I think nuclear is one of my favorite parts of the game. The process for making it and then converting the uranium waste into plutonium is massive, but feels so rewarding once it’s done. Thing is, I’m only running one plant at the moment since I still have enough power production from coal and geothermal. Figured it’d be best to keep plutonium waste to a minimum until I really start needing it, unless they add a feature to bury it. I’ve moved my plants next to the out-of-bounds area near Niagara Falls so I can store the plutonium waste in a container out-of-bounds.
Fair, turbofuel is hard one, not a lot of sulfur on the map, requires rebuilding (or starting a whole new) fuel plant, and depending where you are it may be worth going to full nuclear first. Have fun, Pioneer!
PS there is !satisfactorygame , it’s a bit dead, but when I get back into it I’ll be posting there
I don’t post much on Lemmy and am trying to decide how I want to post without just encouraging everybody to go on the big instances, and so my posts don’t disappear if an instance dies. Figured posting to my own instance and then cross-posting to a large instance and some smaller ones would be a good way to encourage growth everywhere but that’s just me overthinking as always. Tis’ an interesting experiment.
Pretty much same for me. Also you might not want to place your plutonium out of bounds. There might be an update in the future for Nuclear Waste recycling since that is ostensibly possible irl, just really expensive and not worth it atm.
I can get that. I guess the concern would be that Coffee Stain start purging/deleting anything out-of-bounds? You can see the container for the plutonium waste off in the distance a little. The power plants are half in/half-out of the out-of-bounds area.
I’m enjoying the game and having fun but I also have a long list of complaints. #1 for me right now is not having the right dialogue options. First bethesda rpg where a character can ask me if something is a good idea and there is no option to tell them no!
I got Outer Worlds because of all the talk about it having more choice than Fallout 4 and didn’t find that to be true at all. It was largely the same with nothing but Yes, No, and Not Now options.
I disagree, every potential option for betrayal or aligning with one cause versus another in any given scenario was just as good as any other Bethesda game.
The narrative was tighter and not as open world, but I liked the art design a lot and gameplay well enough.
I disagree, every potential option for betrayal or aligning with one cause versus another in any given scenario was just as good as any other Bethesda game.
That’s what I was saying tho. It was only just as good as any other Bethesda game; but it was being praised for being so much better than that.
I watched some streams of Starfield, and I just can’t understand how they made a game that looks so dull and boring. Skyrim had some soul to it, I remember being wowed by the trailer. The world and music in Skyrim are really beautiful too. Yeah it’s a janky Bethesda game in many ways, but it is also more than that.
My thoughts exactly. Whatever issues were in Morrowind, Oblivion, New Vegas, Skyrim etc there was still a uniquely engaging game there.
I’ve been poking around and their lead concept artist died before he got to work on Fo4, and the two main writer producer guys Emil & Pete(?) have basically admitted on game dev talks that they’re no longer trying to tell a coherent story or create a world anymore, just keep a player playing. Maybe this is why?
For all the Bethesda games I’ve played (barring Starfield), I’ve been instantly hooked and wanting to play more. There’s always been something to keep me playing. But in Starfield I feel like there’s just nothing there, I’m not feeling any sense of wanting to explore and find out more. I’m glad I didn’t pay for my copy, would have been a waste of money imo
I have tried to play NMS four separate times now. I just cannot get past a certain point where it feels like repitition towards some kind of story line that is always one stept away of “something interesting”. The mechanics of the gameloop are maybe a bit too obvious, which takes away form the immersion. I end up shelfing it because something else catches my goldfish like attention. Then a year later a major update comes out, and I think “maybe it’s good now”?
This game is just ridiculous. Overhyped advertising, terrible optimalization, 10 years old graphics, so many loadscreens, plain story, no real space exploration, perk wall to do anything, horrible UI and they call it next gen open world space exploration RPG. I stopped playing after 10 hours so I can make a good assumption but it got only worse and worse. I don’t have time to waste it on this. Even if it starts being more enjoyable later it doesn’t excuse all the issues.
I feel you. The first 10-15 hours did feel like kind of a slog. I will say, I hit a point where I’m legitimately enjoying the game and things seem to have coalesced in a way they just don’t in earlier game. I’m 20 hours in though. That’s a slow starter if there ever was one.
You’re a patient man. If you enjoy it, that’s good. But that game is not for me. Last game I enjoyed from Bethesda was Oblivion so I’m not much surprised. I’m quite picky…
I was so prepared to love this game today. Woke up early and fired it up almost two hours ago. It’s crashed 5 times and I’ve only made about twenty minutes worth of progress into the intro.
I’m playing on a Series X. There’s no reason for this type of bullshit.
Sure, it’s a first world problem, but this has really set a bad tone for the day and this game in general.
I might try again later, but I’m probably already over it.
But the Xbox OS isn’t crashing. I just suddenly go back to the home screen, but trying to go back into Starfield relaunches the game. My kid said it was happening to him when he played earlier this week, but I thought he was just exaggerating because he’s like that.
Here’s where it crashed: #1: Saying goodbye to Lin. #2: Space pirates land (no combat yet) (I decided to quicksave after talking to Barrett) #3: Conversation after the pirate fight #4: Spaceship combat tutorial (2 ships)
I get the same crashes in the same places. On a windows 10 pc with less than current parts. I thought it was my aging machine.i have 82 minutes in game and may just refund.
I wouldn’t even say anything if I was on PC, I’d just assume I wasn’t up to spec (I’ve never had a high end machine, I’m used to it) but theres not much I can do to improve my series x.
Gaming “journalism” is shoddy, low quality, biased, and untrustworthy. Every bad game coming out of a big studio will get dozens of 10/10s. Not even talking about starfield, but just every botched release.
Using gamer news or review outlets as a source is useless.
The people that are saying good things about it seem to be people that don’t play that many non-betheada RPGs so don’t have anything to compare it to, or are just excited for a space theme. People that are playing high quality RPGs like persona 5 or baldurs gate are not happy with starfield
Are user reviews on places like Metacritic or Steam ever relevant? Review bombing happens consistently any time anyone is slightly miffed at something, which in gaming is literally all the time.
I'm not exposed to that many "gamer takes" lately, luckily. I watched a recent dunkey video on Starfield reviews, that had some thumb-headed idiot screaming in falsetto about the pronoun switch (oh, the horror, for such a thing to exist! oh, the humanity!). Other than that I haven't seen that much complaining about that specific thing. While it could still be about that, I also think it could easily be getting underwhelming scores because it's... a bit underwhelming. (So far, anyway, I haven't played a lot yet)
I hate Steam’s review system, though. Binary yes or no is not useful to me. I want to know if a game is good (maybe a play eventually) vs absolutely amazing (where I might prioritize playing it right away). Such granularity is also useful because a 10/10 might be worth it even if it’s not my favourite type of game, but a 7/10 can be very worthwhile if it is the type of game I adore.
It’s a shame that user reviews on sites like Metacritic are just consistent trash. Too many users only know 0 or 10 and the user reviews are often review bombed. I wish regular users could at least give numbers like critics. No professional critic is gonna give a game a 0 because of a handful of problems, for example, but average people will totally give a game a zero for that. Only problem with critics is that they often have a perspective that makes them detached from the average person, since they spend all their time reviewing. Ideally user reviews would fill that gap, but users are incredibly fickle.
I think Steam’s Yes/No system is the best option we’ve got for user review scores. As you said yourself, for most people, it’s either 0 or a 10. And while granularity can help, it’s worthless when it differs on a user to user basis. One users 5 is another users 7. And is the difference between a 1 and a 2 even remotely the same between a 9 and a 10? Probably not.
The biggest argument I could see is that “Mixed” option where it’s neither option, but I feel like that doesn’t really help anyone overall and is just indecisive.
If you just ignore a score of 0, then why even have it and conversely, why not show the same treatment towards the equally as ridiculous score of a 10?
for the most part it seems to work better than on Metacritic or other review sites with 5-10 star ratings. a lot of people are very unreasonable with 0 star reviews where they’ll give it a 0 for a slight inconvenience even if the game is completely playable
might as well lump the 0-4 star people together on a 10 scale
I’ve seen some pretty absurd complaints, like the not being able to land on gas planets, or people complaining due to ridiculously high but present area limitations.
Absurd complaints always seem to surround the media people whom people blame of being “woke”, which is why I usually give the media being criticized the extra benefit of a doubt since people will make or criticize shit for reasons they don’t say out-loud. I usually find out it’s not really that bad, but it’s just amplified because they create an environment of criticism that other people that have no underlying agenda still follow.
Then there’s the real complaints about performance, which I personally haven’t experienced because of a top tier PC (although I’m curious what people on the Xbox have to say, as Microsoft would hang them if it wasn’t playable on it as one of their new hallmark exclusives for it), and people not liking the Bethsoft sort of gameplay loop, which this is and has definitely improved upon IMO. Not only will this game be played for years on end like Skyrim, but I suspect it will also spark a much needed MMO off-shoot in the space genre just like their Fallout and The Elder Scrolls games did.
Just tried starting it this morning on a Series X. It crashed 5 times on less than two hours. The last time, I was barely into the “learn how to pilot a ship” part of the tutorial, and I’m already over this. I’m so disappointed. I was really looking forward to getting sucked into a new game.
I’ve played about 40 hours so far on a Series X. It froze on loading twice in that time, but otherwise I’ve had no performance problems. I even tried remote play streaming from my Series X to my PC and it worked well also.
That said, Starfield is fine. It’s not great- I don’t think it would be considered GotY even if BG3 and TotK hadn’t come out this year- but it’s otherwise solid. If you like the Bethesda formula, Starfield plays it absolutely straight (for better or worse). The usual critiques of Bethesda games in general apply- it has that look of a Bethesda game, the NPCs have the facial animation range of a post-botox Barbie, Radiant quests abound, the exploration gameplay loop is pretty shallow, etc.
Don’t get me wrong- there’s a lot it could do better, much of which other games already do. It’s a sci-fi fi version of Skyrim, and that’s good enough for me, but it probably won’t live on in the gaming zeitgeist.
I would agree with you in that if Starfield has any longevity, it would be because it would serve as the foundation for mods rather than on its own merits. But I disagree that it could stand on its own as-is.
youtu.be
Najnowsze