and I’m trying to get into a habit of actually finishing games, but the transition back from OW to FNV was quite a shock. It’s not just graphics; older UIs can be really bad. I tried getting back into a game of Fallout 1, but it felt like just playing the game cost way too much effort.
I totally recommend Kingdom Come deliverance, it’s one of my favorites.
Thanks for the rec! I’ve put it a bit higher on my backlog, after Disco Elysium and BG3. Great stuff ahead :)
You’re misunderstanding. At this point “Bethesda game” is its own subgenre, and many complaints about this game are complaints about the subgenre itself. If you don’t like being the Big Special Hero, you won’t like this game. If you want the game to have rich, detailed combat that stays challenging throughout, it probably won’t be this one either
If you want a huge world with lots of curious little things to explore and more side quests than you can do in a lifetime, built on a backbone of a kind of flimsy story (imo not a terrible one this time) that you are mostly gonna skip out on to go do dungeon hops and loot accumulation, then you’re probably golden with this. And by now, most of us should know what we’re paying for, I think. As long as you expect and want what they consistently make, this game delivers very well
On top of that, the combat and general mechanics are just far better than the usual Bethesda offerings this time around. It’s fun to fight in zero g. It’s an absolute blast to disable an enemy ship and then board it. The side quests are legit quite fun and exciting, with NPCs I’ve found I really enjoy and want to see again.
As long as you expect a game that is like Bethesda makes, it’s a very nice and fun one that delivers more than I had expected from them by a long shot. If you expected a deep, hardcore indie gem, you’re going to be disappointed and also you’re maybe kind of a silly person. It’s a mass produced game for a large audience, that’s the stick by which to measure it.
They’re not saying a Bethesda game is supposed to be bad. They’re saying a Bethesda game is supposed to be… a first/third person western RPG with exploration and looter-sometimes-shooter elements and a heavy emphasis on skill checks. That’s been every one of their games since Morrowind besides FO76. Expecting different at this point would be asinine, especially considering Todd and Bethesda repeatedly said this was an RPG.
Yeah I think it’s less that people are setting unrealistic expectations for a Bethesda game, and more that people are getting fed up with being told they should be happy with all the faults “because it’s Bethesda”.
Bethesda gets a really weird pass in the gaming industry and when it comes to shallow content and bugs. I think a lot of that comes from the modability of their games, so that with mods and a few years of patches, the games often end up being a lot of fun - but the fact is that the games themselves, as released by Bethesda are usually hollow shells by comparison.
For instance it always irks me when people say Skyrim VR is the best VR game - you literally need a couple dozen mods just to make it function as an actual VR game (lack of 3d audio in a VR game is just unforgivable imo, let alone any actual physics interactions).
I think people are just starting to get fed up with Bethesda’s business model of building barebones games and counting on modders to make it fun. And then people get further fed up when they say so online and get told things like “but yeah it’s Bethesda, what did you expect?”
As you can see in the other replies, I don’t think that’s what people mean at all.
I haven’t had a single serious bug in thirty odd hours so far. I, and others here, aren’t saying it’s a good game “despite it all”, we’re saying it’s a good game on its own, but if you were looking for something that is in a different style than Bethesda makes, you’re barking up the wrong tree. It’s a simplistic mass appeal looter shooter rpg in space. It’s a good one of those. It’s also subject to all the expected limitations of a game like this, that’s all. It’s not going to be something it’s not. If you expected to pay for a good one of the kind of looter shooter RPGs we expect from this company, it is what you paid for.
I suppose that will be part of it, but it takes a load of willful ignorance to not see that the reason they distribute it this way is to ease people into the idea of using the infrastructure they ultimately set up to monetize other people’s work (i.e. mods).
NMS at least has planets without buildings or signs of life, but they're certain types of planets (eg. lifeless/airless) There are definitely some that have far fewer ships going around too.
NMS is more expansive in some ways, but also fairly shallow in terms of some of the core mechanics. There's a lot of things to do like having a settlement or building a fleet and sending the fleet on missions, but again, it's a bit shallow. At the beginning you're largely focused on resource collecting to build a base, and unlock upgrades. Over time you can automate a lot of this and focus on other things. However, if you don't like the resource collecting to unlock things, you're probably not going to enjoy it.
I think the space flight and combat in NMS feels better. For whatever reason, in Starfield space flight and combat feels very slow to me. It doesn't help that the UI in the starship does this weird laggy update. The seamlessness of flying into a planet can be fun in space combat and the ships will follow you.
NMS has way more copy-paste assets. Starfield at least has grand cities and some unique set pieces or a few different options ,but every crashed freighter in NMS is identical. The buildings in NMS have a tiny bit of variance but they're all like 1-2 room buildings. All space stations and space ports are identical (just the core race changes). There are pirate space stations, but they're the same basic one but darker and they've moved the vendors inward a bit into tents instead of stalls. A little bit of this is baked into the story of NMS to some extent, but that doesn't exactly help it.
My only quibble with this response is that in my mind ground combat is unbelievably orders of magnitude better in Starfield (you actually have access to different guns and enemy types!), and while I can understand preferring the speed of NMS space combat, I ultimately find the mechanics of it pretty shallow and enjoy the system shuffelling of Starfield, I feel like an ideal system would combine them both.
Great points! Yeah there's definitely a lot more variety and skill involved in Starfield. Most of the NMS ground combat is in the open and is easy to cheese, but it is satisfying to hop in your ship and start shooting things (though now they have it trigger incoming aircraft).
I enjoyed the planetary exploration in No Man’s Sky. Some planets have an outpost, but most don’t. In No Man’s Sky there are several alien races and artifacts they left behind you can learn their language from.
There are a huge number of planets, and some have strange reality altering properties. They have different weather and conditions. There is a ginormous amount of alien life that you can catalogue and interact with and even tame. The planets themselves show a huge variety of differences. There is even underground and underwater environments with unique life suited to those environments.
The base building is fun. You can do a lot and you can even travel to galactic hubs and worlds that other players have worked on.
Even travelling through space is more fun. You are able to fly to planets and land on them seamlessly. You can own several different space ships and even giant freighters that can contain your ships and frigates you can send to other star systems.
I do enjoy the zen of NMS (nothing like piloting alone on the surface of a planet with the sound of the rain falling on the cockpit), but even after all those years and cool upgrades, it still feels so empty… If you enjoy tabletop RPGs and have an opportunity to play one with like-minded friends, I recommend you try Traveller. It’s all those things you mentioned, in a way, way bigger and denser scope. :) Also with actual civilizations, empires, politics, commerce, wars, fleets, etc.
Lol tell this to people who are upset that every planet doesn't have a thriving colony in it. The "empty planets" are frustrating to them.
Not that you or they are wrong, it just highlights that matters of opinion on things like this are a spectrum, and sometimes you end up on the far end. I like that I can land on a planet and have something besides just rocks, but also that's it's procedurally generated so that it isn't the same every time. It's false replayability, sure, but if I like playing the game, it doesn't matter to me that the layouts are the same.
I thought this way back when i first played it. But I’ve been spending the lasts days playing and it got so much better.
The environments are no longer the same everywhere, sure you will find matching planets but they don’t all look like asteroids with hair anymore. Minerals dont stick out of the ground anymore. And underground caves exists.
The multiplayer aspect got better too (or so i hear, didn’t get to try it yet).
The stories are more engaging with specific npc’s interacting with you.
Never thought space combat sucked? It’s not to the level of Elite Dangerous, but it’s somewhat entertaining, and accomplishes what need to be done imo.
It’s an MMORPG so of course you have grinding, and for my current playthrough it isn’t boring yet. I’ve got a minecraft vibe, where you upgrade gear and ammass items for future uses.
love that you can get pets now and use them for more than simply have around, I got some kind of panther yesterday, was able to mount some guns to it and now it helps me in combat (kinda tedious to use idk if i fully figured it out yet, but sometimes the companion won’t attack).
All that and i only started playing, there’s the whole frigate thing, and also settlements to protect. I’m told you can have some kind of fleet to send on missions, and i’m certain there’s other huge content i’m missing that i dont know of yet.
I played it like 3 months ago before the Echoes update, so this isn’t based on the launch version or anything.
The environments are no longer the same everywhere, sure you will find matching planets but they don’t all look like asteroids with hair anymore. Minerals dont stick out of the ground anymore. And underground caves exists.
I mean yeah, but they don’t look any better or more varied than Starfield’s planets, that’s for sure. It’s neat that they added caves but the caves are also pretty boring. There’s not much in them beyond some more resources. You don’t have the expansiveness or endlessness of minecraft caves nor the buried mines and mob spawners and lava and more interesting underground stuff.
Never thought space combat sucked? It’s not to the level of Elite Dangerous, but it’s somewhat entertaining, and accomplishes what need to be done imo.
It’s serviceable, but I wouldn’t describe it as fun, as in I don’t actively enjoy the space combat. I find Starfield’s juggling of systems and targeting on top of standard dog fighting maneuvering at least a little more engaging, but a serviceable system that’s not that much fun kind of describes most of No Man’s Sky to me.
It’s an MMORPG so of course you have grinding, and for my current playthrough it isn’t boring yet. I’ve got a minecraft vibe, where you upgrade gear and ammass items for future uses.
I find it’s crafting to be far less satisfying than Minecraft’s or say Subnautica’s, and a lot more grindy, but that could just be me.
Again, I know they have all these different systems, but it really feels like each system is just barely enough of a system to entertain you for a couple hours, but doesn’t have the depth / polish / interweaving complexity to truly hold you.
I played it not that long ago. The comment above is still pretty much spot on. There’s base building now I guess. There’s still nothing to keep it interesting.
I literally played it like 3 months ago, before the most echoes update, but from the looks of the update notes I think my description still likely stands.
Really? You can’t fathom how someone would consider NMS a better game? Both games are barely comparable other than using space as a backdrop. Judging by the reaction online, it seems like many people were lead to believe that Starfield would be a space sim and came up wanting when it was more of a sci-fi Fallout, with mostly optional engagement with the space elements. For those people, I can see merit in recommending they check out No Man’s Sky, which has a shallow, bit widely-spread space simulation to engage with.
I don’t think it’s useful to try and argue which game is better, but I would much rather play No Man’s Sky any day of the week. Bethesda RPGs have long lost their luster for me since the Oblivion days, and now just stand as a testament of disappointing writing, stagnant technology and under-baked systems. Starfield does not show any meaningful signs of breaking the norm.
Really? You can’t fathom how someone would consider NMS a better game?
Correct.
Both games are barely comparable other than using space as a backdrop.
People who say X things aren’t comparable usually seem to grossly misunderstand how comparisons work. They’re very similar games and even if they weren’t they would still be comparable, the end result of the comparison is just that they would be different.
I don’t think it’s useful to try and argue which game is better, but I would much rather play No Man’s Sky any day of the week.
That’s fine but I still can’t fathom why. The only part of it that’s better than Starfield is flying to and from space.
I recently started playing Diablo 4. I’ve never bought DLC or cosmetics but I recall the horse armor uproar. My shock when some of these cosmetics are $20 for mount or town portal…what?!
It’s because their competitor does the same, see? Since few people purchase the mtx they rise prices to compensate. Please ignore the 70$ price tag, thanks.
Dude, I put like 60 hours into Skyrim my first time before I thought “hey… where’s my shout powers and all the dragons?” Because as soon as Hadvar said “we should split up to avoid suspicion” I unchecked the active quest, said “adios!” And vanished into the trees. I had to come back at like level 30 or something to do the entire MQ from Riverwood to the end.
That’s just how a lot of people play these. I don’t wanna follow their story; I wanna make my own.
Edit: Oh and this is all besides the fact that not only do mods disable achievements, so now do console commands in Starfield. I’ve had to no clip a few times to get unstuck while jumping around with low gravity and ending up places I shouldn’t be, so there are probably some achievements I didn’t get simply because that command likely disabled them (it just gives a generic warning that some commands will disable them, but not which ones).
Honestly, avoid Lemmy and Reddit for reviews on this game. The absolute vitriol it’s gotten here has just pushed me beyond trusting any of them. (and yes, they all end with “I mean I haven’t played it.”)
I have played it. 8 hours in so far, it’s fun. I won’t say it’s “redefining RPGs” for me or anything, but I’m having a good time playing around. To others here on Lemmy I am now the worst person on the planet.
It’s the same people that have been bashing Bethesda for years now, they don’t care whether the game is actually good or not, they just want to bash the people behind it.
I’ll play it for myself on gamepass and see what I think, discussion around it has been worthless here.
Yeah, as if Mars and Pluto is interesting. People want this game to fail because it isn’t a better game than the darling Baldur’s Gate 3. And gamer has been like this for a while: either the game is 10/10 or it’s shit/10, there’s no between.
I remember the time when zelda botw came out and jim sterling gave it a 7/10,people went banana over that lol. Starfield and Witcher 3 may very well be a 6 or 7/10 game, and that’s okay.
I think the big issue with a personal preference of realism vs. Fantasy is that Starfield has no commitment to realism in its execution (I say this with 12 hours played before I gave up). It is very much made to cater to lowest common denominator in other space travel things. The ship movement is very primitive and simplified. Travelling to new solar systems, landing on a planet, etc. Is done through fast travelling on the map to connect the different cells. It does not feel immersive in the slightest to me, and I have really enjoyed the “realism” of games like Elite Dangerous in the past.
Most damning is the lack of environmental planet differences. The only affect of a planets negative traits is suit protection reduction. There is no life support, your oxygen is just a stamina system. There is no vehicles. You are just running across barren, boring, procedural planets with none of the pomp and circumstance of games that have done effective space exploration.
Maybe in 2 years of mods you might have a more realistic experience out of starfield.
Any Bethesda game is essentially a mod vehicle with an RPG tacked on anyway. I think it’s entirely on brand that they didn’t go all in on hard sci fi for vanilla. I don’t think that’s incompatible with having a lot of planets that are mostly barren filler; I’m never going to explore 1000 detailed planets, and rescuing someone from a crash on a barren moon or finding a smuggler base on a frozen rock helps to keep the more interesting places feeling cool. There are still more interesting planets than I’m likely to ever get through.
I can’t remember much of how Starfield was marketed but I remember the “1000 planets” thing being parroted a lot. Was the fact that these planets were going to be realistically portrayed and mostly empty wastelands something that was made clear during marketing?
They said that about 10% of planets would have life, and that one of the things they wanted to portray was an IRL astronaut’s quote of being in space as “magnificent desolation.”
The point of a game is to be fun in some sense of the word, not to depict Mars as scientificly accurate as possible, unless it’s Scientificly Accurate Mars Simulator.
If the planneta are boring, then the game about exploring those planets are probably failed at being fun, and that’s kind of irregardless of what people want.
Personally I would like all the games to be good, for example.
I dunno, I don’t think the point of all art is to be “fun”. There’s plenty of examples of games that aren’t necessarily fun but do something interesting in some sense or inspire other emotions. Exploring a bunch of dead and boring planets may not be fun and maybe it’s not compelling or worth doing in Starfield, but I think it can be interesting to have something more “boring” most of the time to have other moments stand out… and sometimes something being boring or painful is part of the experience and it wouldn’t be as worthwhile without, like for example particularly difficult games can be pretty painful to play through, but sometimes having gone through the painful thing is a huge part of why you care about the experience.
Of course not everything is for everybody, and more “boring” experiences in general are probably not what the average person playing video games is into… but there’s plenty of us who like a good boring or tedious or painful slog every once in a while :). Maybe it’s rewarding, maybe it sets the atmosphere, maybe it’s meaningful in some other way… I get it, but I think it’s a little sad to reduce games to “just supposed to be fun!” It’s an awesome art form and I love seeing other creative things done with it.
It’s a space exploration game with thousands of planet, they can depict planet being a barren rock and can be fun.
Personally i don’t think all games are good, arguing with people parroting that is a waste of time. Personally Witcher 3 is mediocre, but i’m allowing people to love it and see it as 10/10. Game is personal taste, if you don’t like that sort of thing then it isn’t for you, no such thing as “all game is good”.
can depict planet being a barren rock and can be fun.
And that will be good then. My point was, that games should sacrifice realism in favour of fun and criticism of “yeah it’s boring, but it’s realistic” is fundamentally wrong.
I think in Starfield case it’s less of sacrifice fun for realism and more of having these realism for a reason. From the review alone, the location is boring, and that’s by design, because you can either ignore it or interact with it, like gather resource or build a base. There’s thousands of planet, it’s not realistic to all be handcrafted and interesting, because what’s interesting for the first 10 times will get boring when you do it 50 times.
There’s a reason why they design it that way, and i think it’s rather fair for this sort of game.
That depends what you’re going in expecting. Bethesda have been very clear that this isn’t a Space Opera but more hard-sci-fi. I don’t expect cities on every planet and alien political intrigue. I expect a cold, barren and uncaring universe that humans are trying to tame.
Not surprising to see them get complaints about this tbh. They went for “borderline horror game” with how much of a miserable wasteland Fallout 3 was and got blasted for it.
And the only metrics here would be “is the game fun” in the end. Is exploring barren planets fun? Good. Is it not? Then it doesn’t matter that real life Mars is even more boring
I mean, isn’t it still only available to those who paid extra? That’s probably why you see so many people wanting to discuss it without having played it yet…
Personally, I try to see it positive. They want to protect others from being disappointed from yet another Bethesda game. I got burned by Skyrim in my youth, so when I see Todd Howard spitting straight lies again, I’ll try to save others the disappointment.
Now that Starfield is public, I feel like people can at least try to form an own opinion, but if only the people who are willing to pay extra talk about it, then you’ve only got Bethesda fans talking.
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.
Me too, but some of my favorites were console exclusive. There's really no reason for those games to be PC or console exclusive these days. The financial math tends to not work out either.
If it literally can't be done on a controller, then sure, but I've now seen people happy with the controls for Age of Empires II on an Xbox pad, so Arma can probably be done too. I've never played Tarkov, so I can't speak to it.
Tarkov mostly because of how you loot. When you kill a player and start looting there are a bunch of nested containers that you need to rapidly search. You need to click and drag things out of pockets into your rig, maybe you want to pack the victims backpack with their own stuff and then put that backpack inside your own… It’s a lot of fast clicking and dragging. I’m not sure how you’d make that work on a controller. I mean, I know how, but having a cursor controlled by a joystick would make looting very slow.
That being said I have no problem with games being on all platforms. And also you could potentially make a KB/M game for consoles just plug those into the console. I remember Socom on PS2 supported keyboards for text chat, and there was that short lived Eve FPS on PS3 that supported the mouse. But you’d still have to make it support the controller by default.
having a cursor controlled by a joystick would make looting very slow
Perhaps, but aim down sights allowed for controllers to toggle two different sets of aiming speeds on demand, and Destiny-style cursors allowed for fast inventory management on character equipment screens that typically only worked on a mouse. There's probably a way to do it that's a little bit different than just mapping a mouse cursor to an analog stick that requires devs to be a bit more clever about it. The wildest one to me is that Baldur's Gate 3 looks entirely different when using a mouse and keyboard as opposed to using a controller. The likes of Elder Scrolls come up with one UI that can be controlled with either device, but even if I think that UI works great in both realms, people who've been playing those games for 20 years have a certain expectation for how it should look and work.
I don’t blame the lack of good shooters on consoles. Consoles never interfered with that before. I blame the popularity of Battle Royale. Everything is a fucking BR now. And it’s not like they just took the gameplay style; they also took the jank.
All the best new shooters are indy developed boomer shooters with retro aesthetics. And I’m getting kinda over that, too. The genre needs some new ideas.
I miss playing good shooters since the PS360 era, way before the battle royale genre entered the game.
It's when the genre exploded on consoles and it was when the genre was overly simplified and dumbed down
Before, some multiplatform FPS changed between the PC version and the console version. The console versions often had maps changed or even completely removed (and enemies where altered too) because they where too much for a controller
It is a great game imo, but it’s also insanely long and pretty grind heavy. I made it through two of the three disc before I sadly lost my save file in a break in.
I later tried again but only made it to disc 2 before just not being able to stomach the grind :/
I honestly didn’t mind the aliens? That movie definitely had its fucking issues but that wasn’t one of them for me. Then again I’m one of the few people who thinks it was at least… Passable I guess? Not the world ending abomination it’s made out to be.
I mean obviously it’s shit compared to the originals but… Could have been a lot worse. It had its moments.
Yeah honestly I could never figure out why people were all up in arms about aliens. Heart ripping mystics, the holy grail, and god exploding Nazis were all realistic enough for you, but aliens were a bridge too far?
I might disagree on that point because any force that hurls a fridge that far will turns its occupants to jelly (much like the first Iron Man suit catering in the desert with Tony inside), but it doesn’t change the fact that realism has never been the point.
Heart ripping mystics, the holy grail, and god exploding Nazis were all realistic enough for you, but aliens were a bridge too far?
It’s not about realism, it’s about consistency. Aliens in the fourth movie after religious mysticism in the first three is tonally and thematically inconsistent with the rest of the series unless you’re actually familiar with the century old pulp serials the movies are a throwback to.
vg247.com
Ważne