RoadHazard
Gold Member
Interiors can look great, but otherwise no. But more than how it looks, it doesn't seem very next-gen with how everything is segmented with load screens in-between. Load screens are very last gen.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Does Starfield feel "next gen" to you?
- Thread starter GetInTheRobot
- Start date
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
I got news for you brother, most people on here are old enough to purchase these things on their own and are probably already playing it or assessing Long play videos to make their own decisions because who wants to throw away money on Game pass or the full price of a game when it isn't up to their standard?
The difference is this is probably a game you enjoy, and you're perfectly entitled to that, but there's a lot of us that expect a lot more from this company that is not what it used to be. And so certain issues and things fly in the face of people just wanting to throw simple 8/9/10 scores when this feels less advanced in ways and in some takes steps forward.
It inherits a lot of the same issues from the past games and Bethesda weak storytelling or 10000 dildo simulation doesn't make up for the rest.
I tend more to 'no' but there are things I'm certainly missing in other games. For example the ultra detailed shadow maps that even cover the smallest and also dynamic/interactive objects. That's where many modern games fail and small objects feel less grounded. Starfield, without relying on RT shadows, somehow pulls it off. In those scenarios I do find it nextgen visually.
Everything else, from no free landing or starting procedures, to lots of loading screens and seperate instanced locations, and dumb companion and enemy AI, it doesn't feel "nextgen".
Everything else, from no free landing or starting procedures, to lots of loading screens and seperate instanced locations, and dumb companion and enemy AI, it doesn't feel "nextgen".
HeWhoWalks
Gold Member
Ah, cool cool! I can work with that! It is certainly a step up from their previous games in a f ew ways!
Destruction-1002
Member
Have you seen Elder scrolls 3: Morrowind on Original Xbox?
It struggle to run properly:
Kilau
Member
coolmast3r
Member
I see some people are confusing a game "looking next gen" with it "feeling next gen". Implementing modern rendering techniques does not make a game feel next-gen. It might visually seem next-gen due to aforementioned modern rendering techniques, but gameplay wise it may not offer anything next-gen at all. In other words, you can add ray tracing to Morrowind, sure, but would it make the game feel next gen?
OP should have put the word feel (not look) in capital letters in the thread title.
OP should have put the word feel (not look) in capital letters in the thread title.
Thaedolus
Gold Member
There’s nothing next gen about physics models that have been around forever that can just be scaled up via brute force processing power. I don’t get all these videos about “insane physics!!!!” because the number of objects has gone up. Again, what’s going on in TotK, working every time without glitches, feels next gen in comparison to a bunch of potatoes rolling out of a door or milk cartons bouncing around in zero g
That stuff is fun but the NPCs still stutter through walls
Elysion
Banned
While graphically it looks appropriate for the year 2023, structurally and in terms of gameplay this is a game that could’ve been done on PS3 and 360. It’s surprising how little Bethesda‘s rpgs have evolved since Oblivion. Though to be fair, this is true for many current games. I struggle to think of many games from the last ten years that couldn’t have been done on PS360.
SEGAvangelist
Gold Member
No way this scale could have been done on PS3/360. I can't imagine the cuts the game would have taken. Also, imagine the load times.
BacklashWave534
Member
Why does it matter. People pay to much attention to the marketing BS. The only thing that matters is wheter you enjoy the game or not.
coolmast3r
Member
Hmm, maybe because innovation is important?
Thaedolus
Gold Member
But the thing is, there are diminishing returns with the scale. Skyrim already felt huge, I don’t need Skyrim…but more!! I want shit like TotK where if you can imagine it can be done, the game lets you do it. Or BG3, pretty much the same thing where it just accounts for what you’ve done. THAT is what feels new and refreshing and immersive. Starfield, for all its scale, feels incredibly small due to the execution…it feels a lot like a Fallout mod. And hey, I like Fallout, and I like Starfield, but it’s some seriously old and tired stuff. I don’t mind old and tired stuff, I play Super Metroid every year, but let’s call it what it is.
Catphish
Member
So you don't want to play the game because other people have made negative posts on the internet about it?
Shubh_C63
Member
Any single aspect of a game or detailed 3d items can't advocate this game for a true Next Gen game.
more details. more NPCs. more huge ass map, more everything doesn't FEEL like a next gen game.
A true next gen game would be all of the above things while doing what RDR2 does, probably.
more details. more NPCs. more huge ass map, more everything doesn't FEEL like a next gen game.
A true next gen game would be all of the above things while doing what RDR2 does, probably.
SEGAvangelist
Gold Member
Opinions and all I guess. Starfield feels massive in scope to me and the setting puts it over the past Bethesda games, IMO. I think you could easily tell a more intimate space story a couple of generations ago (Mass Effect exists obviously), but I don't see how you get this game as is out during previous generations.
Thaedolus
Gold Member
I mean Daggerfall came out almost 30 years ago and it was too big for anyone to reasonably fully explore, but at some point that becomes totally pointless if there’s nothing interesting to do
SEGAvangelist
Gold Member
There is a ton of interesting stuff to do in Starfield, though. I understand the criticism of loading screens, but I'm still getting the emergent gameplay loop of previous Bethesda games.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
Thaedolus
Gold Member
and that’s my point…it’s the same loop as previous Bethesda games…which I like, so it’s fun to play some new stuff, but it really feels like the same thing I’ve played so many times. It doesn’t feel new or next gen, which was the original question. Well made? Big? Sure. New or exciting? Ehh not really
SEGAvangelist
Gold Member
What defines next gen to you? I'm really curious what you were expecting. No Man's Sky type travel and exploration for a Bethesda game feels very far out, IMO, so I don't see how that would be realistic. Is that what you were expecting?
BacklashWave534
Member
No problem. I'll make sure to not enjoy the game since it didn't meet your expectations.
coolmast3r
Member
No one says you are not allowed to enjoy what Starfield offers in terms of gameplay. And my expectations have nothing to do with the fact that Starfield doesn't offer anything next-gen.
Slicker than your average
Banned
Nope. Played the start and trying my hardest to ignore the piss poor performance and woeful graphics. It plays like any FPS shooter but badly .
Throw is some maps you click on and loading screens for every instance feels like a 360 era game wrapped in a prettier package but still stuck there and on a engine just as old.
Theres fun to be hard but there is nothing next gen about this. An over ambious title that's been oversold by the circus.
Throw is some maps you click on and loading screens for every instance feels like a 360 era game wrapped in a prettier package but still stuck there and on a engine just as old.
Theres fun to be hard but there is nothing next gen about this. An over ambious title that's been oversold by the circus.
SEGAvangelist
Gold Member
I'd like to see a DF video running this game spec'd to XB1 standards.
I'm pretty sure it's just Havok middleware anyway. We have had Havok demos with 1,000,000 rigid body objects on last gen hardware but people are trying hard to upsell something that's not even that impressive with 10,000 potatoes or whatever for this game as some kind of differentiator.
Last edited:
Slicker than your average
Banned
What does this even mean. Clearly you have no clue what next gen means in the context of the topic.
Thaedolus
Gold Member
I mean yeah that would feel a lot more like a leap for this kind of game vs another Bethesda RPG with a fresh coat of paint, which is literally what Starfield is. What feels next gen to me is something like BG3 or TotK where you want to do something, and the game just lets you do it without breaking. Or the game reacting to what you do realistically. Next gen isn’t running/quick traveling through a bunch of boring shit to the next quest marker.
sendit
Member
This is what tipped the scale for me. The game is massive in scope but felt small at the same time. Nothing really felt connected.
Lukaku's First Touch
Member
Haven't played it yet, but from what I saw this is hardly current gen. Nothing looks special about the game tbh.
TonyK
Member
That's totally true. It's next gen only the 30% of the time
March Climber
Member
Right…
Right again…
…and now you’re messing it up man. This is not word for word what you said lol.
I followed up ‘on their own track’ by comparing their own game Starfield to to their other own game Fallout 4. I even said on Bethesda’s terms. I didn’t compare Bethesda to anyone else but Bethesda, because that would be just as foolish as comparing Nintendo graphics to PS5 and XBSX. There is no misinterpretation here. You read way too deeply into a very straightforward statement because you thought I was implying Bethesda is above others in some way."On their own track" is hard to misinterpret and the subsequent replies tell me I was on the right track.
If it helps, let’s use music as a comparison. There are some singers who do things that are very off the wall compared to other singers. I consider the them to be on their own track. They will not follow trends and their sound can sometimes trail behind new musicians, but you can still see them evolving on a separate basis because they have their own sound that they stick with.
I think it’s fun
and it sparks conversation. I do think this was a wild misread though. I think too many people are jumping too quickly at posts simply wording things in a nice manner about Bethesda.
SEGAvangelist
Gold Member
Real question. What game is a next gen game? All the highest rated games this year could be scaled down to previous generations in a way that wouldn't reduce what makes them great.
EDIT: Having read the OP's description of "next-gen," how can the game not be seen as that?
EDIT: Having read the OP's description of "next-gen," how can the game not be seen as that?
Last edited:
ShadyAcshuns
Member
I wonder how many people who voted "no" haven't even played it? And is there any way to tell who they are?
HeWhoWalks
Gold Member
False. From the very beginning, my point was there are others who do things their peers don’t and vice versa (aka, unique to them). I made it clear multiple times what I was getting at.Right…
Right again…
…and now you’re messing it up man. This is not word for word what you said lol.
I followed up ‘on their own track’ by comparing their own game Starfield to to their other own game Fallout 4. I even said on Bethesda’s terms. I didn’t compare Bethesda to anyone else but Bethesda, because that would be just as foolish as comparing Nintendo graphics to PS5 and XBSX. There is no misinterpretation here. You read way too deeply into a very straightforward statement because you thought I was implying Bethesda is above others in some way.
If it helps, let’s use music as a comparison. There are some singers who do things that are very off the wall compared to other singers. I consider the them to be on their own track. They will not follow trends and their sound can sometimes trail behind new musicians, but you can still see them evolving on a separate basis because they have their own sound that they stick with.
I think it’s fun
And no, I don’t find it fun repeating myself, particularly as this has now reached the needless point of obtuse.
Last edited:
BootsLoader
Banned
LaughingStock
Member
It's a fun game. But it feels dated. If you're familiar with their engine you can see fallout and oblivion under the shiny new paint.
March Climber
Member
You edited your post right before I posted something
I’ll let it slide. Have fun man.
Destruction-1002
Member
2008? you think that this came could run on PS3 and X360?
There are games from 2008 on consoles
Metal Gear Solid 4
Grand Theft Auto 4
Far Cry 2
Last edited:
HeWhoWalks
Gold Member
Let what slide? The edit said basically the exact same thing? Only difference was I went back and got the precise words I used (since you seem so hung up on that). But the point of the post didn't change at all (ironic, given that's been one of your issues from the beginning).You edited your post right before I posted something
I’ll let it slide. Have fun man.
Edit: Maybe my approach has been harsh, and that's not really the intent, but I'm far more on the side of letting things be when they've reached that point. I respect your view, I simply don't agree. That's all.
Last edited:
