Starfield/Bethesda Criticism.

[Dideldidumm]

On 10/29/2024 at 7:33 PM, fallout980350376 said:

Woke madness: Examples of the wokeness would be the following, Barett and Sarah are both gay. Both are the main companions that you can have in the game and their main stories revolve around their homosexual relationships.

 

lol, what a way to tell the world you are a special snowflake that is afraid of the "gays".

 

starfield has many problems, "woke" or gay companions isnt one of them.

 

[DocClox]

On 10/30/2024 at 7:25 PM, fallout980350376 said:

she keeps brining up Aja who was very obviously her lover

 

I mean if you ask her, she'll tell you that there was nothing romantic or sexual between them. For whatever that may be worth.

[DIYDeath]

On 10/30/2024 at 4:57 PM, Dideldidumm said:

 

lol, what a way to tell the world you are a special snowflake that is afraid of the "gays".

 

starfield has many problems, "woke" or gay companions isnt one of them.

 

Exactly. You want something that's actually woke? Let's talk about Vanguard and how they basically butchered Qunari lore to the point where they had embargos explicitly against that character's mission pre-release.

 

Barret and Sarah being tastefully homosexual is like, who cares? It's a big, fat nothing burger.

[SeranaUser]

I'm a male gamer with a male character I've been playing for a while. Mostly I don't want to start over because it took me a while to get all the stealth melee (hits? kills?) for one of the perks.

My interest in NSFW mods is more to play a powerful male character than a weak victim female one (though I know the latter can have the bigger NSFW mod scene).

But from my playing experience, Sarah is mostly straight with hints (not definitive) of a bi past, rather than overwhelmingly lesbian. Just on the tomboyish side.

Are others mostly playing female characters?

[SleepyNinja]

20 hours ago, SeranaUser said:

I'm a male gamer with a male character I've been playing for a while. Mostly I don't want to start over because it took me a while to get all the stealth melee (hits? kills?) for one of the perks.

My interest in NSFW mods is more to play a powerful male character than a weak victim female one (though I know the latter can have the bigger NSFW mod scene).

But from my playing experience, Sarah is mostly straight with hints (not definitive) of a bi past, rather than overwhelmingly lesbian. Just on the tomboyish side.

Are others mostly playing female characters?

I started off as a female character to continue my Fallout 4 mindset of a single mother trying not to get fucked by the wasteland, but then once I realized that majority of the game is female. I thought to myself "wait a minute....If most of the game is female, it makes more sense to be male." Because now you get a haram of chicks. Like everybody complaining that all the females are girl bosses don't even see the male power fantasy here if done right by modders.

 

 Granted everybody is valid in their reasoning of girl bosses in the game. But I have a different mindset when it comes for NSFW content. 😉

[Djlegends]

On 11/2/2024 at 10:12 AM, DIYDeath said:

Exactly. You want something that's actually woke? Let's talk about Vanguard and how they basically butchered Qunari lore to the point where they had embargos explicitly against that character's mission pre-release.

 

Barret and Sarah being tastefully homosexual is like, who cares? It's a big, fat nothing burger.

the pandering exists in SF but its nothing compare to Veilguard lol

[Djlegends]

if anything I applaud for bethesda to not shaming my ass if I have disagreements with the only non-binary follower

Edited November 4, 2024 by Djlegends

[sen4mi]

After rereading through these comments... I suspect one thing that throws people off is that Starfield heavily borrows from Traveler.

 

Starfield is not a Bethesda version of No Man's Sky or whatever. The fundamental design of Traveler was oriented towards scenarios, and the game itself could absorb a lot of those. (And the choices in the game tend to be about which scenarios you choose to play ... though there's some background "survival" play also that I think keeps some people going.)

 

Meanwhile, though, the modding scene for Bethesda games hasn't been oriented towards new quests. There have been some, of course, but most mods are oriented towards gear or visuals (though I guess there's also a lot of save games and character presets which presumably some people appreciate).

Edited November 7, 2024 by sen4mi

[SleepyNinja]

https://www.ign.com/articles/todd-howard-wondered-if-starfield-should-have-delayed-buggies-for-shattered-space

 

THIS....

 

This is it right here, is why Starfield will forever be slop and any future RPG by Bethesda is slop.....I'm actually dumbfounded. This line of reasoning, "people have negative thoughts of the DLC? Darn if ONLY we charged them for the buggies, I'm pretty sure we would of had a positive reaction." 

 

HAHAHAHAHAHA I've gone mad bruh, this is the clearest sign of how Bethesda views you, yes you and me and everyone between. They view you as the slop eater of the elder scrolls, the slop eater of the wasteland and the slop eater of the stars. They think everyone enjoys their slop like it's a 5 star cuisine. Yet it's the kind of slop I wouldn't even feed my dog. 

 

The buggies is why you think Shittard Space was slop to most people Todd? The buggies was just a means to travel your slop while simultaneously also being slop. I can't with this company......But.....I blame myself for enjoying their slop. It's like squidward who openingly tells everyone he hates crabby patties but deep down craves that shit like it's the best food you ever witnessed in your life.

 

Bethesda peaked for me with Fallout 4 and I should of stayed on there. Fallout 76 was the biggest hint to stay away from this company but the slop eaters on reddit was like "Noooooo broooooo Fallout 76 was Bethesdas B team!" They hated the game because it was cool but enjoyed that slop like it's the best Fallout game ever. Bunch of slop eatering posers.

 

Now Shitfield comes out and Todd is laughing to the bank, robbed us all blind and said "You like your fantasy and wasteland slop? Good because we made slop in space and we're going to gaslight the hell out of you for not enjoying your slop. But it doesn't matter we have your money now! Thanks for buying the 100 dollar edition of shitfield where we made you wait a whole year for the slop dlc. We knew you wouldn't protest about the wait either, because we know that with the 100 dollars it shows us that you love our slop the most. Just for that, we're putting paid mods back where we take most of the revenue, support your fellow slop eater and us again by buying our own paid slop, today!"

 

I swear as Bethesda fans it's time to admit we have slopholm syndrome because at this rate, the future of Bethesda is all SLOP.

Edited November 26, 2024 by SleepyNinja
Because of Slop

[nIn nIn nIn]

[AceofWind]

2 hours ago, SleepyNinja said:

blah blah blah

You gotta lay off of those 4chan memes, bro.

Edited November 26, 2024 by AceofWind

[snoopy102]

On 11/26/2024 at 1:18 AM, SleepyNinja said:

https://www.ign.com/articles/todd-howard-wondered-if-starfield-should-have-delayed-buggies-for-shattered-space

 

THIS....

 

This is it right here, is why Starfield will forever be slop and any future RPG by Bethesda is slop.....I'm actually dumbfounded. This line of reasoning, "people have negative thoughts of the DLC? Darn if ONLY we charged them for the buggies, I'm pretty sure we would of had a positive reaction." 

 

HAHAHAHAHAHA I've gone mad bruh, this is the clearest sign of how Bethesda views you, yes you and me and everyone between. They view you as the slop eater of the elder scrolls, the slop eater of the wasteland and the slop eater of the stars. They think everyone enjoys their slop like it's a 5 star cuisine. Yet it's the kind of slop I wouldn't even feed my dog. 

 

The buggies is why you think Shittard Space was slop to most people Todd? The buggies was just a means to travel your slop while simultaneously also being slop. I can't with this company......But.....I blame myself for enjoying their slop. It's like squidward who openingly tells everyone he hates crabby patties but deep down craves that shit like it's the best food you ever witnessed in your life.

 

Bethesda peaked for me with Fallout 4 and I should of stayed on there. Fallout 76 was the biggest hint to stay away from this company but the slop eaters on reddit was like "Noooooo broooooo Fallout 76 was Bethesdas B team!" They hated the game because it was cool but enjoyed that slop like it's the best Fallout game ever. Bunch of slop eatering posers.

 

Now Shitfield comes out and Todd is laughing to the bank, robbed us all blind and said "You like your fantasy and wasteland slop? Good because we made slop in space and we're going to gaslight the hell out of you for not enjoying your slop. But it doesn't matter we have your money now! Thanks for buying the 100 dollar edition of shitfield where we made you wait a whole year for the slop dlc. We knew you wouldn't protest about the wait either, because we know that with the 100 dollars it shows us that you love our slop the most. Just for that, we're putting paid mods back where we take most of the revenue, support your fellow slop eater and us again by buying our own paid slop, today!"

 

I swear as Bethesda fans it's time to admit we have slopholm syndrome because at this rate, the future of Bethesda is all SLOP.

 

No, not this. If they would have delayed buggies then the reply would have simply been "why is this in a PAID expansion instead of the base game ?" 

 

The problem is the limitation of the Creation engine which not only brought technical nuisances like loading screens galore but also (imho) caused such bad lore descisions like "let's make earth a barren world so we don't have to create Paris with the Eiffel tower or the Statue of Liberty in New York as explorable locations". 

 

So we ended up with humanity in space - and the largest settlements New Atlantis, Akila City or Neon literally feel smaller than the Imperial City in Oblivion - and get totally crushed by comptitors like "Night City" in CP2077. 

It was just a pile of bad writing and bad decisions. They could have made Earth a restricted area. No permit ? No entry. At least in that fashion "the second largest colony in the UEE" would not have been a hole on Mars with 3 dozend miners. And they would have kept the door open for future Earth.

The whole game just feels unfinished and underwhelming, that's the whole problem. You can add whatever DLC you like, if the game is "meh" then no DLC will be able to salvage that.

Edited November 27, 2024 by snoopy102

[infiniteone]

It remains to be seen, but more content/features can arrive with a combo of free updates plus DLC expansions. Try playing Fallout 4 or Skyrim without DLC, its not as good. Its possible they have the same plan. I would almost expect there to be sentient alien thing in the works, as well as other major cities/quest-lines, perhaps Earth has some deep underground bases? Who knows? I saw remarks its a "boring era in Space" currently? An alien invasion or similar scope could spice things up, cause rifts & collaborations between factions creating more potentials.

 

It is still kind of early, also sales were great, but sentiments were sour by some, perhaps they're spreading out DLC & expansions to wait out & remedy the negativity & refine future releases? Hard to know what internal pressures they had to contend with, hard to know what more is to come, until more time passes.

There's lots of free mods on bethesdas mod system, same as Skyrim/fallout, if people want to buy things, thats fine, most will not, but console players might, since they're a different breed of gamer perhaps? I dunno, ive not had a console since Gamecube😆 Will that extra budget help them refine & give more attention to the game? Perhaps? Regardless, I think there's room for both modding systems, in fact, it ultimately makes Nexus & LL appear even more excellent & rarefied in contrast,

The documentation thing is tough, but its already leaked? Didn't this also happen with past games? Maybe they're contractually bound with certain things, regardless, all the info eventually comes about by combined community efforts.

I only just got the game, but im excited to dig in & mod, I rarely if ever take other peoples word for things, & must do my own inspections lol, A great example is the absolute torrent of shitstorms & derisiveness about Fallout4, which ended up being by far the most popular, best selling, most modded game ever in the Fallout series.... That said, if Starfield if crap, then I wont bother with fallout5 or ES6, but I suspect its going to be better than some portray it to be, just like Fallout 4.

 

Ok I must stop rambling over coffee here lol...
 

[kziitd]

I don't remember why I'm a starborn. But I remember the archetype of my identity in Elder Scrolls or Fallout.
Just like the D&D fantasy framework and any Doomsday/Mad Max framework provided ideas for those 2 games and Beth was willing to refer to existing archetypes when making a game.
I did think before the game was released that it would also be based on those classic universe-themed movies/games.
I still don't understand what Todd described as Nasa punk, but I feel that he is very confident that what he likes will definitely be liked by users.
I now imagine that even if SF is a world/universe exactly like Dead Space, it will be more interesting than the current one.

[DamienVryce]

I wanted to like Starfield so much I bought at release, which for me is a big no-no.  I wanted to believe that, in spite of the example set by the later Fallout games, this one was going to be quality.  I wanted to have an awesome moddable Space Game, and spent a bunch of time fiddling with Skyrim mods to get a feel for Creation Kit (ugh) and Bethesda modding in general.

 

Starfield was such a fucking letdown that I haven't even finished it once.  It's not even installed anymore.  It was bland and ugly from the start, with worse graphics than the original Mass Effect which is like fifteen years old.  It plays like bad-fallout-in-space.  The starborn concept feels like a half-assed rehash of dragonborn, like a committee sat around and asked "when was the last time someone liked our stuff?  skyrim?  okay, let's do it like that!".

 

If only I'd had the good sense to stick to my guns and never, ever, buy a game at release, I could have dodged this one.  Maybe in ten years when they've released a bunch of paid DLC that un-fuck this dumpster fire, and include them in a single game-priced package, it could be a good buy.

[sen4mi]

On 10/11/2024 at 4:21 AM, Miauzi said:

 

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.

 

I think I understand, but I am not completely convinced by this:

1. Modders don't have any job. Well, except if they're getting paid. Paid modders have a job.
2. That said, 3d oceans and underwater combat Would Be Nice. But... yes... probably that will not happen for this game - pulling together the animations, sounds, terrain building, combat, itemization, quests, etc. is probably too much work for any modding team.
3. The space suit hazard mechanics are strange, and would make more sense if they were imposed on players not wearing a space suit (with some sort of encumbrance penalty to encourage that kind of choice).  So, yes, ... another game design choice which could have been done differently if only there had been people to work on making it happen.
4. However, ... in terms of hazard and risk: in real life "space ships" that land do so in a fully automated fashion - and there's no such thing as a non-crash landing on an arbitrary piece of dirt.
5. Though, also, I think the game engine could support some "flyover" mechanics. Not great visuals, but something. (A problem, though, is that the speed of the ships would have to be incredibly (and unrealistically) slow - maybe along the lines of how No Man's Sky does it, or maybe even slower - for this to be any fun. Among other problems.)
6. I am suspecting, also, that a significant number of the consumers of the modding community (and some modders) have become so hostile to Bethesda that they (the Bethesda people) are not sure how to cope. These days I am seeing lots of criticism and even mocking, without useful suggestions on how to improve the game, and very little discussion of how to make mods work. (I do see people working on mods, but... that seems to be mostly happening elsewhere.) So... I may not like their choices, and I can envision a different set of choices having been made, with better mods resulting, but maybe I understand some of the motivations? And, who knows... maybe they'll be able to create a modding community elsewhere, that eventually cranks out some good stuff? I dunno... I am not all that optimistic, but I guess it could happen.

 

[Miauzi]

Vor einer Stunde sagte sen4mi:

 

Ich glaube, ich verstehe, aber ich bin davon nicht ganz überzeugt:

1. Modder haben keinen Job. Na ja, es sei denn, sie werden bezahlt. Bezahlte Modder haben einen Job.
2. Allerdings wären 3D-Ozeane und Unterwasserkämpfe schön. Aber... ja... wahrscheinlich wird das bei diesem Spiel nicht passieren – die Animationen, Sounds, Geländeaufbau, Kämpfe, Itemisierung, Quests usw. zusammenzustellen ist wahrscheinlich zu viel Arbeit für jedes Modding-Team.
3. Die Gefahrenmechanismen für Raumanzüge sind seltsam und würden sinnvoller sein, wenn sie Spielern auferlegt würden, die keinen Raumanzug tragen (mit einer Art Belastungsstrafe, um diese Art von Wahl zu fördern). Also, ja, … eine weitere Entscheidung für das Spieldesign, die anders hätte umgesetzt werden können, wenn es nur Leute gegeben hätte, die daran gearbeitet hätten, sie umzusetzen.
4. Allerdings ... in Bezug auf Gefahr und Risiko: Im wirklichen Leben landen „Raumschiffe“ vollautomatisch – und eine Landung ohne Bruch auf einem beliebigen Stück Erde gibt es nicht.
5. Allerdings denke ich auch, dass die Spiel-Engine einige „Flyover“-Mechaniken unterstützen könnte. Keine großartige Optik, aber etwas. (Ein Problem besteht jedoch darin, dass die Geschwindigkeit der Schiffe unglaublich (und unrealistisch) langsam sein müsste – vielleicht ähnlich wie No Man's Sky, oder vielleicht sogar langsamer –, damit das Ganze Spaß macht. Unter anderem Probleme.)
6. Ich vermute auch, dass eine beträchtliche Anzahl der Verbraucher der Modding-Community (und einige Modder) Bethesda gegenüber so feindlich eingestellt sind, dass sie (die Bethesda-Leute) nicht sicher sind, wie sie damit umgehen sollen. Heutzutage erlebe ich viel Kritik und sogar Spott, ohne nützliche Vorschläge zur Verbesserung des Spiels und nur sehr wenige Diskussionen darüber, wie man Mods zum Funktionieren bringt. (Ich sehe zwar Leute, die an Mods arbeiten, aber... das scheint hauptsächlich woanders zu passieren.) Also... mir gefallen ihre Entscheidungen vielleicht nicht, und ich kann mir vorstellen, dass andere Entscheidungen getroffen wurden und daraus bessere Mods resultieren , aber vielleicht verstehe ich einige der Beweggründe? Und wer weiß ... vielleicht können sie anderswo eine Modding-Community gründen, die am Ende ein paar gute Sachen hervorbringt? Ich weiß nicht ... Ich bin nicht so optimistisch, aber ich denke, es könnte passieren.

 

 

At the moment, spaceships do not land on earth at all - they (the landing capsules) float towards the ground on parachutes... in the "West" they have to fall into the water - because the outstanding aerospace engineers have not managed to "copy" the ancient Soviet technology from the 1960s... which allows those from the "East" (Russians and Chinese) to ignite small braking rockets shortly before "impact" on the ground.

This was originally also planned for the "Draggon" capsule from SpaceX... but as you can see -> water landing.

 

So far only the space shuttles of the USA (SpaceShuttle) and the Soviet Union (Buran) have landed like an airplane... NASA usually did so via pilot and hand control - the Buran was landed automatically - because it was flown unmanned in the late 1980s.

 

No spaceship has ever landed on its engine jet - Mr Musk's "Big Fucking Rocket" is still in the unmanned test phase and has only crashed into the Indian Ocean so far... it doesn't have enough fuel for a single "rotation of the earth" - in other words, it can't get into a stable orbit.

 

So automatic landings of actual SPACESHIPS - as we know them from SF - are still -> FUTURE

 

The spaceships in the usual space games like "WingCommander" or "Elite" or "Empyrion" (which I've been playing with enthusiasm for a month now) or "StarField" are ultimately built like an "airplane" and are also maneuvered (flown) like that.

The player is the pilot - so manual landings are also part of the gaming experience ... some games (like "Elte" or "NoManSky" or "Empyrion") allow this too.

 

An automatic landing would also require a space cluster in a SF scenario ... in the "wild" - i.e. outside of such spaceports (without a flat surface) it will also have to be done manually.

 

I am a "child" of early space travel in the 1960s - I watched the moon landing with my father on TV

The Apollo 11 lander was manually placed by the astronauts because of a "CtD" of the computers ... they had to fly many meters horizontally over the moon's surface until they found a small area without large rocks.

And they had specifically chosen a flat area as a landing zone BEFOREHAND.

 

Now they want to land at the extremely rugged and mountainous South Pole ... with a 40 meter high tower of Rocket... only nobody has leveled a landing pad there... it will certainly NOT happen fully automatically.

 

---

 

Ultimately, I was never interested in underwater battles - exploration was the main focus... especially because it is already a task in the vanilla game.

You can't play the "Path of the Planet Explorer" at all - if you don't also scan the animal species living "in the sea"... without this part you will never get a complete data set about a planet with a biosphere!

How are you supposed to get experience points here at all - if part of the required mechanics don't even work.

 

 

[JouFox]

15 hours ago, Miauzi said:

 

 

 

Ultimately, I was never interested in underwater battles - exploration was the main focus... especially because it is already a task in the vanilla game.

You can't play the "Path of the Planet Explorer" at all - if you don't also scan the animal species living "in the sea"... without this part you will never get a complete data set about a planet with a biosphere!

How are you supposed to get experience points here at all - if part of the required mechanics don't even work.

 

 

You can land on the coast and scan the sea fauna. The oceans are actually three-dimensional, diving is simply disabled, although it is fully implemented in the game code.

[JouFox]

18 hours ago, sen4mi said:

 

I think I understand, but I am not completely convinced by this:

1. Modders don't have any job. Well, except if they're getting paid. Paid modders have a job.
2. That said, 3d oceans and underwater combat Would Be Nice. But... yes... probably that will not happen for this game - pulling together the animations, sounds, terrain building, combat, itemization, quests, etc. is probably too much work for any modding team.
3. The space suit hazard mechanics are strange, and would make more sense if they were imposed on players not wearing a space suit (with some sort of encumbrance penalty to encourage that kind of choice).  So, yes, ... another game design choice which could have been done differently if only there had been people to work on making it happen.
4. However, ... in terms of hazard and risk: in real life "space ships" that land do so in a fully automated fashion - and there's no such thing as a non-crash landing on an arbitrary piece of dirt.
5. Though, also, I think the game engine could support some "flyover" mechanics. Not great visuals, but something. (A problem, though, is that the speed of the ships would have to be incredibly (and unrealistically) slow - maybe along the lines of how No Man's Sky does it, or maybe even slower - for this to be any fun. Among other problems.)
6. I am suspecting, also, that a significant number of the consumers of the modding community (and some modders) have become so hostile to Bethesda that they (the Bethesda people) are not sure how to cope. These days I am seeing lots of criticism and even mocking, without useful suggestions on how to improve the game, and very little discussion of how to make mods work. (I do see people working on mods, but... that seems to be mostly happening elsewhere.) So... I may not like their choices, and I can envision a different set of choices having been made, with better mods resulting, but maybe I understand some of the motivations? And, who knows... maybe they'll be able to create a modding community elsewhere, that eventually cranks out some good stuff? I dunno... I am not all that optimistic, but I guess it could happen.

 

1. I agree

2. The oceans are already implemented in 3D, the working mechanics are already implemented in the game code and disabled. They will probably work on this part in the future, for example, some photos on Reddit show an amazing amount of detail.

3. The danger from the environment, as for me, is implemented normally, but not ideally (some effects are too overpowered and there is no full-fledged shelter recognition). Your suit protects from certain temperatures, but not from everything, it is worse from some things, better from others, and this is a game convention.

4. ХЗ

5. It is unlikely, unless you consider the interplanetary flight, which is implemented in the game and finished with the Astrogate mod.

6. Too much hate poured out on the game, someone expected that it would be the ultimate best space game connecting everything, but the game turned out to be Bethesda, with some changes that were EXPRESSLY discussed long before the release. But we believe in talking heads, and we didn't imagine everything! There is very little constructive criticism, and the hate train has become uncontrollable, and I have concerns that a trick like 76 may not work. I still hope that the developers will bring the game to a full-fledged state, and not throw it halfway, especially now when no matter what they do, game journalists will not like it. (And I understand its shortcomings as I played it myself, and it went well, although it is not ideal. Just do not expect too much from Bethesda in unknown lands)

MT used

[Miauzi]

Vor 1 Stunde sagte JouFox:

Sie können an der Küste landen und die Meeresfauna beobachten. Die Ozeane sind tatsächlich dreidimensional, das Tauchen ist einfach deaktiviert, obwohl es vollständig im Spielcode implementiert ist.

 

Nice suggestion... but completely out of touch with the "reality" of the game!

 

1) You can NOT land on the coast - only in a section of land with a coastal edge.

From there you first have to find the beach!

 

2) Once you get there - you stand on the edge of the shore and you realize -> the range of the scanner is not sufficient to examine the sea creatures

The hand scanner reaches a maximum of about 50 meters at the full "expansion level" (but you have to invest skill points).

But only a tiny fraction of the sea creatures are in the immediate vicinity of the shore... and if you are still at the beginning of "zoology" - you need 10 specimens!

 

[JouFox]

26 minutes ago, Miauzi said:

 

Nice suggestion... but completely out of touch with the "reality" of the game!

 

1) You can NOT land on the coast - only in a section of land with a coastal edge.

From there you first have to find the beach!

 

2) Once you get there - you stand on the edge of the shore and you realize -> the range of the scanner is not sufficient to examine the sea creatures

The hand scanner reaches a maximum of about 50 meters at the full "expansion level" (but you have to invest skill points).

But only a tiny fraction of the sea creatures are in the immediate vicinity of the shore... and if you are still at the beginning of "zoology" - you need 10 specimens!

 

Actually, it does, if we play the same game, or at least you played.

1. Yes, you land not on the coast, but next to it in a few minutes' walk, and with transport even faster. So, if you are too lazy to walk, you can not scan, as some species live in different biomes and not meet in the given one in which the player is.

2. You can swim up to them or use a firearm to kill from a distance, and this is protected in research. The main thing is to be able to use your head and a little imagination.

[Miauzi]

Vor 6 Stunden sagte JouFox:

Tatsächlich ist es so, wenn wir das gleiche Spiel spielen, oder wenn Sie es zumindest gespielt haben.

1. Ja, Sie landen nicht an der Küste, sondern in wenigen Gehminuten daneben, und mit dem Transport sogar noch schneller. Wenn Sie also zu faul zum Laufen sind, können Sie nicht scannen, da einige Arten in verschiedenen Biomen leben und sich nicht in dem Biom treffen, in dem sich der Spieler befindet.

2. Man kann auf sie zuschwimmen oder aus der Ferne mit einer Schusswaffe töten, was in der Forschung geschützt ist. Die Hauptsache ist, dass man seinen Kopf und ein wenig Fantasie einsetzen kann.

 

yeah yeah - apparently we are playing (or played) the same game... only the perception of the game seems to be completely different.

 

Swimming?

You can't swim - you can only "glide" on the 2D surface

 

You can do that - but it doesn't really make sense on quite a few planets - because something else in the game is completely broken -> the spacesuit

 

Its protective mechanism switches off for the most part on planets with an atmosphere... why is your companion suddenly walking next to you in his "street clothes"?

Now you are standing on the sand of the sea beach and everything is still fine... one step "into" the water... and you experience something:

- you suffer massive cold damage - at PLUS 10°C air temperature

- you suffer fatal radiation damage

- you suffer a fatal infection with bacteria

If you do not take immediate (medical) countermeasures... the trip "into" the sea is history!

The space suit is ultimately a purely ballistic armor... it does NOT offer protection against thermal damage or radiation, poisonous gases or germs!

And even in a vacuum, this suit cannot protect you from "poisoning" by an "argon" or "helium" smoker!

Yes - in this game, noble gases are -> toxic and penetrate the closed suit!

 

So, you're playing "super sniper" - what use is that to you if the carcass is 200 meters from the shore?

Oh yes - you "glide" on the 2D surface to there... the only problem is that it can also sink - and thus can often no longer be targeted with the scanner.

 

How did I finally do it?

After I tried all of your great suggestions a year ago and died countless times thanks to the broken mechanics of the space suit - I activated "God" mode on the last 17 of the 20 planets and flew HIGH ABOVE the 2D surface with the jetpack for my scans!

Is that in the spirit of clean and fair game mechanics?

Of course not - but I knew even then that this would never be fixed ... and so far I've been right!

 

---

 

A short walk to the beach from the loading area or just take the new beach buggy?

 

Well - I searched for and ultimately scanned the sea biomes on over 20 different planets - only in 2 cases could you see roughly where the beach might be from the landing area.

 

In 5 or 6 cases I had to move my player through very dense forest - which was also lined with steep rocks at the edge - so no buggy (if I had had one a year ago).

 

---

 

Ultimately, it's all too much bullshit all at once that is presented to a player in this game... SF is one thing - but if you throw all natural sciences "in the bin" ... well - that's all that such a "concoction" gets ->

 

[JouFox]

7 hours ago, Miauzi said:

 

yeah yeah - apparently we are playing (or played) the same game... only the perception of the game seems to be completely different.

 

Swimming?

You can't swim - you can only "glide" on the 2D surface

 

You can do that - but it doesn't really make sense on quite a few planets - because something else in the game is completely broken -> the spacesuit

 

Its protective mechanism switches off for the most part on planets with an atmosphere... why is your companion suddenly walking next to you in his "street clothes"?

Now you are standing on the sand of the sea beach and everything is still fine... one step "into" the water... and you experience something:

- you suffer massive cold damage - at PLUS 10°C air temperature

- you suffer fatal radiation damage

- you suffer a fatal infection with bacteria

If you do not take immediate (medical) countermeasures... the trip "into" the sea is history!

The space suit is ultimately a purely ballistic armor... it does NOT offer protection against thermal damage or radiation, poisonous gases or germs!

And even in a vacuum, this suit cannot protect you from "poisoning" by an "argon" or "helium" smoker!

Yes - in this game, noble gases are -> toxic and penetrate the closed suit!

 

So, you're playing "super sniper" - what use is that to you if the carcass is 200 meters from the shore?

Oh yes - you "glide" on the 2D surface to there... the only problem is that it can also sink - and thus can often no longer be targeted with the scanner.

 

How did I finally do it?

After I tried all of your great suggestions a year ago and died countless times thanks to the broken mechanics of the space suit - I activated "God" mode on the last 17 of the 20 planets and flew HIGH ABOVE the 2D surface with the jetpack for my scans!

Is that in the spirit of clean and fair game mechanics?

Of course not - but I knew even then that this would never be fixed ... and so far I've been right!

 

---

 

A short walk to the beach from the loading area or just take the new beach buggy?

 

Well - I searched for and ultimately scanned the sea biomes on over 20 different planets - only in 2 cases could you see roughly where the beach might be from the landing area.

 

In 5 or 6 cases I had to move my player through very dense forest - which was also lined with steep rocks at the edge - so no buggy (if I had had one a year ago).

 

---

 

Ultimately, it's all too much bullshit all at once that is presented to a player in this game... SF is one thing - but if you throw all natural sciences "in the bin" ... well - that's all that such a "concoction" gets ->

 

Well, it seems we play different games or perceive them differently. (We haven't forgotten how to enjoy what we have)

1. Swimming: once again for the especially gifted, yes you can't swim into the depths, this mechanic is simply disabled, but the ocean is a 3D surface, as if you try to set up an outpost it will go into the depths (although for logical reasons you can't set it up) Also in the game code and this is a generally proven fact there is this working mechanic with an implemented suffocation system. But all of it requires a lot of revision.

2. The suit and environment system doesn't work perfectly, but it's acceptable if you think about some moments as a game convention. But even so, it's not you that gets damaged, but the suit's protection, and then your health. But yes, the mechanics are partially broken when radiation breaks through everything. And yes, it protects from radiation, cold and all the other crap, it doesn't damage you right away, does it? And after a while, when the protection is depleted, it's essentially a standard defense mechanic.

3. Not all waters are dangerous, and you need to prepare for dangerous ones.

4. If you kill her, you automatically scan her, this is the first, the second is free experience, and the third is that the enemy in the new outposts with the UI turned off creates much more problems, and they can be 100 meters or more from the player. Install special attachments and sights and you will be happy.

5. Too long to walk? Well, I don’t know when the game was a walking simulator in which you had to walk 1k, then I don’t know, for me this is nothing. A strange harassment for the sake of harassment. If you don’t want to walk for a long time, then exploring the planets is definitely not worth it. You yourself are turning it into a walking simulator, although now this has been fixed with transport, but I played before it. And so that you don’t have to search, there is a map that everyone asked for so much, and you can put markers if necessary.

6. As a player, were you offered a lot of garbage? Then don't use it, it's at the level of Poi monotony, yes it's a problem, but it only appears when the player puts too much emphasis on them, and from the outside it seems like he's trying to get away from it. Why do something you don't like? The game provides many ways and options, this is secondary content that's not mandatory. Do it if you want, or don't. Of course you can object, but you showed your level of awareness when you talk about a 2D ocean, while its inhabitants can go deep. Doesn't it seem like something contradicts, if it were a 2D ocean, then the fish wouldn't go deep.

MT used.

[GoblinLover]

On 11/27/2024 at 4:46 AM, snoopy102 said:

 

No, not this. If they would have delayed buggies then the reply would have simply been "why is this in a PAID expansion instead of the base game ?" 

 

The problem is the limitation of the Creation engine which not only brought technical nuisances like loading screens galore but also (imho) caused such bad lore descisions like "let's make earth a barren world so we don't have to create Paris with the Eiffel tower or the Statue of Liberty in New York as explorable locations". 

 

So we ended up with humanity in space - and the largest settlements New Atlantis, Akila City or Neon literally feel smaller than the Imperial City in Oblivion - and get totally crushed by comptitors like "Night City" in CP2077. 

 

If they switch off the Creation Engine how would the modding scene cope? Other studios have been producing better RPGs for a while now but there's never been a modding scene for an RPG like Skyrim's before or since and the runner ups are other Creation Engine games. Maybe it's something I don't understand but if ES6 was a 9/10 game on UE5 would it have a big modding scene or would it be really hard to mod?

[Djlegends]

7 minutes ago, GoblinLover said:

If they switch off the Creation Engine how would the modding scene cope? Other studios have been producing better RPGs for a while now but there's never been a modding scene for an RPG like Skyrim's before or since and the runner ups are other Creation Engine games. Maybe it's something I don't understand but if ES6 was a 9/10 game on UE5 would it have a big modding scene or would it be really hard to mod?

it wouldn't since the Creation Engine has one of the best moddability unlike UE