Starfield/Bethesda Criticism.

[SleepyNinja]

So basically out of respect for @Ashal and other mod authors I'm making this thread because alot of us have huge grievances with 2024 Bethesda. So if it's the creation kit, Starfield, Bethesda drama you're looking for, this is the place, I really don't care what y'all say, just keep the arguments constructive for those that like modern Bethesda or against modern Bethesda.

 

I'll start by saying Starfield is the safest least interesting game Bethesda has made and I'm really only playing for the porn mods at this point, which don't exist yet so it's not taking up my storage. Really was hoping Shattered Space would be good but alas Bethesda saved me 30 dollars.

[JouFox]

I think Starfield is a controversial game that combines the unconnected. If someone had said that Starfield would have the ability to fly your own ship and customize it, I wouldn't have believed it. They have not weakly worked this out, of course it's not Elite level, but at least it's commendable, as no other action rpg has it.

Now about quests and everything related to it: in Starfield Betnesda jumped where it shouldn't have, all this philosophical nonsense is not interesting to the average player, many people will not understand. Starfield is much more mature, at least putting aside all the sur and humor Fallout, and more serious TES. In none of them that I noticed the quests at all had any context at all that makes you think about reality. Plus they've gone back to the RPG consistency of the early Oblivion games at least by introducing a pinch of Fallout. In Skyrim or Fallout there's no way to fully play through dialog and lots of options, as I recall. There RPG system is fixed by mods and vanilla is a stump. But Starfield suffers from catastrophic undeveloped: here and there plugs, some elements are either cut out or downgraded.

 

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

Но это всего лишь мнение, как игра фундоментально отличается от предыдущих игр, это не ТЕС или Фолыч, а совершенно новая и нужен к ней новый подход, но игроки разучились изучать, а Старфилд это требует хотя не идеально. Старфилд тупо не ТЕС или Фолыч, а совершенно новое и желать того же разумно, но похожего не будет.

 

But this is just an opinion, how the game is fundamentally different from previous games, it is not TES or Fallout, but completely new and a new approach is needed, but players have forgotten how to study, and Starfield requires it, although not ideally. Starfield is simply not TES or Fallout, but completely new and it is reasonable to want the same, but it will not be similar.

[Dideldidumm]

Quote

Starfield is much more mature,

if starfield was mature, it would let players explore options and different themes, give moral choices.

 

instead starfield plays like a visual novel. you get railroaded into a story the writer chose for you.

 

 

starfield has nice ideas, but copium and hope doesnt keep a player base.

the fact that not even the people that bought the premium edition, went back to play shattered space, an expansion that is free for them, should tell you something.

[Miauzi]

Whether StarField is a mature game or not... honestly, I can't even make sense of the term "mature game".

 

I'm now over 62 years old and have been reading SF literature or watching films in this genre for over 50 years... over the years I've built up a large and rich library.

 

The basic story of the game is very poor at best - if it were addressed directly, I'd say -> "cheap SF trash"

The whole background about the "artifacts" - the "gravity drive" and the "destruction of the earth" is something I would expect to find in a cheaply produced B-movie from the film studio "Asylum" - but not in a multi-million dollar game... Costs in the 3-digit million range - but what for??

 

No money for a professional plot writer? ... there are loads of good SF authors - who could design an exclusive and high-quality "universe" including background for a 5-6-figure fee from a game developer... and would certainly want to.

 

The error was already in the conceptual approach before a single line of code had even been written.

 

 

A year ago, someone (a good friend) gave me a 30-day game pass when the game was released - so I could take a good look at the game.

After 3-4 days, I realized -> OMG - what a terrible plot for the main story... and then "Jedi Knight" powers too.

What were they thinking at Bugdesta... "let's jump on the Star Wars hype so we can make more money"??

Or were their own plot writers completely unimaginative?

Ultimately, it doesn't matter... the "quality" of the main story in their games has never been at the level of "very good" or "epic"... but now they have fallen well below the level of "bad" and have reached "subterranean".

 

What do you do in a case like this when you can still play a game legally for about 25 days without having to buy it?

Well, I've always been enthusiastic about games where you can discover "things" - and in my opinion the Bethesta games have always been good here.

 

And it was also heavily advertised -> "Discover our fantastically designed worlds"

 

That looked very good at the beginning - so I shifted the focus from story to world exploration and had many hours of very good entertainment.

 

Until the "oddities" piled up... if you play as an "explorer" you also get your experience points for leveling up from the COMPLETED exploration missions.

For a planet with a biosphere, this means -> scanning a set number of different animal and plant species - the number of specimens required decreases with the level of experience achieved (skill points!)

 

But what do I do on a planet with an ocean (or several seas) - if I have to scan 1-2 animal species that live in them... but this is only a 2D surface!

What? ... Yes - there is no 3D space for the seas and oceans (or large lakes)... you don't "swim" either, but slide around on them sliding on your stomach.

The "animal" to be scanned moves UNDER this 3D surface in a 3D space that is inaccessible to you as a player!

 

Ultimately, you can only get further here by cheating... because the protective function of the space suit (radiation, chemistry, biology, temperature, etc.) doesn't even exist.

 

Protective function of a space suit?

Yes - you can easily survive MINUS 240°C or PLUS 600°C in a space suit on planets and moons WITHOUT A BREATHABLE atmosphere... but at PLUS 10°C in the rain on a planet with a biosphere (and breathable atmosphere) you get frostbite or on the beach you can quickly get a fatal dose of radiation or a fatal bacterial infection.

The whole thing then goes on to scientific absurdities such as "bubbling methane pools" on a sun-drenched planet - whose surface temperature of PLUS 600°C is even a few degrees away from the melting point of aluminum.

For liquid methane you need temperatures of less than MINUS 100°C!

 

If you don't want to play an explorer, you can ignore all of this... but why is a game advertised with the "explorer" aspect when it is so incomplete or flawed?

For me personally, this is a complete "rip-off" of a potential buyer!

 

Now you might think that "Bugdesta" would learn something from the criticism from players or gaming media and at least fix these things gradually with patches after a year... of course they don't do that!

Because in their opinion, the game modders are responsible for that... and quite a few players confirm their opinion - by asking the modders to do this work... what the fuck!

Take the game back and spend another 1-2 years massively reworking or "repairing" it?

They've never done that - they had the modder scene working freely and unpaid to fix bugs... and now with Microsoft as the "owner" something like that would lead to the immediate dissolution/winding up of the studio.

 

So everything will remain so broken or so incomplete - why should mod authors deal with such problems... with such poor tools?

Such complex work can only be done if the original source code is available!

 

 

Space battles?

I've been playing since the days of "Wing Commander 1" - that's 35 years... and this "dog fight" is always the same boring "rehash" of air battles from World War II with propeller planes... yes, I also know all the games with air battles with "modern" jets... none of that has anything to do with battles in space.

 

Space battles with today's technology would be like in the SF series "The Expanse"... very small time windows and insane speeds between the opponents in the range of tens of KILOMETERS PER SECOND... so 20-200 times the speed of sound in the air and therefore ultimately unsuitable for a computer game.

 

 

Unsuitable "engine" for a space game?

Other people have already commented on this and I can understand their reasoning.

Ultimately, the "engine" used has its strengths precisely in those areas that are completely uninteresting for a SPACE game.

What use is the physics simulation of 140 "sandwiches" on the table to me - when it comes to the inability of a pilot to control the flight of his spaceship himself!

 

So in plain language:

Unlike in "Elite", for example, I can load my spaceship at a point on a planet's surface that I have determined or start it from there... I, as the player, am shown a "film" of the loading... aka a loading screen.

 

So an essential element for an experienceable space game is missing... because the "engine" can't do it at all!

And no mod author can fix that either!!

 

In Skyrim you can ride a dragon and have something like a flying experience - but it's a complete side issue... because there you can travel in conventional ways - like "on foot" or "on horseback" or "by carriage"!

But something like that is missing in StarField... you MUST do the loading screen travel in your spaceship... there isn't even the option to travel between the INHABITED worlds by "taxi" or "bus" or "passenger ship"!

 

 

Mods are created when mod authors are motivated over a LONG PERIOD of TIME to complete a time-consuming, thankless task - for which they receive NO money and ultimately only a very sparse "reward" in the form of "likes".

Take a look at the number of downloads of the mods here in the forum (or on Nexus) - compare that to the "likes" given... not to mention the positive text messages!

 

So - essentially, mod authors do their work for themselves... we users are lucky enough to be able to use it ourselves.

But if authors are not interested in working on a game or even creating a mod for it... there is nothing we can do about it!

[shhwonkie]

I've considered trying it because I do not want to just regurgitate all the "starfield bad" I've heard on social media & YouTube without at least forming my own opinion but that price is just seriously steep even on sale. Especially with the DLC.. over one hundred dollars! For a game that- from what I've seen from gameplay and what reviews say- isn't even very good!

Edited October 9, 2024 by shhwonkie

[Varithina]

40 minutes ago, shhwonkie said:

I've considered trying it because I do not want to just regurgitate all the "starfield bad" I've heard on social media & YouTube without at least forming my own opinion but that price is just seriously steep even on sale. Especially with the DLC.. over one hundred dollars! For a game that- from what I've seen from gameplay and what reviews say- isn't even very good!

 

I am waiting for it to drop to a more reasonable £20-30 for the whole special edition or collectors edition or whatever they are going to call it, the one with every DLC available, so probably late this year or next year sometime, depending on how stubborn they are about pricing.

[etahtinen]

One of the streamers I watch regularly gave a decent critique to the game that resonated with me regarding Starfield and Bethesda games in general. He stated that Bethesda games have a general story arc in practically all their games that the player's character is the 'chosen' one. 10 to 20 years ago, this was fine. Now, with what other game companies have done with their games, this doesn't work as well as it once did. Cyberpunk 2077 is a good example of this new dynamic in that the player's character is a part of the world instead of being the focus of the world. In Starfield, the NPCs are waiting on your character to appear, they will follow your progress as you walk around them, it seems.

 

I enjoyed Starfield for what it was, a Bethesda IP using the Bethesda formula. Did they add some stuff to differentiate it from some of the other games? Yes and no. I liked how they changed how they did NG+, combat was better compared to Fallout 4. Story was OK, not groundbreaking or anything. It had me wondering where it was going and they left enough questions open that I would like to see where they go with it. Exploration suffered compared to Skyrim and Fallout 4. Both the other games had much more of a situation of 'what is that?' when exploring. Too many of the locations were generic and didn't have any variation in design. You find one frozen lab bunker and you've seen them all. That takes away from the exploration a bit. I know some people like to say that is what would happen in a war time situation with rapid expansion, that engineers would lay everything out the same every time. I say bullshit, too many factors on the ground would create variances in design while building the outposts. The enemies wouldn't spawn in the exact same sequence either.

[Halstrom]

Its pretty much like the first Fallout or Elder Scrolls for comparison in modding and its community. But a lot of modders also do the simpler mods that piggyback off a primary sex mod which does not yet exist.
Creating the core framework isn't easy, we just have to wait for someone interested with the skills and time to do it.
Anyone can learn to mod and should start learning if what they want isn't happening.
Many of the Skyrim and Fallout Authors just aren't into Starfield. Asking 100x when CBBE is coming out isn't going to make it happen when the author isn't interested in Starfield.

As far as the game itself, I think it needs intelligent Alien races and their cultures like Star Wars and Star Trek, just humans is limiting to one planets cultures and gets boring fast.

Edited October 10, 2024 by Halstrom

[JouFox]

21 hours ago, Dideldidumm said:

Если бы Starfield была зрелой, она позволяла бы игрокам исследовать варианты и различные темы, давала бы моральный выбор.

 

Вместо этого Starfield представляет собой визуальный роман. Вы попадаете в историю, которую для вас придумал писатель.

 

 

У Starfield есть хорошие идеи, но Копиум и Надежда не удерживают базу игроков.

Тот факт, что даже те, кто купил премиум-издание, не вернулись к игре Shattered Space, которая является для них бесплатным дополнением, должен вам о чем-то говорить.

Now, let's remember that these players either stupidly went through the main dlc quest, in 3-5 hours or didn't touch at all and stupidly dropped the rating.

In Starfield there are significant moments, of course it's a cliché and naive players will not surprise, such as the fate of competitors of the corporation, which can be met, the fate of Uniona quest of the same name, or in general in general the actions of corporations about one device, or even there is one quest in the dlc that has a direct relationship to old age and the problem associated with it.

Or the theme starborn: in which literally both types are not really good, and the emissary manipulator, the end justifies the means and the player with each ng + approaches the hunter, his ideology, because he passes stupidly the main quest spidraniya and having fun as he can, but for the locals it ends in most cases massacre. 

The partners of course are not very good, but they contribute to the whole sur, how they react adequately, except for the two actions of the player in the quests, like normal people, and if for you the reaction to the murder of a civilian interferes, then for me it is realistic, of course there is not enough unprincipled characters with trouble in the head, although there is Sarah, but she is fixated on self-abuse and tries too hard to do everything "right". And it's basically PTSD

The game is mature enough as a game that you still have to figure out what you're going to do in it. It's like Star Citizen or Space Engineers with lesson planning as mindless absorption is usually stifling. But that's just an opinion.

 

 

 

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

[Dideldidumm]

2 hours ago, JouFox said:

Now, let's remember that these players either stupidly went through the main dlc quest,

Dude, by estimation about 1-2 million people bought the premium edition of starfield.

 

on steam the game jumped to less than 22 thousand players and it is already down to pre shattered space levels.

 

even if you count vastly better console numbers compared to steam, not even the people that already owned the expansion came back.

[EPBD8]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  I enjoy playing Starfield. The gameplay works for me.  It's not everything I hoped for, but it's something.

 

HOW-BE-EVER, for every thing that makes you say, "Oh wow, this is cool!" there's another thing that makes you say, "WHAT THE FUCK WERE YOU THINKING, BETHESDA?!?"

 

But I'm a sucker for space games, and I've wanted an "Elder Scrolls in Space" since Daggerfall, so, there's that.

Edited October 10, 2024 by EPBD8

[nIn nIn nIn]

8 hours ago, Dideldidumm said:

Dude, by estimation about 1-2 million people bought the premium edition of starfield.

 

on steam the game jumped to less than 22 thousand players and it is already down to pre shattered space levels.

 

even if you count vastly better console numbers compared to steam, not even the people that already owned the expansion came back.

 

There were 14 million "sales" for starfield, the overwhelming majority on Gamepass. Those players do not show in the steam stats at all. Never have and bever will. The individual downloads on Creation Club reveal there are a lot more players still playing the game compared to those steam numbers the haters love to trumpet.

 

And I bought the Premium edition. I have already completed SS once already and will do it again next NG+ or new character (once Expired updates Chargenmenu). I love the game despite it's flaws, shortcomings and small number of bugs.

 

Stop projecting your biases onto everyone else.

[Dideldidumm]

3 hours ago, nIn nIn nIn said:

Stop projecting your biases onto everyone else.

 

im projecting as much bias as you do 😉, how about we discuss this like adults instead of verbally hitting against each other?

 

Numberswise, steam is the only hard data we have, except for the xbox charts (and there the only hard number is the maximum number of players overall games).

 

on pc the game is dead compared to other bethesda games at the same time.

on console there are only estimations how many people actually play the game, but it managed top 10 xbox after all last week, so itll be astronomically higher than on steam. 

 

there arent many games that have negative critics and player reviews and are still a success. that doesnt bode well for shattered space.

[Allnarta]

Modding scene could save this game, absolutely. But introducing paid mods when game's scene is in it's infantry (and legitimately breaking it's spine by it) was a fatal damage because of a lot of reasons (BGS decision to gatekeep documantation for beginner modmakers, and possibly a whole CK updates in future; lack of healthy communication between modders and sharing experience; lack of cross-communication between modding projects; lack of free usage of SFSE advantages for mods; lack of enthusiasm to make something more interesting but less profitable; and so no, so on, so on; list can be long).

That said, game modding has absolutely no future as it is now (we will probably get those small mods coming out as before; but there is no hope for actual evolution); game without mods is too empty and fluffy. So, for me it's dead end and I'm back to Mojave now.

[Miauzi]

Vor einer Stunde sagte Allnarta:

Die Modding-Szene könnte dieses Spiel auf jeden Fall retten. Aber die Einführung kostenpflichtiger Mods, wenn sich die Szene des Spiels in seiner Infanterie befindet (und ihm damit rechtmäßig das Rückgrat bricht), war aus vielen Gründen ein fataler Schaden ( BGS-Entscheidung, die Dokumentation für Anfänger-Mod-Hersteller aufzubewahren, und möglicherweise eine ganze CK-Aktualisierung in der Zukunft; Mangel ). von gesunder Kommunikation zwischen Moddern und mangelnder gegenseitiger Kommunikation zwischen Modding-Projekten; mangelnder Enthusiasmus, etwas interessanter, aber weniger profitabel zu machen; Liste kann lang sein ).

Das heißt, Spiel-Modding hat in der jetzigen Form absolut keine Zukunft ( wahrscheinlich werden wir diese kleinen Mods wie zuvor herausbringen; aber es gibt keine Hoffnung auf eine tatsächliche Weiterentwicklung ); Spiel ohne Mods ist zu leer und flauschig. Für mich ist es also eine Sackgasse und ich bin jetzt zurück bei Mojave.

 

No - the modding scene cannot save this game - because it is not the job of mod authors to, for example, turn a 2D ocean into a 3D ocean ... or to "repair" the space suit - so that the player no longer suffers COLD DAMAGE in PLUS 10°C and rainy weather!

The "engine" apparently does not allow a spaceship to fly freely over a surface of the ground ... so there will never be a real landing approach in this game - where the player as PILOT puts his "bird" down exactly where HE wants it.

This is an essential element for a space game.

Edited October 11, 2024 by Miauzi

[Allnarta]

I... Do not know german, sorry. 😐

[Miauzi]

Vor 49 Minuten sagte Allnarta:

Ich... kann leider kein Deutsch. 😐

 

sorry - I corrected it

[Allnarta]

Uh, ok, but me, as modmaker, still stand for a fact that modding could save a game. Lack of flying right to the planet from space is also not even annoying thing, it's still BGS game; inter-planetary travel is an issue that engine can actually handle, and it could be fixed - with advanced SFSE modding. If not for all the factors that killed it.

Also, ocean is 3D. You can swim in it with a single ini edit. Issue is only water shader, Which, again, is pretty easy ti integrate... Would be pretty easy if there was actual modding scene.

[espguy]

Starfield is impressive technically but really suffers from wanting to do too much and forgetting that tone of the main reasons bethesda games are loved is the handcrafted world. By itself it is a ok game to waste time but I believe it has potential with mods if the community dont give up on it. Right now what the game lacks the most are custom areas/planet overhauls and possibly city expansions. Shattered space had a decent story and pretty good ambience and was mostly hand crafted conted, sadly it was too short. You want to make starfeild far better? take the varuunterritory and make new custom aras/hubs in specific planets based on that, Im not saying to remove the ability to do random landings but we definettly need more custom made landing zones.

[Miauzi]

Vor 8 Stunden sagte espguy:

Starfield ist technisch beeindruckend, leidet aber wirklich darunter, dass man zu viel machen will und vergisst, dass der Ton der Hauptgründe für die Beliebtheit von Bethesda-Spielen die handgefertigte Welt ist. An sich ist es ein gutes Spiel, um Zeit zu verschwenden, aber ich glaube, dass es Potenzial für Mods hat, wenn die Community es nicht aufgibt. Was dem Spiel derzeit am meisten fehlt, sind benutzerdefinierte Gebiete/Planetenüberarbeitungen und möglicherweise Stadterweiterungen. „Shattered Space“ hatte eine anständige Geschichte und eine ziemlich gute Atmosphäre und bestand größtenteils aus handgefertigten Inhalten, leider war es zu kurz. Du willst Starfeild viel besser machen? Nehmen Sie das Untergebiet und erstellen Sie auf dieser Grundlage neue benutzerdefinierte Aras/Hubs auf bestimmten Planeten. Ich sage nicht, dass wir die Möglichkeit, zufällige Landungen durchzuführen, entfernen sollen, aber wir brauchen definitiv mehr maßgeschneiderte Landezonen.

 

What is completely missing from this space game -> You are the pilot of a spaceship - but you hardly notice it as a player

The essential element of such games -> the individual landing site and not the landing zone!

You as the pilot decide where you land in the terrain... in other words, there is an "actual" look out of orbit to the planet's surface and then FREE flight over it until you as the pilot say "Here I'll gently set my bird down on the ground"

Yes - that is flight simulation... but this aspect is completely missing from this game

The predetermined point at the loading zones then leads to absurd situations - which personally put me off the game a lot

1) You "land" in a dense forest area on a clearing - fight your way 500-800 meters through the undergrowth... only to then find a wide savannah landscape - which has only a few trees. And you immediately ask yourself -> "Why didn't I land here?"

 

2) You look for a landing zone with a "coast" - because you plan to explore the marine fauna. Where do you land? It could be in the middle of the dense forest again... and yes - you can't use the new buggy here anyway - so you have to walk... but where to? Thanks to this "super" map, you can't see any topography - and therefore no coastline. When you finally find the "beach" - the same question arises again -> "Why the hell didn't my spaceship land here?"

 

Well - the simple answer is -> you are sitting in the pilot's seat as a player - but you have no influence on where this game actually puts you on the ground.

Probably one of the main reasons why so many buyers put this game in the corner after a few hours... because there are currently games that offer exactly that.

 

Ultimately, what remains is an RPG shooter - which is a mixture of many things - but can only implement very little of it in a useful (and interesting) way.

[Zeee3eee]

On 10/11/2024 at 8:37 AM, Allnarta said:

Modding scene could save this game, absolutely. But introducing paid mods when game's scene is in it's infantry (and legitimately breaking it's spine by it) was a fatal damage because of a lot of reasons (BGS decision to gatekeep documantation for beginner modmakers, and possibly a whole CK updates in future; lack of healthy communication between modders and sharing experience; lack of cross-communication between modding projects; lack of free usage of SFSE advantages for mods; lack of enthusiasm to make something more interesting but less profitable; and so no, so on, so on; list can be long).

That said, game modding has absolutely no future as it is now (we will probably get those small mods coming out as before; but there is no hope for actual evolution); game without mods is too empty and fluffy. So, for me it's dead end and I'm back to Mojave now.

 

What mods or kinds of mods, if added to starfield, would make you change your mind?

[EPBD8]

6 hours ago, Miauzi said:

 

What is completely missing from this space game -> You are the pilot of a spaceship - but you hardly notice it as a player

The essential element of such games -> the individual landing site and not the landing zone!

You as the pilot decide where you land in the terrain... in other words, there is an "actual" look out of orbit to the planet's surface and then FREE flight over it until you as the pilot say "Here I'll gently set my bird down on the ground"

Yes - that is flight simulation... but this aspect is completely missing from this game

The predetermined point at the loading zones then leads to absurd situations - which personally put me off the game a lot

1) You "land" in a dense forest area on a clearing - fight your way 500-800 meters through the undergrowth... only to then find a wide savannah landscape - which has only a few trees. And you immediately ask yourself -> "Why didn't I land here?"

 

2) You look for a landing zone with a "coast" - because you plan to explore the marine fauna. Where do you land? It could be in the middle of the dense forest again... and yes - you can't use the new buggy here anyway - so you have to walk... but where to? Thanks to this "super" map, you can't see any topography - and therefore no coastline. When you finally find the "beach" - the same question arises again -> "Why the hell didn't my spaceship land here?"

 

Well - the simple answer is -> you are sitting in the pilot's seat as a player - but you have no influence on where this game actually puts you on the ground.

Probably one of the main reasons why so many buyers put this game in the corner after a few hours... because there are currently games that offer exactly that.

 

Ultimately, what remains is an RPG shooter - which is a mixture of many things - but can only implement very little of it in a useful (and interesting) way.

Clearly, you never played Starflight and similar games. Choosing exact landing position was not a thing the way you're making it sound.  Besides, I don't need to land from orbit myself to feel like a pilot.  That's such an insignificant part of the whole experience, IMO. I will complain that the space combat is more naval combat than air combat style, but that's pretty much just like older games like Starflight also.  

 

As far as finding the ocean when landing on the coast, it's a non-issue now.  Just look at the surface map.  Oceanic exploration? Not really missing it. Not a whole lot you could do with it. 

 

Procedurally generated planets? That's just like the majority of the land in Daggerfall, empty woods with monsters and in Starfield we at least get (admittedly very similar) POIs where we can fight and loot (and those are like the random dungeons in Daggerfall as well, except they're not spaghetti mazes you get lost in).  I honestly prefer infinitely repeatable random gameplay loops to hand-crafted content that runs out and leaves you with nothing.  The mission board concept is awesome...especially since it even covers cyber-runner missions with Ryujin.  I like what BSG refers to as "Radiant" quests, it allows you to keep playing a style of gameplay without needing constant extra content to do it in.  Although I would certainly like better variety, but it's the sandbox gameplay that I most enjoy.

 

I honestly think you're just wanting it to be ALL the things and it's just not. If the game isn't for you, then it isn't for you.  That doesn't make it a dead game, though.  It just has a niche crowd it appeals to.

Edited October 12, 2024 by EPBD8

[Miauzi]

Vor 37 Minuten sagte EPBD8:

Offensichtlich haben Sie nie Starflight und ähnliche Spiele gespielt. Die Wahl der genauen Landeposition war nicht so, wie Sie es klingen lassen. Außerdem muss ich nicht selbst aus dem Orbit landen, um mich wie ein Pilot zu fühlen. Das ist meiner Meinung nach ein so unbedeutender Teil der gesamten Erfahrung. Ich werde mich darüber beschweren, dass der Weltraumkampf eher einem Seekampf als einem Luftkampf ähnelt, aber das ist so ziemlich das Gleiche wie bei älteren Spielen wie Starflight. 

 

Das Finden des Ozeans bei der Landung an der Küste ist jetzt kein Problem mehr. Schauen Sie sich einfach die Oberflächenkarte an. Ozeanische Erforschung? Ich vermisse es nicht wirklich. Viel kann man damit nicht machen. 

 

Prozedural erzeugte Planeten? Das ist genau wie der Großteil des Landes in Daggerfall, leere Wälder voller Monster und in Starfield bekommen wir zumindest (zugegebenermaßen sehr ähnliche) POIs, an denen wir kämpfen und plündern können (und diese sind auch wie die zufälligen Dungeons in Daggerfall, nur dass sie Es sind keine Spaghetti-Labyrinthe, in denen man sich verirrt. Ehrlich gesagt bevorzuge ich unendlich wiederholbare, zufällige Gameplay-Schleifen gegenüber handgefertigten Inhalten, die zur Neige gehen und einem nichts mehr übrig lassen. Das Konzept des Missionsbretts ist großartig ... vor allem, da es sogar Cyber-Runner-Missionen mit Ryujin abdeckt. Ich mag die Quests, die BSG als „Radiant“-Quests bezeichnet. Sie ermöglichen es einem, einen Spielstil weiterzuspielen, ohne dafür ständig zusätzliche Inhalte zu benötigen. Obwohl ich mir sicherlich eine größere Abwechslung wünschen würde, ist es das Sandbox-Gameplay, das mir am meisten Spaß macht.

 

Ich glaube ehrlich gesagt, dass Sie einfach ALLES wollen, aber das ist einfach nicht der Fall. Wenn das Spiel nichts für Sie ist, dann ist es nichts für Sie. Das macht es jedoch nicht zu einem toten Spiel. Es gibt einfach ein Nischenpublikum, das es anspricht.

 

Oceanic exploration not important?

 

I don't know what you play in StarField - but definitely not an "explorer" ... because that requires COMPLETE scanning of the fauna of a planet - that includes the marine fauna.

If you don't have that -> there is NO COMPLETE exploration of the planet - so no experience points.

 

And one more thing -> you can SELL this data to the "Black Russians" in the space station - there's really a lot of money for that!

 

But obviously you know what I want better than I do ... weird - I've been meeting people like that all the time since 1990.

 

By the way, have I commented on the gameplay?

Yes - about a year ago ... the missions in SF are almost completely irrelevant to me, to put it mildly.

 

Have we talked about building the oh-so-great bases yet?

Thanks to the developer's great decision (probably shortly before release) to remove the fuel consumption for the hyper drive (aka grav jump drive) - building a base is no longer a mandatory requirement to advance to the "right half" of the star map.

There are no inhabited planets there and no "free" space stations - so nowhere to refuel your bird!

 

So why can I produce fuel in a base I built - if this need doesn't even exist!

 

All of this contributes to this game feeling incomplete - the impression that it was released in a hurry "burns" through the thick layer of advertising babble in many places.

 

Topic of freely selectable landing site:

Well, I've been playing "Elite" - I've been choosing my loading spot wherever I want for 9 years... whether I want the support of a landing computer or not.

My wife has been playing "nomens sky" (for 9 years) - there too she can freely choose the landing spot for her spaceship"

 

Two examples of games that have exactly what I miss in StarField!

[SleepyNinja]

On 10/11/2024 at 11:16 PM, espguy said:

Starfield is impressive technically but really suffers from wanting to do too much and forgetting that tone of the main reasons bethesda games are loved is the handcrafted world. By itself it is a ok game to waste time but I believe it has potential with mods if the community dont give up on it. Right now what the game lacks the most are custom areas/planet overhauls and possibly city expansions. Shattered space had a decent story and pretty good ambience and was mostly hand crafted conted, sadly it was too short. You want to make starfeild far better? take the varuunterritory and make new custom aras/hubs in specific planets based on that, Im not saying to remove the ability to do random landings but we definettly need more custom made landing zones.

I'm not really too hung up over the lack of overhauls and custom planets because it's only been a year and most big overhauls go from 6 months to a decade like alot of the Fallout 4 overhauls. I'm currently playing the Silent Hill mod for Fallout 4 called Whispering Hills in survival mode and I never felt fear playing Fallout 4 until I first played the mod back in 2021. I've been following the mod since and episode 4 just got completed at the beginning of the year, it's came a long way and does the Silent Hill treatment right. 

 

I would really love someone to do an Alien Isolation vibe in Starfield in the near future. I mean Bethesda hints at it alot in Starfield and even had a quest similar to Alien Isolation, it's on an empty ship with mangled dead bodies and if you have the stealth perk, the stealth meter is constantly orange like something is watching you. IMO it might be the highlight of Starfield for me, they should of gone more on the horror aspect of the game and I thought Shattered Space would do that, at least that's what the marketing for the DLC seemed.

 

It's just the game has no identity, it's trying to appeal to everyone but no one wants it. It has too many conflicting ideas in it's narrative. I can tell you how all of the factions are connected to the institute in Fallout 4. I can tell you how all of the guilds are connected to each other in Skyrim. I can not tell you how any of the factions in Starfield are connected to Constellation. And every member like Sarah Morgan who has connections with a faction like the UC, doesn't count other than a bit of backstory as far as they're concerned. To them Constellation is their faction now and all the other factions are in their own bubble.

Edited October 13, 2024 by SleepyNinja

[EPBD8]

22 hours ago, Miauzi said:

 

Oceanic exploration not important?

 

I don't know what you play in StarField - but definitely not an "explorer" ... because that requires COMPLETE scanning of the fauna of a planet - that includes the marine fauna.

If you don't have that -> there is NO COMPLETE exploration of the planet - so no experience points.

 

And one more thing -> you can SELL this data to the "Black Russians" in the space station - there's really a lot of money for that!

 

But obviously you know what I want better than I do ... weird - I've been meeting people like that all the time since 1990.

 

By the way, have I commented on the gameplay?

Yes - about a year ago ... the missions in SF are almost completely irrelevant to me, to put it mildly.

 

Have we talked about building the oh-so-great bases yet?

Thanks to the developer's great decision (probably shortly before release) to remove the fuel consumption for the hyper drive (aka grav jump drive) - building a base is no longer a mandatory requirement to advance to the "right half" of the star map.

There are no inhabited planets there and no "free" space stations - so nowhere to refuel your bird!

 

So why can I produce fuel in a base I built - if this need doesn't even exist!

 

All of this contributes to this game feeling incomplete - the impression that it was released in a hurry "burns" through the thick layer of advertising babble in many places.

 

Topic of freely selectable landing site:

Well, I've been playing "Elite" - I've been choosing my loading spot wherever I want for 9 years... whether I want the support of a landing computer or not.

My wife has been playing "nomens sky" (for 9 years) - there too she can freely choose the landing spot for her spaceship"

 

Two examples of games that have exactly what I miss in StarField!

It sounds more like you want a simulator space game, not a space opera RPG.  You're wanting Starfield to be something it is not intended to be.  Play Elite if you want a simulator.  Play No Man's Sky if you want an arcadey exploration game.  Starfield is not those, nor is it supposed to be.  It fills a different niche. It is, primarily, an adventure RPG with space combat and exploration elements.  You can't explore the ocean in Elder Scrolls or Fallout, either.  Starfield is the same style of game.

 

What do you mean no xp for aquatic life??  You land on a coast, go to the ocean and scan from shore, or go out in your miraculously amphibious REV.  You've always been able to fully scan every planet.

 

As far as fuel, it's another of those things that don't really matter for this style of game.  I mean, there's mods if you want it to cost fuel, but the mechanic as is simply exists as a short hurdle to overcome for longer jumps. Also, outposts with HE-3 extractors DO extend your jump range.

 

Hell, outposts exist only to build better outposts.  That's an unfinished gameplay feature. 

And I truly do not understand why choosing your exact landing point matters so much to you. You choose the general area, the rest is up to that exploration you keep complaining about it not having.

Edited October 13, 2024 by EPBD8