-
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.
It's 2023, the Bethesda defense shouldn't exist anymore
- Thread starter Gaiff
- Start date
deriks
4-Time GIF/Meme God
You can argue about the game having characters acting like robots and stuff, which it is, but the overall game is very pretty. Still, it's not like Starfield is getting the best complements ever. For the most part people just say that "it's a fine game" and that's it. Chill and play. I'm having a lot of fun
Guilty_AI
Member
Imagine having less sense than AI:
"ChatGPT, list out reasons why Starfield shouldn't be GOTY"
*list out reasons*
"HA HA HA LOOK GUYS, CHATGPT IS AGAINST SATRFIELD BEING GOTY"
coolmast3r
Member
Being critical of a game so that future releases don't repeat the same mistakes ≠ hating.
Get your head out of your ass for a second.
mejin
Member
They do have the money but this is not a guarantee they'll develop a goty. Starfield is a solid game and It is reviewed accordingly.
Bethesda eats like a top dog, but isn't one anymore.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
The Galileo.
It's a Class A ship meant for traversal/grav jumping and not combat, but I really like it.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
Just using neutral LUTs to remove color filters, that's it. Other than that it's just maxed out on PC w/ Auto HDR.
Topher
Gold Member
I keep seeing Auto HDR pop up but I've ignored it. I'll try it tonight.
Low Moral Fibre
Member
Tell some other devs to make games like Bethesda do then.
You can't spend 100 hours just messing about in 99% of 'open' world games these days as they are just linear story driven games with very little to do outside of that. Rockstar make great worlds but then artificially limit what you can do in them outside of the multiplayer modes as they want people spending money repeatedly (not that their games aren't crazy VFM for a single player gamer it's just annoying to have tons of content in multiplayer than would work just find in the single player story).
I spent this weekend literally just messing about in Starfield - a game that I already have 80 hours in. You can't do that in Sony or Ubisoft open world games without wanting to kill yourself from boredom. I double dipped on Spider-Man on PC thinking how great it would be to play at 4k 120fps and I was bored after 67 minutes according to Steam but I could install Skyrim today and just mess about all evening and be perfectly happy despite having played it for probably 500 hours.
NMS has that "I've just spent 50 hours messing about" type gameplay but that's all it has (it's still 100% worth playing especially after all the remedial work they have done).
Some people want a carefully crafted and curated experience and there are plenty of open world games that offer that but I want a game where you can break it in a million different ways by trying stupid stuff.
I will say that I would 100% love Bethesda to have competition as they would have to try much harder than they do but when your competition is devs like Piranha Bytes putting out stuff like Elex 2 which looks like an Xbox 360 game while running at 20fps on PS5 and XSX you just cut Bethesda some slack.
You can't spend 100 hours just messing about in 99% of 'open' world games these days as they are just linear story driven games with very little to do outside of that. Rockstar make great worlds but then artificially limit what you can do in them outside of the multiplayer modes as they want people spending money repeatedly (not that their games aren't crazy VFM for a single player gamer it's just annoying to have tons of content in multiplayer than would work just find in the single player story).
I spent this weekend literally just messing about in Starfield - a game that I already have 80 hours in. You can't do that in Sony or Ubisoft open world games without wanting to kill yourself from boredom. I double dipped on Spider-Man on PC thinking how great it would be to play at 4k 120fps and I was bored after 67 minutes according to Steam but I could install Skyrim today and just mess about all evening and be perfectly happy despite having played it for probably 500 hours.
NMS has that "I've just spent 50 hours messing about" type gameplay but that's all it has (it's still 100% worth playing especially after all the remedial work they have done).
Some people want a carefully crafted and curated experience and there are plenty of open world games that offer that but I want a game where you can break it in a million different ways by trying stupid stuff.
I will say that I would 100% love Bethesda to have competition as they would have to try much harder than they do but when your competition is devs like Piranha Bytes putting out stuff like Elex 2 which looks like an Xbox 360 game while running at 20fps on PS5 and XSX you just cut Bethesda some slack.
Horseganador
Member
Bethesda's defense will be stronger every day since it is owned by Xbox, the next Elders scrolls will have the same engine and the same errors and bugs as always and will be hyped just like Starfield, if it were multi the complaints would be much more.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Reizo Ryuu
Gold Member
Game is fun as hell and has managed to hold my attention for 80 hours, that's the only metric that matters in the end.
YeulEmeralda
Member
I predicted it would be Skyrim in space with pretty bad characters and underwhelming background lore.
Do you miss Bioware yet?
Do you miss Bioware yet?
Doctor Hades
Member
I am 95 hours into my Starfield playthrough on PC, using a number of mods that enhance the experience (neutral LUTs to get rid of the horrible washed out colour palette, DLSS3 frame generation which is really useful for Neon and a 60 fps UI), and I have been really enjoying the game...
... but... but... but...
... I will admit that this feels very much like a Bethesda Games Studio RPG through and through in terms of design and execution... oh and bugs. The game is also dated with constant loading screens, bland, static dialogue scenes with what appear to be Thunderbird puppets who animate in a lifeless way, barely moving their arms and faces, but just have higher polygon counts and exceptional lip-syncing over prior games. The game's graphics can vary wildly from excellent (textures and micro details) to mediocre (flat lighting that can make character faces look like they're made of plastic) to downright bad (much of the procedurally generated stuff is just bland with cut and paste content). It's a real mixed bag. There is definitely a sense, in my opinion anyway, that the Creation Engine is being pushed to its utmost limits here. The game feels lie it is ten years out of date because it took them ten years to make it.
Gameplay is fun, I won't deny that, particularly the combat, and the core gameplay loop of loot and levelling up is undoubtedly addictive. But it is also a very, very familiar game despite the setting. This feels very much like Fallout 4 in space; like this is an extension of that universe where people left earth to colonise the stars. The writing is fairly flat, there is a lot of dialogue, some of it incredibly dull, and plenty of characters but, as usual with BGS games, few are very memorable. It is also surprisingly lacking in immersion. It never feels like a real place but I think the constant loading screens, granted most are a few seconds, and the bugs and glitches are to blame for that. Both crop up so often and just serve as a reminder that I am playing a video game.
Oh yes, and the bugs and the jank, things BGS are famous for! The game starts off well enough but the longer I play it then the more issues and bugs I am encountering from NPCs getting stuck or violently juddering up and down, broken quests (such as the locked door preventing me from completing The Audition quest on Neon), a ship technician's worktop that sometimes disappears at the spaceport in Akila City (amusingly leaving the items on top of it floating in mid-air) and so on. These are all things that happened with previous BGS RPGs so I am not surprised to see them here. BGS claimed this is their most polished game to date but that isn't saying much and it seems like most of the polishing was for the first 20-30 hours of the game. Again, maybe the dated engine is to blame? The longer you play, the more stuff and missions you accumulate and the more people you meet then the more likely it is that something will break or not work properly?
Still, it is a good solid 8 out of 10 game for me. If it was a bit more innovative, a bit more seamless with less loading screens and a bit more cinematic with cutscenes and dialogue that were interesting to watch (something Baldur's Gate 3 managed with ease), oh and a bit less buggy, then this could have been a classic worthy of a 10. This game does leave me a bit concerned for Elder Scrolls 6 which apparently will also be using this engine... I think by the time that game comes out the traditional BGS gameplay will be considered retro!!!
... but... but... but...
... I will admit that this feels very much like a Bethesda Games Studio RPG through and through in terms of design and execution... oh and bugs. The game is also dated with constant loading screens, bland, static dialogue scenes with what appear to be Thunderbird puppets who animate in a lifeless way, barely moving their arms and faces, but just have higher polygon counts and exceptional lip-syncing over prior games. The game's graphics can vary wildly from excellent (textures and micro details) to mediocre (flat lighting that can make character faces look like they're made of plastic) to downright bad (much of the procedurally generated stuff is just bland with cut and paste content). It's a real mixed bag. There is definitely a sense, in my opinion anyway, that the Creation Engine is being pushed to its utmost limits here. The game feels lie it is ten years out of date because it took them ten years to make it.
Gameplay is fun, I won't deny that, particularly the combat, and the core gameplay loop of loot and levelling up is undoubtedly addictive. But it is also a very, very familiar game despite the setting. This feels very much like Fallout 4 in space; like this is an extension of that universe where people left earth to colonise the stars. The writing is fairly flat, there is a lot of dialogue, some of it incredibly dull, and plenty of characters but, as usual with BGS games, few are very memorable. It is also surprisingly lacking in immersion. It never feels like a real place but I think the constant loading screens, granted most are a few seconds, and the bugs and glitches are to blame for that. Both crop up so often and just serve as a reminder that I am playing a video game.
Oh yes, and the bugs and the jank, things BGS are famous for! The game starts off well enough but the longer I play it then the more issues and bugs I am encountering from NPCs getting stuck or violently juddering up and down, broken quests (such as the locked door preventing me from completing The Audition quest on Neon), a ship technician's worktop that sometimes disappears at the spaceport in Akila City (amusingly leaving the items on top of it floating in mid-air) and so on. These are all things that happened with previous BGS RPGs so I am not surprised to see them here. BGS claimed this is their most polished game to date but that isn't saying much and it seems like most of the polishing was for the first 20-30 hours of the game. Again, maybe the dated engine is to blame? The longer you play, the more stuff and missions you accumulate and the more people you meet then the more likely it is that something will break or not work properly?
Still, it is a good solid 8 out of 10 game for me. If it was a bit more innovative, a bit more seamless with less loading screens and a bit more cinematic with cutscenes and dialogue that were interesting to watch (something Baldur's Gate 3 managed with ease), oh and a bit less buggy, then this could have been a classic worthy of a 10. This game does leave me a bit concerned for Elder Scrolls 6 which apparently will also be using this engine... I think by the time that game comes out the traditional BGS gameplay will be considered retro!!!
poodaddy
Member
Game turns out to be a turd huh? Is that why everyone seems to be universally praising it outside of transparent idiots who are just trying to pick apart anything they can about it? If liking the game makes me a fanboy, then what am I gonna do about the Spider-Man 2 special edition I got preordered, seeing as how I'm obviously an Xbox fanboy right? I'd wager 95% of those spouting hyperbole about the game haven't even played it and are just hopping on a bandwagon.
Stay with me on this one as I'm about to get esoteric and far out, one can enjoy products independent of their competitive affiliations based on their own individual merit. Wow! What a concept right? I know it sounds weird bro, but trust me it is possible.
Me personally, I've got over a hundred hours in Starfield between PC and Xbox, (and I love it because I love all of Bethesda's games, but if their other stuff isn't your bag then you're not gonna like this either), and I'm gonna hundred percent Venom's big black 19 inches here soon, because I'm of the mental capacity to enjoy multiple works from different camps. Life's good man, you're welcome to join when you're able, but first you gotta let go of hyperbole and fanboyism.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
Tell us about your not good experience with the gunplay on PC with m+kb.
Destruction-1002
Member
You can't use the current year excuse for this.
Bethesda confirmed in 2018 that they will use the creation engine for Starfield
Being 2018 or 2023, doesn't mean that some people will change, they are the same
Bethesda confirmed in 2018 that they will use the creation engine for Starfield
Being 2018 or 2023, doesn't mean that some people will change, they are the same
Last edited:
Doctor Hades
Member
Oh and I forgot to mention how despite this game having a huge star map with hundreds if not thousands of planets to visit that this galaxy actually feels surprisingly small in scale because there are only a handful of cities and settlements (all connected via fast travel). Only a handful of planets have a city and then there is only one with the rest of the content being procedurally generated (boring!) with recycled bases, caves, structures and buildings ad nauseum. It wouldn't be so bad if they were randomised but BGS took the laziest option here and basically cut and paste the exact same building, item and enemy placements over and over again on different planets. It is hard to know where I have been at times because I keep coming across the same old bases and enemies. This really is the worst possible design for any game and impairs any sense of immersion it might have had. Why should I bother exploring if everything I find it what I have already seen numerous times before?
nemiroff
Gold Member
It's a good thing it has both good graphics and solid gunplay then - in addition to being a full-blooded Bethesda RPG. So IDK what you're on about.
My issue with Starfield is that I wish it had a more "seamless" feel. I did not expect it to have that many loading screens.
My issue with Starfield is that I wish it had a more "seamless" feel. I did not expect it to have that many loading screens.
Last edited:
The problem is the consistancy of all those talks.
Like OP is mentioning CDPR when they were literaly buried alive when their last game came out, not only because of the bugs everywhere, but because the game was accused of not even being a RPG (and it's true that in the narrative design, choices you can make, Cyberpunk feel more like a narrative game compared to even Starfield). And now suddenly they are a reference again in gaming (i'm not even saying that to shit on CDPR because i personally love Cyberpunk).
And yes there are new studios that rose while others are stagnating after being very high, that's just normal. Even RDR2 was accused of being creatively bankrupt despite its impressive aspects. Because truth be told even Starfield has more interesting gunfights than RDR2 (despite the better feeling of RDR2).
But yes RDR2 looks better than Starfield, and than any other game man. Until GTA 6.
Stop projecting expectations when, if we dig a little, people are never consistant about those. Are people saying that Mario Wonders should look 10 times better and be more innovative because it's Nintendo, it's 2023 and they make billions of profit ? All those pretext seem very fake to me. I'm not going to look over your shoulder for every game you like and defend on the internet and say that you defend a game because you're a fanboy and it's 2023 the devs should do better.
Are you implying that Bethesda are beating their meat doing nothing for 15 years ? That you can't see any difference between this game and Fallout 3 on technical aspects ? On the gameplay feeling ? If not, i don't know what you're trying to say. Starfield is just not an incredible game, i'm not going to cry about it, it's still very enjoyable in a lot of aspects.
Like OP is mentioning CDPR when they were literaly buried alive when their last game came out, not only because of the bugs everywhere, but because the game was accused of not even being a RPG (and it's true that in the narrative design, choices you can make, Cyberpunk feel more like a narrative game compared to even Starfield). And now suddenly they are a reference again in gaming (i'm not even saying that to shit on CDPR because i personally love Cyberpunk).
And yes there are new studios that rose while others are stagnating after being very high, that's just normal. Even RDR2 was accused of being creatively bankrupt despite its impressive aspects. Because truth be told even Starfield has more interesting gunfights than RDR2 (despite the better feeling of RDR2).
But yes RDR2 looks better than Starfield, and than any other game man. Until GTA 6.
Stop projecting expectations when, if we dig a little, people are never consistant about those. Are people saying that Mario Wonders should look 10 times better and be more innovative because it's Nintendo, it's 2023 and they make billions of profit ? All those pretext seem very fake to me. I'm not going to look over your shoulder for every game you like and defend on the internet and say that you defend a game because you're a fanboy and it's 2023 the devs should do better.
Are you implying that Bethesda are beating their meat doing nothing for 15 years ? That you can't see any difference between this game and Fallout 3 on technical aspects ? On the gameplay feeling ? If not, i don't know what you're trying to say. Starfield is just not an incredible game, i'm not going to cry about it, it's still very enjoyable in a lot of aspects.
Last edited:
Team Andromeda
Member
He's typing like one. Also, I don't know what game he is playing to say RD2 looks better than Starfiled on console is pushing it a little and I find the combat wonderful.
It seems that Xbox has stolen a lot of people's thunder. So many were all set to bash XBox and say they can't handle a studio because Starfiled ships with so many bugs and dreadful performance
So now we need to bash the graphics *rollseyes*
Guilty_AI
Member
Honestly i think they just need to up their writing and characters. All the rest is passable for a rpg.
manlisten
Member
Starfield has pretty good gun play though.
Games of Today
Member
First, Cyber Punk really isn't even close to Starfield other than say, the gunplay. That game plays like Mafia 1. It's a mostly linear story with a branching narrative that can result in multiple endings, surrounded by graphically intense open world. And that's about it. Since launch it hasn't really been an RPG game in the slightest outside of maybe upgrading your characters hacking abilities.
Second, Red Dead 2 looks incredible but what can you do in it? Literally story missions, side missions, hunting, camping. That's it. No branching dialogue. No choices other than acting maybe good or maybe bad. The only really thing it does better is random NPC interaction. Starfield has much to be desired in that regard.
Third, you're using Naughty Dog as a comparison? Is that a joke? Why would anyone ever compare Starfield to a Naughty Dog game. They make linear, extremely focused, high fidelity experiences and that's why their games, look, sound and play the way they do.
Starfield is a Bethesda game. Stop trying to make it something it isn't. And I'm telling you right now that Elder Scrolls 6 is going to look very close to this game just slightly better. So don't blow your pants out dreaming of a ES game with Naughty Dog graphics LOL.
Ammogeddon
Member
I think many people that are playing Starfield would agree that it has its shortcomings, but it doesn’t stop it being a good game overall.
I don’t think that’s defending it or letting BGS off the hook.
I’m seeing more posts about how shit the game and barely any posts rallying to defend it.
If you want validation, you’re right, they need to do better. BGS oversold the product and I’m disappointed by some elements of the game.
Right, I’m off to sink a few more hours into it.
I don’t think that’s defending it or letting BGS off the hook.
I’m seeing more posts about how shit the game and barely any posts rallying to defend it.
If you want validation, you’re right, they need to do better. BGS oversold the product and I’m disappointed by some elements of the game.
Right, I’m off to sink a few more hours into it.
R6Rider
Gold Member
I laugh every time I see someone say the game has good gunplay or worse, good AI.
Someone was even claiming the AI gets better on higher difficulties.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
Yet Skyrim and Fallout 3/4 have much better AI.
ChoosableOne
ChoosableAll
Don't crouch near NPCs and you will be fine. AI could be so much better though.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
The fact that there are people bring up Cyberpunk shows its more about "owning Tood Howard" than having a real good faith discussion, it feels that the NMA and RPGCodex opinions started to spread around the mainstream and ever since Fallout 4 came out you have these youtubers saying that BGS never made a good game at all except for Morrowind.
DragonNCM
Member
If you want better graphics in your games and if you want boring quests like killing 10 rabbits so you level up your character don't play Bethesda games. I don't know why people bitching about Starfield when they know exactly that game will be Fallout in space +/- some things. Stop complaining about loadings.....you do realize that everything what you do in the world ( in all fucking galaxy) every planet, every outpost, every container every fucking object will stay in that world forever. No one & I mean no one from developers till today have done something in their games on this scale. Starfield has flows but overall gameplay & fun factor in the game is damn satisfying.
R6Rider
Gold Member
LMAO these are the videos that always get passed around. Not impressed by high leveled characters taking on level 2-6 enemies all while still showing the awful AI.
This is bog standard gunplay made to look good.
Not to mention the horrible weapon variety in which there are over 30 "ballistic" weapons and less than 10 in the other gun categories combined (including the arc welder and cutter).
Last edited:
MiguelItUp
Member
Fortunately you can just not play Bethesda games if you choose not to. But I think it's clear that they have a lot of folks that enjoy their games for a variety of reasons. Regardless if they're "good" or "great".
Starfield is great for some, good for others. It's not a bad game by any means. I really don't understand the dramatic negative reaction it received.
Starfield is great for some, good for others. It's not a bad game by any means. I really don't understand the dramatic negative reaction it received.
Last edited:
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
Last edited:
manlisten
Member
Exactly. I'm at 80 hours, haven't completed any of the faction quests yet nor the main story and I'm having a blast.
But please tell me more about a review score.
manlisten
Member
Fortunately you can just not play Bethesda games if you choose not to. But I think it's clear that they have a lot of folks that enjoy their games for a variety of reasons. Regardless if they're "good" or "great".
Starfield is great for some, good for others. It's not a bad game by any means. I really don't understand the dramatic negative reaction it received.
My understanding is some feel that MS and MS fans hyped it beyond what was ultimately delivered. The thing is, I wasn't there for any of it lol. Literally only discovered this game in June when they released the direct then forgot about it for 2 months. I'm digging it, it's scratching that Mass Effect itch for me real nice.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
I've been playing only 2 games for the past month. BG3 and Starfield and I don't even own a PS5 (nor a Series X for that matter). I'm 99% a PC gamer but apparently I'm a Sony troll.
I'll keep playing because the game is indeed getting better but Bethesda really fumbles the ball at times. The ships and some interiors are among the most beautiful I've seen in a game but you also get visually questionable choices. I also still think there shouldn't be that much unused VRAM on a Series X assuming the profiling is similar to what we have on PC.
Buggy Loop
Member
Surely you've heard that it's not as good in gunplay as Doom? Invisible walls? And uh, oh the list goes on and on. Stop having fun!
AtomicStarving
Member
It's insane to me that Bethesda keeps making RPG games with romance, but their games have zero animations for any kinda of human interactions. None... characters can not hug, kiss, no sex scenes, even in custscenes.
Good thing mods did something in Skyrim lol. I feel Bethesda is stuck in the past in so many things. But still, their games are far from "bad" status, even Fallout 76, IMO.
Good thing mods did something in Skyrim lol. I feel Bethesda is stuck in the past in so many things. But still, their games are far from "bad" status, even Fallout 76, IMO.
Phase
Member
My complaints center around how poor the writing, world design, quest design, characters are. These aren't things that get fixed with time. I actually still had quite a bit of Bethesda optimism before this release, but now I don't even think those working there could produce a good ES game if their lives depended on it.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Oh no doubt. I have been bitching about virtually everything in the game from its downgraded planet terrain to its awful menu driven space exploration. there is A LOT to hate, but visually and the gunplay are actually vast improvements.
Id recommend you start doing some faction quests. They send you on some higher level quests that will award you some really good ships, powerful weapons, and armors. Do story missions until you get your first alternate ability. you will know what it is when you get it. Then go do some faction quests for better weapons. You will need to invest in the skill tree with medpacks to unlock weapon mod skills so go ahead and spend four points there early on.
JTCx
Member
It's called starfield
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
Point us what is bad about the gunplay in the 2 videos posted in the thread.
Mobilemofo
Member
I'm a playstation guy, and to me, starfield looks generally, very nice. The faces aren't the best but, they aren't game breaking. Long as people are having fun. That's the point.