Starfield has lost 97% of players.

[brown66]

1 hour ago, SleepyNinja said:

1 - Game hyped, didn't deliver to the masses, game bad, masses moved on. It's really that simple looking back(I was pretty vocal in the past but I learned to like the game lately. I play in small doses every 6 months then delete the game.) Also I put too many hours into the game to return it. Might has well justify it's existence in my library.

 

I really think that Starfield was an odd addition to BGS's mainline games. When usually their games revolve around you being a demi god hero of the day. In Starfield you're just...there? Like in every faction you rise to the ranks and be the hero yet it doesn't effect the main story. 

 

You can say the same for Skyrim outside the civil war quest yet each guild supposedly builds your character and prepares you for the main quest.(If you take the time to train with each guild character that offers training.) I say supposedly because you can build your character outside of each guild quest but aye it's the thought that matters in a BGS game.

 

One of the few reasons why I like Fallout 4 is because each faction ties to the main quest even if the execution wasn't the best. People still debate who deserves to rule the commonwealth of Boston to this day. 

 

2 - Yet in Starfield, you're a nobody working for a guild that searches the stars as they say, to understand the fragments yet that allure(for me at least) gets thrown out the window the moment I became Starborn. So now you're seaching the stars with superpowers and...that's it? What's the point of having the powers outside of gameplay? There's no reason to join any of the factions outside of locked content. All of the factions can be ignored.

 

3 - Starfield could have a better story if they really did Skyrim in space like many claim. You as the Starborn bridge diplomatic unity between the FreeStar collective and the United Colonies as the snake cult(Forgot their names.) join forces with the one guy who always spy on you but turned out to be the bad guy in the end.(didn't beat the game, tbh they all got forgettable names.) And you have to stop them, joining the research guild and getting the powers, midway through the space latina was a spy for the snake cult the whole time but gives you an ultimatum and switch sides, betraying everyone for space latina cheeks and justifying being evil.

 

OR

 

They could of shamelessly copied Mass Effect, still be a nobody, no starborn powers, join the factions like normal, join the research guild, the fragments being little clues to a bigger picture. The temples giving clues to a past civilization that been wiped, learn of an alien threat, have either preferred faction take charge with major consequences and benefits during the final fight.(I.E. siding with Ryujin will give you more technical prowess but less manpower.) have the final boss be an alien only to find out that the alien was a drop in the bucket to a bigger picture, setting up the next game.

 

Like there's so many ways with the current concept of Starfield they could of went and they chose the most boring safe corporate one. 

 

Mind you btw I read an article the other day that Todd was Initially fine with just using a jetpack to get around, but Phil Spencer, CEO of Xbox wanted a buggy and now we have a buggy. They implemented in like a damn mod itself, it feels underwhelming and plays exactly like a warhog from Halo. It can't be more obvious that the buggy was a corporate decision and not at all what Todd had envisioned.

 

Ok I wrote enough. Want a TLDR? Read the first paragraph.

 

1 - This is what I've been saying since the wave of hate for this game rose and I stand by it! People, sooner or later, are getting back into the game. And if nowadays there are still a lot of people who talk about this game, often just to say bad things, it's because the game still interests them. This is not an opinion. It's a fact!

 

2 - In other Bethesda RPGs from The Elders Scrools series, you also start as a nobody. In this, Starfield did not bring anything new. In fact, if you look at the game's opening scene, the similarities with Skyrim's introduction scene are more than evident. In Starfield you go inside a mine elevator, in Skyrim you go inside a horse-drawn cart and in both situations you are on your way to something that will change the course of your life.

 

As for superpowers, one of the criticisms of people who liked Oblivion and hated Skyrim, was precisely the fact that in this last game, almost from the beginning, you become a demi-god, whereas in Oblivoin you had to work a lot for the your character will be powerful. I think Bethesda wanted to copy the superpower system that exists in Skyrim in Starfield, so fans shouldn't be displeased, but I agree with you, these superpowers are something that could be dispensed with.

 

3 - The story of Starfield's main mission is very good! Yes, in the end we are left with the feeling that there is still something missing, but it seems to me that the missing development will appear in the future Starborn DLC.

 

The big problem with the main quest story is that Bethesda's marketing department put an emphasis on advertising the player becoming a Starborn, as if everything else didn't matter at all, when in fact the truly interesting (but not original!) part of this game is the question: Why did the Earth become uninhabitable?

 

When I discovered the answer to that question, Sarfield's main quest became one of the best I've played in a long time! The problem is that people do the main quest in a hurry and don't pay attention to all the details that explain in detail why the Earth has become uninhabitable. If the marketing department had encouraged players to discover why Earth has become uninhabitable, we wouldn't have so many people asking "I've already become a Starborn, what now?"

[Miauzi]

2 hours ago, brown66 said:

 

1 – Das sage ich, seit die Welle des Hasses gegen dieses Spiel zugenommen hat, und ich stehe dazu! Früher oder später kommen die Leute wieder ins Spiel. Und wenn heutzutage immer noch viele Leute über dieses Spiel reden, oft nur, um schlechte Dinge zu sagen, dann deshalb, weil das Spiel sie immer noch interessiert. Dies ist keine Meinung. Es ist eine Tatsache!

 

2 – In anderen Bethesda-RPGs aus der The Elders Scrools-Reihe beginnen Sie ebenfalls als Niemand. Darin brachte Starfield nichts Neues. Wenn man sich die Eröffnungsszene des Spiels ansieht, sind die Ähnlichkeiten mit der Einführungsszene von Skyrim sogar mehr als offensichtlich. In Starfield steigen Sie in einen Minenaufzug, in Skyrim in einen Pferdewagen und in beiden Situationen sind Sie auf dem Weg zu etwas, das den Verlauf Ihres Lebens verändern wird.

 

Was die Superkräfte betrifft, so war einer der Kritikpunkte von Leuten, die Oblivion mochten und Skyrim hassten, genau die Tatsache, dass man in diesem letzten Spiel fast von Anfang an zu einem Halbgott wird, während man in Oblivoin viel dafür arbeiten musste Dein Charakter wird mächtig sein. Ich denke, Bethesda wollte das Superkräftesystem, das in Skyrim existiert, in Starfield kopieren, also sollten die Fans nicht unzufrieden sein, aber ich stimme Ihnen zu, auf diese Superkräfte kann man verzichten.

 

3 – Die Geschichte der Hauptmission von Starfield ist sehr gut! Ja, am Ende haben wir das Gefühl, dass noch etwas fehlt, aber es scheint mir, dass die fehlende Entwicklung im zukünftigen Starborn-DLC auftauchen wird.

 

Das große Problem mit der Hauptquestgeschichte besteht darin, dass die Marketingabteilung von Bethesda den Schwerpunkt darauf gelegt hat, den Spieler als Starborn zu bewerben, als ob alles andere überhaupt keine Rolle spielen würde, obwohl es in Wirklichkeit der wirklich interessante (aber nicht originelle!) Teil davon ist Spiel ist die Frage: Warum wurde die Erde unbewohnbar ?

 

Als ich die Antwort auf diese Frage fand, wurde Sarfields Hauptquest zu einem der besten, die ich seit langem gespielt habe! Das Problem ist, dass die Leute die Hauptquest in Eile erledigen und nicht auf alle Details achten, die im Detail erklären, warum die Erde unbewohnbar geworden ist. Wenn die Marketingabteilung die Spieler dazu ermutigt hätte, herauszufinden, warum die Erde unbewohnbar geworden ist, hätten wir nicht so viele Leute gefragt: „Ich bin bereits ein Starborn geworden, was nun?“

 

The question of the "uninhabitability of the earth"... I would be a bad "tester" of a game if I didn't look into it... and it was the next disappointment in this already bad game.

From my point of view (and I've been reading SF and watching films for 50 years - I even deal with it at the level of literary science... and on top of that I've been playing games from this genre for more than 35 years) it is the most stupid plot I've ever come across on this topic!

95% of the earth's population is allowed to die - just to save a small minority.

There are several options to protect 100% of the earth's population and none of them require relocation to other star systems.

Habitat cylinders in the L-points of the Earth-Moon system were proposed as early as the 1970s and their feasibility was confirmed by TODAY's space travel.

 

But no - it has to go into "distant space" - a new version of "Noah's Ark" so to speak... the unworthy stay at home and perish... the chosen ones are saved.

 

The last 80 years are really full of dozens of very good SF stories about such a scenario... but they had to invent something "new" (there was probably no money in the budget for a license) - but they failed on all fronts!

 

 

[DocClox]

1 hour ago, Miauzi said:

Opinions are not facts - no matter how often you say that here... but I'm used to this kind of "discussion style" by now.

 

To be honest, "people wouldn't talk about it if they weren't interested" seems fairly solid. You may not want to play it, but the game holds some sort of fascination for you, or else you'd find more productive uses for your time than arguing the toss here on LoversLab.

 

1 hour ago, Miauzi said:

95% of the earth's population is allowed to die - just to save a small minority.

 

Correct me if you have evidence to the contrary, but we don't know exactly what percentage of Earth's population died. Between Bethesda's usual scaling on the one hand, and possibly unreliable UC histories on the other, the percentage could be anywhere between 90 and zero.

 

I mean as long as we're talking about keeping our facts factual.

 

1 hour ago, Miauzi said:

Habitat cylinders in the L-points of the Earth-Moon system were proposed as early as the 1970s and their feasibility was confirmed by TODAY's space travel.

 

How feasible is that, I wonder? I mean there are obvious advantages for a society that doesn't have any sort of FTL, but I'm not entirely sure It's a clearly superior solution otherwise. There are issues of food supply, heat disposal, the sheer scale of construction, and the fact that an O'Neil colony is always going to be fundamentally less robust thatn living on the surface of a planet, let alone having your population spread across dozens of planets.

 

1 hour ago, Miauzi said:

The last 80 years are really full of dozens of very good SF stories about such a scenario... but they had to invent something "new" (there was probably no money in the budget for a license) - but they failed on all fronts!

 

Well, heaven forbid anyone should try and be original when there are old stories that can be recycled yet again

 

Still, have you considered that we may not yet have the full story? Victor Asiz was manipulated to bring about the devastation of Earth which the intention of forcing humanity to leave home. Perhaps the manipulation went deeper than the fairly sketchy summary we have so far. I think this is something we'll see explored in a future DLC. The dangling loose end of Asiz' non-standard artifact vision seems too obvious a hook to pass up.

 

Edited August 23, 2024 by DocClox

[brown66]

5 hours ago, Miauzi said:

 

The question of the "uninhabitability of the earth"... I would be a bad "tester" of a game if I didn't look into it... and it was the next disappointment in this already bad game.

From my point of view (and I've been reading SF and watching films for 50 years - I even deal with it at the level of literary science... and on top of that I've been playing games from this genre for more than 35 years) it is the most stupid plot I've ever come across on this topic!

95% of the earth's population is allowed to die - just to save a small minority.

There are several options to protect 100% of the earth's population and none of them require relocation to other star systems.

Habitat cylinders in the L-points of the Earth-Moon system were proposed as early as the 1970s and their feasibility was confirmed by TODAY's space travel.

 

But no - it has to go into "distant space" - a new version of "Noah's Ark" so to speak... the unworthy stay at home and perish... the chosen ones are saved.

 

The last 80 years are really full of dozens of very good SF stories about such a scenario... but they had to invent something "new" (there was probably no money in the budget for a license) - but they failed on all fronts!

 

 

 

I see you haven't discovered why the Earth has become uninhabitable...🙄

 

There are especially two or three audio recordings in which you learn the cause of this and its relationship with the Starborn. Listening to these recordings is essential to understand the Starborns' relationship with the destruction of Earth. You learn about this whole story in the main mission missions that you have to do initially on the Moon and then in the old NASA facilities. In fact, there comes a time when, after listening to these recordings, you have to choose whether you think the destruction of the Earth was justified, given the "progress" that was offered to the human population. I chose the option of not agreeing with this destruction in the name of said progress and Andreja, who was my companion at the time, did not like my choice, as it meant denying the future of humanity that unfolded later and allowed her to come then to be born.

 

But focusing on the part about Starfield not being a science fiction masterpiece by your science fiction standards (I hope you at least think it's better than the old Flash Gordon TV series, the one from the 50s of the last century), Sarfield it's not a 100% science fiction game, just as it's not a 100€ point and shoot game, nor a game about flying spaceships (that part for me was the biggest disappointment) and not an action game or a exploration game. It's a little bit of all of that and that's why there will always be critics who are fanatics of any of these computer game genres saying that they know games better.

 

The point is to find a game that does everything Sarfield does and say it's better.

 

My first PC was a Hyundai PC with the 8088 processor, 640KB of memory and a fabulous (and noisy) 20MB hard drive, purchased in April 1990. I played a lot of PC games and one of the most memorable games I ever played it was just science fiction, Another World (I still have a legal copy of it). After that, the other science fiction game I loved was the first Half-Life. The last of the science fiction themed games that I played (and still play) and really liked is called Starfield and we are still just at the beginning of the adventures that this game will provide us with in the coming times.

[Miauzi]

Vor 21 Minuten sagte brown66:

 

Ich sehe, Sie haben nicht herausgefunden, warum die Erde unbewohnbar geworden ist ... 🙄

 

Es gibt insbesondere zwei oder drei Audioaufnahmen, in denen Sie die Ursache dafür und seinen Zusammenhang mit den Sternengeborenen erfahren. Das Anhören dieser Aufnahmen ist wichtig, um die Beziehung der Starborns zur Zerstörung der Erde zu verstehen. Diese ganze Geschichte erfahren Sie in den Hauptmissionen, die Sie zunächst auf dem Mond und dann in den alten NASA-Einrichtungen durchführen müssen. Tatsächlich kommt irgendwann der Zeitpunkt, an dem man sich nach dem Anhören dieser Aufnahmen entscheiden muss, ob man die Zerstörung der Erde angesichts des „Fortschritts“, der der menschlichen Bevölkerung geboten wurde, für gerechtfertigt hält. Ich entschied mich für die Option, dieser Zerstörung im Namen dieses Fortschritts nicht zuzustimmen, und Andreja, die damals meine Begleiterin war, gefiel meine Wahl nicht, da sie bedeutete, die Zukunft der Menschheit zu leugnen, die sich später entfaltete und sie dann kommen ließ geboren werden.

 

Wenn wir uns aber auf den Teil konzentrieren, in dem es darum geht, dass „Starfield“ nach Ihren Science-Fiction-Maßstäben kein Science-Fiction-Meisterwerk ist (ich hoffe, Sie denken zumindest, dass es besser ist als die alte TV-Serie „Flash Gordon“, die aus den 50er Jahren des letzten Jahrhunderts), dann ist „Sarfield“ kein Science-Fiction-Meisterwerk 100 % Science-Fiction-Spiel, genauso wenig wie es ein 100-€-Point-and-Shoot-Spiel ist, auch kein Spiel über fliegende Raumschiffe (dieser Teil war für mich die größte Enttäuschung) und auch kein Action- oder Erkundungsspiel. Es ist ein bisschen von alledem und deshalb wird es immer Kritiker geben, die Fanatiker eines dieser Computerspielgenres sind und sagen, dass sie Spiele besser kennen.

 

Es geht darum, ein Spiel zu finden, das alles kann, was Sarfield kann, und zu sagen, dass es besser ist.

 

Mein erster PC war ein Hyundai-PC mit dem 8088-Prozessor, 640 KB Arbeitsspeicher und einer fabelhaften (und lauten) 20-MB-Festplatte, den ich im April 1990 gekauft hatte. Ich habe viele PC-Spiele gespielt und eines der denkwürdigsten Spiele, die ich je gespielt habe, war nur Science-Fiction, Another World (ich habe immer noch eine legale Kopie davon). Danach war das andere Science-Fiction-Spiel, das ich liebte, das erste Half-Life. Das letzte Science-Fiction-Themenspiel, das ich gespielt habe (und immer noch spiele) und das mir wirklich gut gefallen hat, heißt Starfield und wir stehen noch am Anfang der Abenteuer, die uns dieses Spiel in den kommenden Zeiten bescheren wird.

 

Huh? What on earth are you constructing?

 

Of course I found these recordings and listened to them!

 

And it is precisely because of these tapes that the game is -> BULLSHIT

(Without these ribbons you won't get to the last temple in the main story and therefore won't get to the point of becoming a "star god"... You should work on your understanding of the text before you start making accusations against other people!)

Very bad SF plot

 

And don't come with "Flash Gordon" ... this comic has absolutely nothing to do with SF ... even under the category "space opera" it is complete trash

Edited August 23, 2024 by Miauzi

[SleepyNinja]

17 hours ago, DocClox said:

I think they tried to do a really clever thing here. Bethesda usually get a ton of crap about their games revolving around "The Chosen One", and there's an element of truth in that. Invariably you start out with decent combat skills, you can pick locks, cast spells, etc. All things most normal people can't do.

 

So I think they tried to address that in Starfield. You start out and you really an unremarkable pleb. You have to spend skill points to get good at most things, and some things you need to invest in before you can do them at all. BUT, the clever thing is that if you go round the NG+ loop a few times, suddenly you are that default Bethesda hero, bristling with skills and aptitudes that (from a non-Starborn perspective) are entirely unearned,

 

In short, you get the classic BGS living god power rush, but not without having to work for it. Like i say, it's a clever approach. I'm not sure it worked for as many people as they'd hoped, largely because a lot of their players refused to play past Unity, but if nothing else it's a worth attempt.

See, this is what they get for only making 2 franchises throughout the studios existence that are too similar to each other. When the masses think of Bethesda, they think of Skyrim, maybe Oblivion and maybe Fallout 3 but definitely Fallout 4 and 76, us nerds can appreciate their other works when at a time nobody cared for Bethesda. I'm way younger than some of you old farts on this website, but I remember a time when Halo, Battlefield, Call of Duty, and GTA was the masses holy grail. Times has changed, niche franchises that were once gatekeeped became corporate merchandise just like those games which I guess is the nature of all things that print money.

 

Now the reason why I bring all this up is simply because of how Bethesda marketed Starfield. From the jump Starfield was already going to be corporate slop, they got bought out by the biggest corpo on the planet after all. Weather the game was going to be good or bad is subjective at the time before release. But the thing I clearly remembered from the gameplay trailer is that the devs kept reassuring EVERYONE that this is still a Bethesda game. That reassurance is ultimately why I think everyone in mass doesn't like the game, when people think of Bethesda RPGs it's more of the same. Starfield is clearly different yet not different at the same time.

 

It's puzzling that the devs would approach their new IP and market this way knowing the masses won't like the game after a few hours of play because it doesn't play like a Bethesda game to people that only play Skyrim and Fallout 76. To us nerds, sure Starfield is exactly like a Bethesda game and we can see some game design from previous games in it but we're not the target audience anymore and that's one of the reasons I'm not really excited for Elders Scroll 6. They're just going to keep dumbing down the lore to the point Skyrim looks like a Harry Potter book in comparison.(which had tone down lore from Oblivion, which had tone down lore from Morrowind.) Ironically enough it's Bethesda nerds that keeps this game up past 5000 players a day when Skyrim and Fallout 4 average around 18-22k a day.

 

To drive home your response, I don't have a issue with how you level up in Starfield, I think it's one of it's many strengths. My issue is the Starborn. The moment I realized this, is the moment I didn't like the game. So now the main quest takes a back burner and I get to do jack all. Then all of the sudden I'm the classic Bethesda "chosen one" with no underlying reason except to cross the unity in a forever loop? So they couldn't be bothered to get rid of the chosen one stereotype but made it harder to achieve? I really do hope the DLC addresses the Starborn thing more coherently than the base game because as it stands it just doesn't interest me. Like the reason I haven't even touched the main quest is simply because I rather be a pleb earning a reputation in the stars than be another "He's him" archetype. I got as far has reaching Starborn, never used powers don't care for it, clapped space snake latina cheeks and called it a day. Like I'm really just playing for mods at this point.

 

 

Edited August 24, 2024 by SleepyNinja

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SleepyNinja said:

They're just going to keep dumbing down the lore to the point Skyrim looks like a Harry Potter book in comparison.

  

 

1 hour ago, SleepyNinja said:

I'm way younger than some of you old farts on this website

1 hour ago, SleepyNinja said:

My issue is the Starborn.

 Unimpressive to say the least.

But you can collect sandwiches, lot's and lot's of sandwiches until you become overloaded with sandwiches, but how many sandwiches can you actually eat....

                   

Edited August 24, 2024 by Raven 54

[DocClox]

6 hours ago, SleepyNinja said:

Then all of the sudden I'm the classic Bethesda "chosen one" with no underlying reason except to cross the unity in a forever loop?

 

Would you have been happier with a classic Bethesda "save the world" story? No snark there, I'm genuinely interested.

[pleasetryme]

i am getting back into elite dangerous odyssey and found a place in a system called the leisure zone and they have music playing a bar etc and female pilots walking around.  i wish somehow there was some sex framework for this but i doubt it, would be awesome to land on these planets and get it on with npcs for money and who knows you could have your own harem and slaves. 

[SleepyNinja]

12 hours ago, DocClox said:

 

Would you have been happier with a classic Bethesda "save the world" story? No snark there, I'm genuinely interested.

Yeah, yeah I would actually compared to what we have instead. Ideally I would of wanted a space RPG that rivals the fraction of Star Citizen but this is BGS so maybe in an another universe.

 

You know I can forgive alot of things about Starfield. The loading screens, the 1000 planets, the faction writing, I think UC was pretty good. The FreeStar Collective I wish was longer. I'm probably in a minority when I say the combat was pretty decent but when I'm not doing none of the powers or anything. And I'm actually using cover and aiming down sights not exposing myself, there's no vats so combat is actually fun. That's something I wish Fallout 4 worked on. I can even forgive the corporate slop known as the creation club, that's your money at the end of the day you do you honey. Starfield is the most eye candy Bethesda game we have.There's so much detail in alot of the world space outside of the planets. The music is crafted well, I don't think BGS ever failed in the music department.

 

It's just one thing I can never forgive is a lack luster main story because the potential is there, it's very strong the way the lore is set up but they did not deliver with the main story. I'm sorry, it's boring and uninspiring. And before you say anything, I felt the same way about Fallout 4 after coming from New Vegas however the difference between 4 and Starfield is stark as 4 felt like a streamlined water downed Fallout 3.

 

It was linear in it's approach, all the factions have issues but you're supposed to choose who rules the commonwealth. Despite all that, people still discuss about Fallout 4s story and the lore implications of choosing a faction. In Starfield you don't get any of that because the conflict is over, we have lore readings about the 3 factions but we never see ourselves. There's no discussion because the factions we work with have no lore implication on the main story so far. I hope I'm wrong as Todd said, he wants to work on the game for 10 years. Who knows what he does.

 

Like if they did the obvious galactic war between the FreeStar Collective, House Va'rum, and the UC, people would of ate that up because that's what the masses want from a Bethesda game, that's how they always marketed themselves, then they experiment outside of their main formula. And then people wonder why nobody plays the game. People making hour long essays on YouTube dissecting the whole game and people would rather watch all that then play the game, you can't make this up.

 

And the funny thing about all this is that if Bethesda would have approached Starfield as this niche passion project(As Starfield was something that Todd wanted to make for a long time.)instead of relying on corporate marketing to appeal to every customer that buys from them(At first) the negativity wouldn't be as bad because they know they can't please their die hard Elder Scroll fans with this, they been waiting since 2011 for the next game. Diehard Fallout fans will have to wait what? 15 years for the next Fallout game? We'll probably be in real life Fallout by then lmao. Yeah they're not picking this up either. This is a new IP with a new fan base. Instead of trying to bring over people from your other games into this.I don't know. Try to develop your own fan base and see if those fans of your other games would be interested later?

 

It's the same old slogan of appealing to everyone appeals to no one.

 

 

Edited August 24, 2024 by SleepyNinja

[Miauzi]

13 minutes ago, SleepyNinja said:

Ja, ja, ich würde tatsächlich mit dem vergleichen, was wir stattdessen haben. Im Idealfall hätte ich mir ein Weltraum-Rollenspiel gewünscht, das mit Star Citizen mithalten kann, aber das ist BGS, also vielleicht in einem Universum.

 

Du weißt, ich kann Starfield vieles verzeihen. Die Ladebildschirme, die 1000 Planeten, das Fraktionsschreiben, ich denke, UC war ziemlich gut. Ich wünschte, das FreeStar Collective wäre länger. Ich bin wahrscheinlich in der Minderheit, wenn ich sage, dass der Kampf ziemlich anständig war, aber wenn ich keine der Kräfte oder so einsetze. Und ich nutze tatsächlich Deckung und ziele auf Visiere, ohne mich zu entblößen. Es gibt keine Bottiche, also macht der Kampf wirklich Spaß. Ich wünschte, Fallout 4 würde daran arbeiten. Ich kann sogar den Unternehmensschmaus, der als „Creation Club“ bekannt ist, verzeihen, das ist dein Geld, das du am Ende des Tages verdienst, Schatz. Starfield ist das schönste Bethesda-Spiel, das wir haben. Es gibt so viele Details in weiten Teilen der Welt außerhalb der Planeten. Die Musik ist gut gemacht, ich glaube nicht, dass BGS in der Musikabteilung jemals versagt hat.

 

Nur eines kann ich nie verzeihen: Es fehlt der Hauptgeschichte an Glanz, weil das Potenzial vorhanden ist. Die Geschichte ist sehr stark aufgebaut, aber mit der Hauptgeschichte haben sie es nicht geschafft. Es tut mir leid, es ist langweilig und wenig inspirierend. Und bevor Sie etwas sagen: Mir ging es bei Fallout 4 ähnlich, nachdem ich aus New Vegas kam. Allerdings ist der Unterschied zwischen 4 und Starfield groß, da sich 4 wie ein stromlinienförmiges Fallout 3 anfühlte, das vom Wasser überflutet wurde.

 

Der Ansatz war linear, alle Fraktionen haben Probleme, aber man soll entscheiden, wer das Gemeinwesen regiert. Trotz alledem diskutieren die Leute immer noch über die Geschichte von Fallout 4 und die Lore-Implikationen, die sich aus der Wahl einer Fraktion ergeben. In Starfield bekommt man davon nichts mit, weil der Konflikt vorbei ist. Wir haben Hintergrundgeschichten über die drei Fraktionen, aber wir sehen uns selbst nie. Es gibt keine Diskussion, da die Fraktionen, mit denen wir zusammenarbeiten, bisher keinen Einfluss auf die Hintergrundgeschichte der Hauptgeschichte haben. Ich hoffe, ich irre mich, als Todd sagte, er möchte 10 Jahre lang an dem Spiel arbeiten. Wer weiß, was er tut.

 

Wenn sie zum Beispiel den offensichtlichen galaktischen Krieg zwischen dem FreeStar-Kollektiv, dem Haus Va'rum und der UC führen würden, würden die Leute das auffressen, denn das ist es, was die Massen von einem Bethesda-Spiel wollen, so haben sie sich immer selbst vermarktet und dann draußen experimentiert ihrer Hauptformel. Und dann fragen sich die Leute, warum niemand das Spiel spielt. Leute, die auf YouTube stundenlange Aufsätze verfassen, in denen sie das ganze Spiel analysieren, und die Leute wollen sich das alles lieber ansehen, als das Spiel zu spielen, das kann man sich nicht ausdenken.

 

Und das Lustige an all dem ist, dass Bethesda Starfield als Nischenprojekt aus Leidenschaft angegangen wäre (da Starfield etwas war, das Todd schon lange machen wollte), anstatt sich auf Unternehmensmarketing zu verlassen, um jeden Kunden anzusprechen, der kauft (Zuerst) wäre die Negativität nicht so schlimm, weil sie wissen, dass sie ihre eingefleischten Elder Scroll-Fans damit nicht zufrieden stellen können, sie warten seit 2011 auf das nächste Spiel. Eingefleischte Fallout-Fans müssen warten, was? 15 Jahre für das nächste Fallout-Spiel? Bis dahin werden wir wahrscheinlich im wirklichen Fallout sein, Lmao. Ja, sie greifen das auch nicht auf. Dies ist eine neue IP mit einer neuen Fangemeinde. Anstatt zu versuchen, Leute aus Ihren anderen Spielen mit einzubeziehen. Ich weiß nicht. Versuchen Sie, Ihre eigene Fangemeinde aufzubauen und sehen Sie, ob diese Fans Ihrer anderen Spiele später interessiert wären?

 

Es ist derselbe alte Slogan, der alle anspricht und niemanden anspricht.

 

 

 

The problem was and is -> they advertised the game as a space game ... but their "engine" cannot do the most important thing for it -> the simulation of space and the associated "space" flight.

 

This results in so many disadvantages - that it completely "drowns" their strengths.

 

Yippee - I have a buggy and want to drive it on the beach of a planet that was previously unknown to me.

 

So how do I proceed?

1) Find a "pixel area" (biome) on the planet map - which contains both land and sea

2) Don't choose an area with forest - because this will be difficult for your buggy to penetrate

3) Since your spaceship will never land on the beach (because you have no control over where you land on the map) - you have to remember exactly where the sea is on the planet map ... because you still don't have a usable overview map on the ground!

4) When you finally reach the beach - you realise that you have forgotten your swimming trunks (or bikini) ... but that's not a big deal - because the sea is still a 2D surface - so swimming or even DIVING is out of the question

 

In 10 years I will be 72 real years old ... if I am still alive at all (because of my illnesses) ... I will definitely not wait - if I can experience an ocean now -> in "no man's sky"

[brown66]

53 minutes ago, Miauzi said:

 

The problem was and is -> they advertised the game as a space game ... but their "engine" cannot do the most important thing for it -> the simulation of space and the associated "space" flight.

 

This results in so many disadvantages - that it completely "drowns" their strengths.

 

Yippee - I have a buggy and want to drive it on the beach of a planet that was previously unknown to me.

 

So how do I proceed?

1) Find a "pixel area" (biome) on the planet map - which contains both land and sea

2) Don't choose an area with forest - because this will be difficult for your buggy to penetrate

3) Since your spaceship will never land on the beach (because you have no control over where you land on the map) - you have to remember exactly where the sea is on the planet map ... because you still don't have a usable overview map on the ground!

4) When you finally reach the beach - you realise that you have forgotten your swimming trunks (or bikini) ... but that's not a big deal - because the sea is still a 2D surface - so swimming or even DIVING is out of the question

 

In 10 years I will be 72 real years old ... if I am still alive at all (because of my illnesses) ... I will definitely not wait - if I can experience an ocean now -> in "no man's sky"

 

 

Correction!

 

You can swim, but you can't dive.

 

See this video at 4:30.

 

 

I had to immediately get out of the water because it was radioactive. If you use a large monitor and view this video in 4K, you will see this information in the bottom left corner of the screen.

 

Edited August 24, 2024 by brown66

[brown66]

17 hours ago, Miauzi said:

 

1 - Huh? What on earth are you constructing?

 

Of course I found these recordings and listened to them!

 

2 - And it is precisely because of these tapes that the game is -> BULLSHIT

(Without these ribbons you won't get to the last temple in the main story and therefore won't get to the point of becoming a "star god"... You should work on your understanding of the text before you start making accusations against other people!)

Very bad SF plot

 

And don't come with "Flash Gordon" ... this comic has absolutely nothing to do with SF ... even under the category "space opera" it is complete trash

 

 

1 - What I'm "building" is the impression that either you played the main mission hastily and didn't realize how deep it goes, or you didn't play the game at all. If you were aware of the reason for the destruction of the Earth and were an expert in science fiction, you would know that this reason for the destruction of the Earth was already pointed out in a similar way in Cowboy Beebop.

 

That's why in a previous message of mine I said that the reason for the destruction of the Earth, despite being well presented, was not original.

 

2 - You're mocking these "tapes" (in Starfield, the recordings are on slates or computers, not tapes!), but the way in which the technological advance that caused the destruction of Earth was transmitted to one of the people who appears in these audio recordings references a cult science fiction film - 2001 - A Space Odyssey.

 

More! If you think a little considering that we already know that there will be a DLC called Starborn in the near future, it is not very difficult to make the prediction that in some part of this future DLC, our character will be the one who transmits to the person on Earth that in the past had access to such technological advancement, which later caused the destruction of the Earth.

 

If this my prediction of the plot of the future Starborn DLC is confirmed, then the plot of Starfield's main quest, despite resorting to ideas already used in other works of science fiction, is very well done and will be at the level of very good, not to mention say brilliant.

Edited August 24, 2024 by brown66

[Miauzi]

23 minutes ago, brown66 said:

 

 

Korrektur!

 

Sie können schwimmen, aber nicht tauchen.

 

Sehen Sie sich dieses Video um 16:30 Uhr an.

 

 

Ich musste sofort aus dem Wasser raus, weil es radioaktiv war. Wenn Sie einen großen Monitor verwenden und dieses Video in 4K ansehen, sehen Sie diese Informationen in der unteren linken Ecke des Bildschirms.

 

 

Wrong - you don't "swim" - you "glide" on a 2D surface... basically "sliding" on your stomach

 

It's like someone had cast the "solid water" spell in Morrowind.

 

When you really "swim" - as you know it from "Sykrim" or "Fallout 4" for example - your entire body is 89-90% submerged in the water... and you can submerge your head INTO the water when you tilt it down (underwater vision)... when you lift it up you have "normal" vision again.

 

By the way - you can also be killed by other things "in" the sea... there's not just "radioactivity" but also "hypothermia" (at PLUS 10°C water temperature) or "bacterial infection"... hahaha - don't tell me you're wearing a spacesuit

 

 

[Miauzi]

Vor 12 Minuten sagte brown66:

 

 

1 – Was ich „aufbauen“ möchte, ist der Eindruck, dass Sie entweder die Hauptmission hastig gespielt haben und nicht gemerkt haben, wie tief sie geht, oder dass Sie das Spiel überhaupt nicht gespielt haben. Wenn Sie den Grund für die Zerstörung der Erde kannten und ein Science-Fiction-Experte wären, wüssten Sie, dass dieser Grund für die Zerstörung der Erde bereits in „Cowboy Beebop“ in ähnlicher Weise dargelegt wurde.

 

Deshalb habe ich in einer früheren Nachricht von mir gesagt, dass der Grund für die Zerstörung der Erde, obwohl er gut dargelegt wurde, nicht ursprünglich war.

 

2 – Sie machen sich über diese „Bänder“ lustig (in Starfield sind die Aufnahmen auf Schiefertafeln oder Computern, nicht auf Bändern!), sondern über die Art und Weise, wie der technologische Fortschritt, der zur Zerstörung der Erde führte, an einen der auftretenden Menschen weitergegeben wurde In diesen Audioaufnahmen wird auf einen Science-Fiction-Kultfilm verwiesen – 2001 – Odyssee im Weltraum.

 

Mehr! Wenn man ein wenig darüber nachdenkt, wenn man bedenkt, dass wir bereits wissen, dass es in naher Zukunft einen DLC namens Starborn geben wird, ist es nicht sehr schwer, vorherzusagen, dass in einem Teil dieses zukünftigen DLCs unser Charakter derjenige sein wird, der übermittelt der Mensch auf der Erde, der in der Vergangenheit Zugang zu solchen technologischen Fortschritten hatte, die später zur Zerstörung der Erde führten.

 

Wenn sich meine Vorhersage der Handlung des zukünftigen Starborn-DLC bestätigt, dann ist die Handlung von Starfields Hauptquest trotz des Rückgriffs auf Ideen, die bereits in anderen Science-Fiction-Werken verwendet wurden, sehr gut gemacht und wird auf dem Niveau von sehr gut liegen. ganz zu schweigen davon, brillant zu sein.

 

They obviously can't stop their permanent insult mode... they assume that people - who don't think the game is absolutely brilliant like they do - have either not played it at all, or haven't played it completely, or haven't played it thoroughly enough... because otherwise they would automatically think it's as good as they do.

 

I don't care what else might be included in the DLC... because it definitely won't fix broken things like the 2D sea... or improve anything about the ridiculously bad basic plot of the background story (we let 90% of the earth's population die just to "travel to the stars").

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, brown66 said:

You can swim,

We call that wading in the Kiddie pool, Swimming is when you actually submerge your whole body, move your arms & legs causing movement in a particular direction

[Guest]

It's also really great how Bethesda ripped off Mass Effect with the Visions when the player touches the Artifact as well as the Chunks info that plays when you walk bt a Chunks store sounds just like the guy from The Fish Dog Food Shack from Mass Effect.

Real Original Bethesda...real freaking original!   

[SleepyNinja]

18 hours ago, Miauzi said:

 

The problem was and is -> they advertised the game as a space game ... but their "engine" cannot do the most important thing for it -> the simulation of space and the associated "space" flight.

 

This results in so many disadvantages - that it completely "drowns" their strengths.

 

Yippee - I have a buggy and want to drive it on the beach of a planet that was previously unknown to me.

 

So how do I proceed?

1) Find a "pixel area" (biome) on the planet map - which contains both land and sea

2) Don't choose an area with forest - because this will be difficult for your buggy to penetrate

3) Since your spaceship will never land on the beach (because you have no control over where you land on the map) - you have to remember exactly where the sea is on the planet map ... because you still don't have a usable overview map on the ground!

4) When you finally reach the beach - you realise that you have forgotten your swimming trunks (or bikini) ... but that's not a big deal - because the sea is still a 2D surface - so swimming or even DIVING is out of the question

 

In 10 years I will be 72 real years old ... if I am still alive at all (because of my illnesses) ... I will definitely not wait - if I can experience an ocean now -> in "no man's sky"

I kind of figured they wouldn't be able to pull off the space simulation because of the engine but when they kept reassuring, that Starfield would still be a traditional Bethesda game,  that at least held me onto to it because I kinda figured "oh more of the same, galactic space war would be nice."

 

"Oh there's no aliens? Well that's OK, a story about how no matter how much we leave earth, humans will always fight,  because we can't fight nature, right?."

 

"That's not it either? Well the marketing material suggests finding what's out there, so is there heavy assumptions of mystery beyond our galaxy? There is? Ok that's interesting I guess but you said it's basically like the movie Looper? But instead of time travel it's the multi-verse? Didn't Marvel already do like 3 recent movies on the multi-verse already?"

 

I want to preface something, I don't hate the game, I just understand why it's not a driving force of a franchise that most people don't like and that corporate would expect from a studio that break sales records. Yet despite that, as much as people hate it, Bethesda definitely got their money from Starfield and I personally think that's what saved the studio when a couple months back Microsoft axed like most of their purchase of ZeniMax, I also think the release of the Fallout show was a way for Bethesda to show Microsoft that there is still heavy interest in their games. How convenient of the Fallout show's release around the same time Microsoft shut down the studio that made RedFall.

 

I've worked in sales for abit and the one thing I know in the corporate world is that if you can't get a sale off your product, you move on to the next product or you get fired. Most of the time the product speaks for itself but you're just there to convince the potential customer that it's worth their money, so you can make money. It's no different in the gaming industry. Todd is just an experienced cars sales man.

[DocClox]

 

9 hours ago, SleepyNinja said:

Ok that's interesting I guess but you said it's basically like the movie Looper?

 

Well OK. But then Fallout was quite blatantly "A Boy And His Dog". Fallout 3, the Bethesda team were told to use "The Road" as the bible for the Commonwealth, and Fallout 4 owes a lot to "The Book Of Eli".  They say there is nothing new under the Sun, and it's true. Every Robot film ever made (for example) you can trace the inspiration back to Asimov, Metropolis, Frankenstein, Pygmalion and Galatea... If there'd been a couple of dozen Looper-ish movies lately then I could understand them drawing flack for rerunning a tired and worn out trope. But I don't think that's the case here.

 

9 hours ago, SleepyNinja said:

Didn't Marvel already do like 3 recent movies on the multi-verse already?"

 

Yeah. The trouble with the Marvel multiverse is that (in the comics at least) they want to have their cake and eat it at all times. So for every universe where Gwen Stacy dies tragically at the hands of Norman Osborn, there's another one where she survives, one where she was brought back as a clone, one where she gets spider powers... and after a while I'm like "WHO CARES?!?" I mean why am I going to get emotionally invested in the next big plot twist when I know that in six months time there's going to be series where the opposite thing happens? When every possible outcome happens somewhere, nothing really matters since you can go to the universe next door where everything is OK.

 

The thing I liked about Starfield's multiverse is that they leaned into that "nothing really matters" feeling, and used it to make a game about the price of immortality and the progressive alienation of seeing the same patterns repeat over and over again. And eventually you're confronted with the question of who you want to become: Hunter, Emissary, or Keeper. For me at least, that insight was worth the price of admission.

Edited August 25, 2024 by DocClox

[SleepyNinja]

On 8/25/2024 at 1:50 AM, DocClox said:

 

 

Well OK. But then Fallout was quite blatantly "A Boy And His Dog". Fallout 3, the Bethesda team were told to use "The Road" as the bible for the Commonwealth, and Fallout 4 owes a lot to "The Book Of Eli".  They say there is nothing new under the Sun, and it's true. Every Robot film ever made (for example) you can trace the inspiration back to Asimov, Metropolis, Frankenstein, Pygmalion and Galatea... If there'd been a couple of dozen Looper-ish movies lately then I could understand them drawing flack for rerunning a tired and worn out trope. But I don't think that's the case here.

 

 

Yeah. The trouble with the Marvel multiverse is that (in the comics at least) they want to have their cake and eat it at all times. So for every universe where Gwen Stacy dies tragically at the hands of Norman Osborn, there's another one where she survives, one where she was brought back as a clone, one where she gets spider powers... and after a while I'm like "WHO CARES?!?" I mean why am I going to get emotionally invested in the next big plot twist when I know that in six months time there's going to be series where the opposite thing happens? When every possible outcome happens somewhere, nothing really matters since you can go to the universe next door where everything is OK.

 

The thing I liked about Starfield's multiverse is that they leaned into that "nothing really matters" feeling, and used it to make a game about the price of immortality and the progressive alienation of seeing the same patterns repeat over and over again. And eventually you're confronted with the question of who you want to become: Hunter, Emissary, or Keeper. For me at least, that insight was worth the price of admission.

That's fair, I got to force myself to finish the game at least but I want to do it because I want to, not because it's another checklist. Hopefully the dlc drives that home for me. I've heard speculation that the DLC is like Dead Space 3, which I'm not really a fan of DS3 because it's more action than horror but if Starfield is taking elements from that series well I might be interested. I saw with the UC Vanguard quest they definitely got inspired by Alien Isolation and I know Todd wanted Starfield to be more of a survival game, so if they can fix their wrongs with the DLC, I'm game.

[Miauzi]

Vor 12 Minuten sagte SleepyNinja:

Das ist fair, ich muss mich zwingen, das Spiel zumindest durchzuspielen, aber ich möchte es tun, weil ich es möchte, und nicht, weil es eine weitere Checkliste ist. Hoffentlich macht mir der DLC das klar. Ich habe Spekulationen gehört, dass der DLC Dead Space 3 ähneln soll. Ich bin kein wirklicher DS3-Fan, weil er mehr Action als Horror bietet, aber ob Starfield Elemente aus dieser Serie gut übernimmt, könnte mich interessieren. Ich habe bei der UC Vanguard-Quest gesehen, dass sie sich definitiv von Alien Isolation inspirieren ließen, und ich weiß, dass Todd wollte, dass Starfield eher ein Überlebensspiel ist. Wenn sie also ihre Fehler mit dem DLC beheben können, bin ich dabei.

 

What made games like Fallout so special in the first place?

Not the plot or the setting... but the BLACK humor - which, as a child of the "Cold War" (and the real fear of nuclear catastrophe), made the game bearable in the first place.

But this humor didn't come from "bugdesta" - but from the original creators of this universe -> "Fallout 1" by "Black Isle"

While this humor was particularly prevalent in the game "Fallout NV" - there is hardly any of it in "Fallout 4"... and in "Fallout 76" everything is completely absent - because there are neither NPCs nor a main plot!

It is remarkable that most players consider "Fallout NV" to be the best title in the series... which wasn't even created by "Bugdesta" himself - but by "Obsidian".

 

That's why I wasn't surprised not to find a single grain of "humor" in "StarField" ... which contributes massively to the boredom in this game.

 

The scenario of "Fallout" deals with a post-nuclear world in which 99% of humanity has been wiped out ... and they made bad jokes - actually had to do so so that the player isn't "traumatized".

 

In the "StarField" scenario, at least 90% of the earth's population is killed by a genocide triggered by the "starborn" ... and they remain completely serious about it.

And that's exactly why this plot is so mega bad - because something so "stupid" has to be turned into an obvious absurdity (e.g. through black humor)!

 

---

 

I live here in Europe and obviously have a different cultural connection to SF than the "normal" US citizen.

On the one hand, there are sources from our own continent - which are already very diverse due to the many cultures and languages ... but then I can also look to the USA or Japan.

 

And in the USA I know a lot of SF classics - while the comic world from there is pretty boring and absurd (in a bad sense).

 

If I really want to read or see something stimulating -> Japan

[DocClox]

The  difference is that, unlike Fallout, Humanity in Starfield has recovered from the tragic events that overtook Earth and have successfully rebuilt their civilization. You know? The sort of thing people keep saying should have happened in Fallout after 200 years, rather than just living in shacks with holes in the walls and 200 year old skeletons on the floor. But it's hard to make the game bleak and cynical when there's New Atlantis designed to be a shining beacon of hope for the future.

 

Thing is: Starfield isn't a Fallout game. It's not supposed to be a Fallout game. And if that's what you wanted from it, then no wonder you're disappointed.

 

Also, at the risk of repeating myself, we don't have an authoritative source as to what percentage of Mankind made if off Earth.

[Kusoneko]

Just gonna give my 2 cents since I spent a few hours reading this thread.

 

In my opinion, Starfield in and of itself isn't bad, but it suffers from Todd's process of making games. I don't quite recall where I saw it, but I'm fairly sure he once said that his approach to making games is to look at the previous games for things to trim and remove first, before considering adding new things. The problem with Starfield is it's not the next TES or the next Fallout. It doesn't have a past of multiple games' worth of lore stretching over IRL decades, IG centuries. When you start a new IP, such as Starfield, the Todd approach to making games is the wrong one. It's a fundamentally safe and cautious approach. "Remove and trim things until you get the most basic things, then build the new game back up from there, naturally some things never get to come back from this process." What you want for a new IP is to take risks, not be cautious. You want to design a whole new universe, with brand new rules. You want to implement many features that you wouldn't normally offer, perhaps not going as in depth with them as they deserve, but to cast as wide a net as possible and catch as many potential people as possible. Starfield was *lucky* in that it still sold despite using the Todd approach thanks to the Bethesda name. Unfortunately, a Starfield 2 would not sell as well. Another brand new IP from Bethesda would not sell as well either. People have seen what Bethesda making a new IP looks like, and it was found lacking.

 

Unlike others above, I am neither praising nor condemning Starfield, though. It suffers from many issues, just like every other Bethesda game has for the past few decades or so. Unlike the claim that DLCs and modding cannot fix it, I do believe they can at least improve it to the point that I would be willing to play it again. I'll say though, that the way I play Bethesda games is more like playing in a Sandbox than strictly following the story, that is Bethesda's greatest strength in spite of their efforts to always railroad you into a MSQ. How many times have I made an Oblivion or Skyrim character and simply ignored the main storyline and just did my own thing? Probably the majority of my game time on those games, actually. I can't say as much about Fallout 4, due to the voiced protagonist and the limit of 4 possible replies, among other things, which was a terrible mistake in that sense. It killed the ability to play whatever role I wanted by forcing a role onto me. Starfield did not force a role onto you *as much* but it still sort of did, which is unfortunate. Regardless, I think Starfield has potential from a modding perspective to become a better game for the way I personally play Bethesda games. It just isn't, until the modding scene picks up, good enough for me to go back to it right now.

 

I don't think I need to rehash all the other ways in which Starfield is lacking, the list has been collectively grown and added to ever since release, and it doesn't need me looking it over and adding more to it. I'll definitely say that the factions all being extremely generic and the extremely empty planets are definitely at the center of the issue to me. To play the way I play, the world needs to feel both alive and lived in. Right now it feels like the Starfield universe's Creator God started to make the universe, then got interrupted and forgot to finish it and breath life into it, which makes the universe feel very dead. The universe essentially waits for you 100% of the time. most NPCs don't even have a routine, do not sleep or eat, they just sit at their job 24/7 and it's just painful for any sort of immersion. Even with all it's genericness, if at least the NPCs were alive, it would feel a lot better, in my opinion.

 

I think most of my issues can and will be fixed, if not by DLCs, definitely by modding.

[brown66]

1 hour ago, Kusoneko said:

Just gonna give my 2 cents since I spent a few hours reading this thread.

 

In my opinion, Starfield in and of itself isn't bad, but it suffers from Todd's process of making games. I don't quite recall where I saw it, but I'm fairly sure he once said that his approach to making games is to look at the previous games for things to trim and remove first, before considering adding new things. The problem with Starfield is it's not the next TES or the next Fallout. It doesn't have a past of multiple games' worth of lore stretching over IRL decades, IG centuries. When you start a new IP, such as Starfield, the Todd approach to making games is the wrong one. It's a fundamentally safe and cautious approach. "Remove and trim things until you get the most basic things, then build the new game back up from there, naturally some things never get to come back from this process." What you want for a new IP is to take risks, not be cautious. You want to design a whole new universe, with brand new rules. You want to implement many features that you wouldn't normally offer, perhaps not going as in depth with them as they deserve, but to cast as wide a net as possible and catch as many potential people as possible. Starfield was *lucky* in that it still sold despite using the Todd approach thanks to the Bethesda name. Unfortunately, a Starfield 2 would not sell as well. Another brand new IP from Bethesda would not sell as well either. People have seen what Bethesda making a new IP looks like, and it was found lacking.

 

Unlike others above, I am neither praising nor condemning Starfield, though. It suffers from many issues, just like every other Bethesda game has for the past few decades or so. Unlike the claim that DLCs and modding cannot fix it, I do believe they can at least improve it to the point that I would be willing to play it again. I'll say though, that the way I play Bethesda games is more like playing in a Sandbox than strictly following the story, that is Bethesda's greatest strength in spite of their efforts to always railroad you into a MSQ. How many times have I made an Oblivion or Skyrim character and simply ignored the main storyline and just did my own thing? Probably the majority of my game time on those games, actually. I can't say as much about Fallout 4, due to the voiced protagonist and the limit of 4 possible replies, among other things, which was a terrible mistake in that sense. It killed the ability to play whatever role I wanted by forcing a role onto me. Starfield did not force a role onto you *as much* but it still sort of did, which is unfortunate. Regardless, I think Starfield has potential from a modding perspective to become a better game for the way I personally play Bethesda games. It just isn't, until the modding scene picks up, good enough for me to go back to it right now.

 

I don't think I need to rehash all the other ways in which Starfield is lacking, the list has been collectively grown and added to ever since release, and it doesn't need me looking it over and adding more to it. I'll definitely say that the factions all being extremely generic and the extremely empty planets are definitely at the center of the issue to me. To play the way I play, the world needs to feel both alive and lived in. Right now it feels like the Starfield universe's Creator God started to make the universe, then got interrupted and forgot to finish it and breath life into it, which makes the universe feel very dead. The universe essentially waits for you 100% of the time. most NPCs don't even have a routine, do not sleep or eat, they just sit at their job 24/7 and it's just painful for any sort of immersion. Even with all it's genericness, if at least the NPCs were alive, it would feel a lot better, in my opinion.

 

I think most of my issues can and will be fixed, if not by DLCs, definitely by modding.

 

Hallelujah!

 

I thought no one else had noticed that. This is for me Starfield's biggest flaw and the one that causes me the biggest drop in immersion. Especially when I enter Akyla City and I always see the same guard at the entrance gate.

Now that that's been said, just wait a little longer for the haters to throw a big party over the "discovery" of a new bug (in reality it's more of an omission than a bug itself) that they didn't know about because they haven't played the game yet.

 

Edited August 26, 2024 by brown66

[Miauzi]

Vor 6 Minuten sagte brown66:

 

Halleluja!

 

Ich dachte, das hätte sonst niemand bemerkt. Das ist für mich der größte Fehler von Starfield und derjenige, der bei mir den größten Einbruch in die Immersion verursacht. Vor allem, wenn ich Akyla City betrete und immer den gleichen Wachmann am Eingangstor sehe.

Nun, da das gesagt ist, warten Sie einfach noch ein wenig, bis die Hasser eine große Party über die „Entdeckung“ eines neuen Fehlers schmeißen (in Wirklichkeit ist es eher eine Auslassung als ein Fehler selbst), von dem sie nichts wussten, weil sie Habe das Spiel noch nicht gespielt.

 

 

You are really quite primitive ... because such things don't even really bother me ... since the same senseless and stupid sayings of the guards in Skyrim