Gambit2483
Member
Which you can do if your focus on the main story/faction stuff...I'd rather play in an Olympic Sized Pool than a 300 mile puddle.
![Thinking face :thinking: 🤔](https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/7.0/png/unicode/64/1f914.png)
Which you can do if your focus on the main story/faction stuff...I'd rather play in an Olympic Sized Pool than a 300 mile puddle.
It's what happens when people get stuck in echo chambers. They start believing everyone thinks like them.Not everyone treats Reddit as an accurate representation of what a gaming fanbase feels.
8,168 upvotes doesn’t signify or corroborate anything in the grand scheme of people playing Starfield.
This probably applies to a lot of us, BUT given that you are the one ranting and mentioning your backlog of titles that are ready to be played, maybe you should play those?As an adult, I value my time. As a gamer, I also have a huge-ass backlog of titles ready to be played. So keeping it shorter and up to the point when designing your games is always appreciated.
Which you can do if your focus on the main story/faction stuff...![]()
I don't call walking/running for 10 minutes in one direction to find a small hut with one scientist sitting at table really compelling. Inventory management is also a huge turn off. I'm spending more time in menus than playing. Big meh.
See your point. The Exploration at its basis is weak, sure, but the storylines and substories seem to make up for that.Yes but in Skyrim and Fallout 4, if you're not focusing on the main story or faction stuff, you could just go explore that one world, and run into all sorts of wonders and interesting things. That seems to be to a lesser extent in Starfield. Both Skyrim and Fallout had one handcrafted world. The procedurally generate planets have created limitations to what they can do when you leave the cities, hop on to your ship, and just go explore and see what's out there.
I enjoy ES and Fallout games a lot, but lets face it. Not every plain, mountain or swamp needs shit every 30 second jog. And this even excludes all the fights, unmarked locations, and random shit that isn't big enough to get a location marker.I prefer this to every world having something on it
I haven't gotten near this far yet but I am the type who would find an out of the way hidden moon cave to build an outpost and stash shit
See your point. The Exploration at its basis is weak, sure, but the storylines and substories seem to make up for that.
You and everyone else come September 6th (including myself)So that's pretty much where whatever's left of my optimism lies. I'm hoping that the faction storylines, cities, and companions make up for the lackluster exploration.
Not high enoughStarfield's reception:
![]()
Yes but in Skyrim and Fallout 4, if you're not focusing on the main story or faction stuff, you could just go explore that one world, and run into all sorts of wonders and interesting things. That seems to be to a lesser extent in Starfield. Both Skyrim and Fallout had one handcrafted world. The procedurally generate planets have created limitations to what they can do when you leave the cities, hop on to your ship, and just go explore and see what's out there.
You know there's a user reception on those site too right ? How is that different from this thread ?The game sits at 87/88. It's reception is great.
The Metacritic user reviews don't unlock until scheduled release date. And at that time people who have never played the game will make the Metacritic user score as useless as it is for every other popular game. Steam user reviews don't unlock until then, either.You know there's a user reception on those site too right ? How is that different from this thread ?
You're missing the point. Stating that you shouldn't have a user opinion on the game because the media outlet review said it's good is kinda dumb . If it was the case they wouldn't bother to make a user review section. And most of the time in retrospective I find myself leaning more on the user review score than the media one.The Metacritic user reviews don't unlock until scheduled release date. And at that time people who have never played the game will make the Metacritic user score as useless as it is for every other popular game. Steam user reviews don't unlock until then, either.
The irony.My first experience with a Bethesda open world game was Oblivion and I thought it was shit when I first played it. Then, people kept pressing about the open world experience, so I gave it another shot and kind of forgot about it as other games pried my attention away around that time.
Then there was fallout 3, and everybody raved about it and after an hour or so of that, I was falling out of consciousness real quick. Still had no idea why people were so accepting of such bland experiences.
Then came Skyrim. This was it. This was the one, right? Granted, this held my attention a little better than the other two, but still, a very shallow experience that put me to sleep after a while.
After that, I would occasionally pop into streams where people played these games and realized one of the critical things I was doing 'wrong'. People loved looting in these games. They would just collect every damn fucking thing and I didn't care to spend my time doing that at all.
So when Fallout 4 came along, I thought, okay, this is finally going to be the one that grabs my attention all the way through. I know how to properly play these games now and even the aesthetic for this one speaks to me much better than the apocalyptic wasteland in Fallout 3.
And unsurprisingly, a few hours into the game, and it was just nope, nope, nope. That's it. Done with these. Never again.
I will say, I have been on and off with No Man's Sky, but even that ended with a disdain for these calorieless, flavourless experiences.
To a lesser degree, I would even throw BOTW/TOTK and Assassin's Creed games in the pile for good measure.
Freedom gets boring, real quick. Thank god for BG3.
The irony.
That's an option for any open world game. Going from main story mission to main story mission. I don't recall a open world game where the game forces the player to do side missions (at that point, it isn't a side mission). It's just nice to have the option to do so, instead of feeling constrained to the main story line.Lol, true. Though with BG3, you can play it very conventionally, if that makes any sense.
That's an option for any open world game. Going from main story mission to main story mission. I don't recall a open world game where the game forces the player to do side missions (at that point, it isn't a side mission). It's just nice to have the option to do so, instead of feeling constrained to the main story line.
Fuck the reviews, have you played it? I have, it's not goodWhat’s with these threads? Are people not seeing the reviews? What the fuck is going on here with this game. It’s like I’m in la la land where Im the only one seeing the reviews while everyone else’s is seeing 50s or 60s. It’s fuckin crazy…
I agree with this take completelyBetween Starfield and FF16, I think critics have engaged in some serious score inflation.
User scores are not open yet. And even if they were I've learned to always ignore them since you can post a score/review without proof of playing the game.You know there's a user reception on those site too right ? How is that different from this thread ?