It is essentially just a tech demo BUT, I would say they’ve touched on what I wanted from the space travel.
You can take off, fly the ship, point it up, and then boost off into space. That’s fun, that’s what I wanted, and I don’t think it’s really expecting that much.
“It’S NoT ReAlIsTiC”, none of it’s realistic, it’s a video game ffs.
It’s a fun and engaging mechanic that I’d expect in a great space game.
Bethesda’s seeming disdain for anything that could be considered a fun and seamless mechanic is frustrating. And fanboys seemingly have no expectation that Bethesda games should actually get better and improve on their weak areas.
I think Bethesda “fanboys” (like myself) just really like the core experience (warts and all) I play NMS when I want to lose myself in a beautiful seamless scifi setting and i play starfield when my focus is on engaging with faction and character storylines and some campy space encounters. I kinda like how janky bethesda games can be, reminds me of playing tabletop RPGs and all the weird janky shit that happens in those games too. I like that I can be the golden boy of the crimson fleet and still join up with the freestar rangers. I make up a little story for my character and act it out and have a lot of fun doing so.
The only thing I could do without is the loading screens. I don’t mind that landing on a planet isn’t seamless, but i mean… loading screen to get on ship, loading screen to get into space, loading screen to fly to different planet, wait until scan finishes, loading screen to land on planet.
That’s the worse part for me. If it was just a short cut scene for landing on a planet, I think that’d be 100% fine.
I just don’t think it’s good to let a company get away with not improving.
The small improvements they have made in Starfield are alright, but it feels like the bar was set with Skyrim and they can’t even really match something from 12 years ago.
I do not have high hopes for TES VI and I’m half expecting something extremely dated, as based off FO4 and Starfield I think the studio’s best days are behind them at this point.
The small improvements they have made in Starfield are alright, but it feels like the bar was set with Skyrim and they can’t even really match something from 12 years ago.
Or maybe game development is just hard? Why haven't other "better" developers created a game that improves upon Skyrim?
Look at Baldur's Gate 3. It's "small improvements" to the type of game that Larian has been working on for many years at this point.
I'm not really talking about preferences. I'm asking more about the niche that games like Skyrim/Fallout/Starfield fill. If it is so simple to just make "Skyrim but better" or "Starfield but better" then where are all the games from other developers that are just that?
Or from another angle. Where is the Path of Exile for Skyrim?
Yup. People will always bring up some games like Witcher 3 as “better than Skyrim” and in terms of the roleplay elements within the story? Sure. Do the games have some similarities? Sure. They’re both open world RPGs in a medieval fantasy setting. But beyond that, the comparisons fall apart. Somebody just looking for any RPG experience might well prefer Witcher 3 over Skyrim, but somebody looking for another Skyrim experience is not gonna find it in Witcher 3. Same goes for comparisons for NMS and Starfield. Does NMS have seamless planetary flight and Starfield doesn’t? Absolutely. Can you scan plants and wildlife in both? Sure. But, again, beyond that the comparisons fall apart.
I don’t even like skyrim BG3 is objectively a much better game, least Bethesda can do is esspecially with the funding they got from Microsoft is not sell skyrim again but with a space reskin this time
Starfield seems like a pretty stark improvement over Fallout 4’s shortcomings, so I don’t think it is fair to say that they aren’t improving. Just looking at my own playtime, I bailed out of Fallout 4 at the 20 hour mark, but I’m 60 hours into Starfield and haven’t slowed down at all.
Bethesda’s seeming disdain for anything that could be considered a fun and seamless mechanic is frustrating.
Or that the technology available doesn't really make this type of setup reasonable?
Star Citizen is trying to do this and it's been how long with how much money spent?
Would Starfield be a better game if they sacrificed the quests/content/companions and just made a game that was more like Elite Dangerous or No Man's Sky?
That’s fun, that’s what I wanted, and I don’t think it’s really expecting that much.
I mean, CIG has been trying to make a game that does what you want for the last 13 years and they aren't close yet. Maybe it's not as easy as you want it to be?
Star citizen has been able to do "all that" for at least 4 years, and most consider it a glorified tech demo
In Star citizen you can also do all those things with other players too
If you think "they aren't close yet" it might be worth trying it out during one of the free fly events - the only cost is your time to download and play it.
Having an opinion is fine, having an informed opinion is better
If it's just a glorified tech demo, then it doesn't seem like it's able to be compared to a released and completed game? Unless the designation of tech demo means something I'm not aware of.
The first 90 percent of the code accounts for the first 90 percent of the development time. The remaining 10 percent of the code accounts for the other 90 percent of the development time.
I only know of it from memes about it's development, but I would agree from what I know. Scope creep seems to be a thing there. Ambitions are great, until they get in the way of every other aspect of the game lol
If things continue the way it has been, never would be the best estimate of a release date.
Depending on the last time you logged into a session, the current status is between playable and entertaining and nightmare of lag/desync issues making it something most people would want to avoid
In a purely technical sense, if CIG locked the code branch and set 100% of the creative teams to the task, the current system could replicate a Starfield level game and do so in a seamless manner.
It wouldn't be without issues but something I consider plausible
I just don’t see atmospheric entry/exit as being that important to my immersion, yes it was kind of cool the first time you did it in NMS, seven years ago, but it got old fairly quickly even in that game. I’m happy for Starfield to have a more ME like set up and focus on other areas of the game.
Same. It’s cool for maybe 5 times before you just stop caring. Only thing I miss is actually flying around the planet, and that’s purely for finding the best basebuilding spot.
Yeah, how about… no DRM and instead focus on making games people want to buy. It seems to work well for CD Projekt Red, and surely it would work for others as well.
Im still preparing myself mentaly to jump to linux the next year with the out of service of 10. Its hard because stop using adobe as graphic designer… I hope we have get real linux alternative at that moment.
I believe in you! Personally, when I find someone charging me subscription prices for something that should have a one-time fee, I flip the bird and run to the nearest competitor, but I can’t speak for your line of work. For my amateur needs, open source alternatives have gotten the job done, and I wish you the best.
If you want to migrate to Linux, I would strongly suggest you set up a dual boot, and start playing with it to gain experience. Being able to switch back to something you know is a massive benefit when you are still learning.
While Linux has come a very long way, you are sure to experience some hitches along the way. If not because of Linux itself, then because you are not familiar with how to do “that one thing” on Linux.
Its hard because stop using adobe as graphic designe
Premiere Pro, Photoshop, and After Effects all worked when I tried them on Linux Mint 22 to see if they worked
Older versions from before the CC updates for those programs that you can use them for also work and work quite well, though I do understand that there are literally missing features for professional work in some of those older versions
A real Linux alternative (or proper fucking Support but fuck adobe) would be GREAT, but the change likely won’t be as bad as you might be worrying
So far the hardest thing I’ve had to install was called YAD, and that was so I could install Morrowind mods specifically, a rather niche need all things considered, and I’ve made multiple audiovisual projects on my Linux workstation without having to do anything like that
I do keep a Win10 LTSC on a side boot drive for games with anticheat and any programs I might need there but so far that’s literally only been handbrake, which I’m sure there’s a Linux version/alternative for but I just haven’t had to use it on that OS yet due to work flow
None of my friends have a Meta Quest (or any VR headsets for that matter). On the extremely few occasions the headsets are brought up, all the conversations are the same; “it’s kind of cool but it’s made by Facebook”.
I wonder how many people would be in the market for a relatively cheaper headset like the Meta Quest if it wasn’t a Mark Zuckerberg project
Its a mixed bag. The Pico headsets are around the same price point but at that price point, you are typically paying with your user data as well. Its just a question of who you are giving it to facebook or some random ass Chinese company. While Facebook trying to own "VR" for itself is bad I will at least thank them for making headsets that make it more likely people are willing to dip their feet into VR. While facebook sucks, only having to pay 300 to 400 to get into something you may absolutely hate. They make for great "starter" headsets that you can probably easily find on the 2nd hand market for sub 200. Try out VR on a quest and if you like the concept and feelings of it probably invest more on a better headset. Hopefully we will hear more about Valve's Deckard soon.
Edit: I almost forgot to mention PSVR 2 which is pretty damn good but for 550, I don't think it will have a massive appeal to console games seeing as they are gaming on something funnily worth less than that headset. It being locked to only the PS5 is also a massive penalty against it and there is no news of a fan made driver for it on pc.
They’re not just entry level headsets. You can link them to a powerful gaming computer through Steam Link and then they’re the equivalent of a $1200 headset from Valve or HTC.
100% not equivalent. I said entry since it gets the job done but it has a ton of limitations. The biggest one is it having to compress the video via the link cable and it having to decode on its own cpu. So this can lead to a some artificating and some stuttering issues. This is a problem that can be solved if Meta chooses to use DP over usb via the displayport protocol but that makes engineering a bit harder and it runs counter to their whole point of the device being a standalone unit, this isn't even an unrealistic ask since this is how the PSVR2 works.
2nd one and this is only a partial issue but its still worth mentioning battery life. For many people having a link cable will extend the life of your quest 2 but it won't keep the same charge level so a session will probably stop after 2 or 3 hours. Which is fine for a single person but if you are doing this for a party or something, may not be enough time to let everyone have a go with the thing. So a standard headset will just have a dedicated power cable and can go for as long as you want it to. Like said I'm hesitant to put too much faith on meta since they can easily drop support for these headsets. To my knowledge the quest 1 still works with a link cable but how long do we expect that to be the case, maybe one day a software update with their oculus platform basically makes it impossible to use it.
If your computer has USB-C 3.2 v2 then you can play for infinite time over the charge cable. I have a couple on my MOBO and as soon as I switched to those ports I never had charging issues. I think that resolves the video compression issue too. I’m not certain about the video issue but the bandwidth of 3.2 v2 is double what the display port is. I’ve never had any issues anyway. I’m sure there are other benefits to the pricier headsets too, like not having to deal with Facebook, and possibly better interfaces and stuff, but for the money the Quest v2 is pretty awesome.
The gameplay they showed near the start of Tennocon looked really intriguing game world wise. DE is fantastic at world building so it should be a treat!
And it’ll be free to play so nothing to lose trying it once it’s out
Assuming it’s the same they do in Warframe, it’ll only be cosmetics that are only available with the premium currency. The premium currency is also tradeable, so F2P can get it without spending
They’ve been F2P for a long time now. What’s different about their model is that, although you can buy in game currencies on their site, you can also trade them with other players for stuff. So if you want to play completely free, you can grind for your loot and valuable items on the market, then trade it with other players.
Warframe's been around a long time; I know in these parts there's a certain purist view towards MTX, but Warframe does it well enough that I don't mind paying for some of it and getting a lot of game in return.
That aldo happened to Bomberman. To play locally, it needs to connect to a server. The servers are no longer active, and as a result, the game isn’t playable.
I’m genuinely worried for Bungie and Destiny 2. It’s like “We get it, we let our players down. We are going to fix it by firing the current CEO and hiring Bobby Kotick…”
Do you really think they’d dig themselves out of the Sony-shaped hole they’re in by Final Shape even if left entirely to their own devices anymore? I lost anything I had for Bungie when they wanted to try and pin the reason for their layoffs on ‘the players not spending enough’ with the prices they already charge for base admission.
I’ve seen that they understand players are leaving in droves, but I’ve seen no indication that they know why. Every single thing they’ve said an done since the last DLC has been exactly the opposite of what makes the game fun for me. I went from spending way, way, way too much time each week to spending virtually none in a single season… And I haven’t even checked on the game since the second week of this season. It’s really sad.
Bobby going to Bungie is only an uncomfirmed rumor.
However, I will never forgive Bungie.
They did Marty and Joe dirty, Marty by trying to rescind his company shares and Joe for the way Jason Jones treated him in Destiny 1s developement
They absolutely ruined Destiny 1 and 2, though 2 far more than 1
They deleted content that I paid for without my permission, removing my ability to choose to access it (this is when I stopped playing Destiny altogether)
They’re tarnishing Marathon’s good name by making it a PvEvP extraction looter shooter
“We want you to throw money at the screen” famous quote (they really thought it was a good idea to say that)
If Bobby does become CEO there, I would not be surprised. But I actually dont think its possible for Bungie to get any lower.
They even closed the Steam discussion thread and didn't have the decency to properly link to the "New Discussion" wherever the fuck that is taking place. CA have their heads so far up their ass that every bit of shit smells wonderful to them at this point.
Aww man it’s actually a bummer to hear so many people are disliking the game. This has been the first game in a while where I’ve gotten hooked. I love the RPG elements in the game and the story has been brilliant. I’ve enjoyed games recently like Ragnarok and Control but this is the first one where I’m excited to just get back and sucked into the world. The last Bethesda game I played was actually Fallout 3 over a decade ago. It makes sense as Mass Effect is my favorite franchise and this feels like an evolution of that. My perfect game would probably be Starfield with ME: Andromeda combat.
I totally agree. I’m having a blast with this game. Imo, the best thing Beth has ever made (yeah, suck it Morrowind stans)
I think the problem is that this game has a bit of a slow burn. It took a bit for it to open up and make sense for me, more than most Beth games. I think over time the hate cycle will die down and people will get it on a steam sale and finally sink their teeth into it and after a couple of years it’s going to be as beloved as Skyrim is today.
I think a big part of the problem is just hype cycles. People had expectations that were through the roof. They didn't tell you they had seamless transitions to space, and they didn't tell you they had BG3 caliber branching conversation trees (which we're a long way from being able to realistically do outside of a CRPG). But people seemingly expected that.
I watched the direct and we got basically what I expected (though the gunplay feels better than I expected. I definitely felt like VATS was needed in FO4.) It's Bethesda's game design philosophy of a massive world with a bunch of different play styles and a bunch of different quest lines (and smaller single quests) and locations that don't have to be done in any order. You can easily get sidetracked and go down rabbit holes. They iterated on most of their core features and adapted them to the new setting in a really well done way.
I also love the way the skill system brought back the "get better by doing" philosophy of Skyrim with challenges to unlock higher levels, and the story telling is sci fi in more than just skin.
Out of curiosity, have you played BG3 ? It seems that most people who don’t like the game are coming to starfield right from BG3 and those who do have not played it. BG3 is now just the bar that AAA story telling is held to and anyone who has experienced it is having a hard time with the story of other games.
I’m playing Baldurs Gate 3 with friends and Starfield singleplayer. And I am enjoying both.
They aren’t the same game, even though they both rely on story and some aspects of the game are the same (like coming up with your own character and wanting to see how the story affects them)
pcgamesn.com
Ważne