• 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.

Starfield | Review Thread

What scores do you think StarfieId will get?

  • 40-45%

    Votes: 3 0.5%
  • 45-50%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 50-55%

    Votes: 1 0.2%
  • 55-60%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 60-65%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 65-70%

    Votes: 2 0.3%
  • 70-75%

    Votes: 5 0.8%
  • 75-80%

    Votes: 15 2.3%
  • 80-85%

    Votes: 81 12.5%
  • 85-90%

    Votes: 241 37.3%
  • 90-95%

    Votes: 243 37.6%
  • 95-100%

    Votes: 55 8.5%

  • Total voters
    646
  • Poll closed .

Raven117

Member
This comes down to a design issue probably relating to the Creation Engine. Maybe in 5 years those loads will feel a lot shorter and that will improve things, but it's not going to be patched out.
It just adds to the overall clunkiness of the game. Because of the lack of just open world wandering around, it feels you are engaging with the clunk far too often.

If they went with like 20 hand design planets…. Can fly between them and land…. That would have been all that’s required. For effs sakes…. The outer wilds did it.
 

Musilla

Member
JH0hCu4.gif
 

ShaiKhulud1989

Gold Member
At the end of the day, I think that Starfield actually deserved it's low 80's meta, because with my crazy schedule I won't stay in a game for 70 hours if it's shit. It's a game of supernova-level glaring issues, but with it's moments like zero-g and overall satisfying shootin'n'lootin' loop. I can't say that I've wasted my time.

But boy, I do hope that it will be slammed hard. Why? Bethesda, especially BGS with infinite MS pockets, do need a big shakedown to learn something. They need a punch in the bottom to actually change something in their tech and philosophy. Because honestly, I'm not worrying about Starfield. It's fine. But potential TES VI shenanigans scares me shitless.
 

ShaiKhulud1989

Gold Member
I think Bethesda needs a new creative lead. Todd Howard hasn’t kept up with advancements in the gaming industry and there’s various things in the game that just feel old.
I think it’s a lot more about Emil than Todd. Every game he leads is turning structurally into TES guilds. Every. Single. One.
 

M1987

Member
This is my first Bethesda game and it's pretty good,but the AI is completely embarrassing for a 2023 game,and I've seen better in 2010.It's annoying being in a gun fight and the enemy justs starts levitating through the air
 

Mephisto40

Member
Of all of the hype of the Zero G combat, I've played for 60 hours now, and have discovered a grand total of 1 location that had zero g movement in it

Also the game seem to be crashing more and more on my playthrough on xbox, I can't play for an hour now without the game crashing when I enter the menus
 
Last edited:

Tsaki

Member
Of all of the hype of the Zero G combat, I've played for 60 hours now, and have discovered a grand total of 1 location that had zero g movement in it

Also the game seem to be crashing more and more on my playthrough on xbox, I can't play for an hour now without the game crashing when I enter the menus
I did see at some reviews that the game is much more polished in the early part of the playthrough and it becomes buggier and less performant the more you play.
 
I have put about 50 hours in and I would give the game a solid 8/10. It reminds me alot of Destiny 1, objectively flawed but weirdly addictive to the point where I can't stop playing. I can see why somebody might not like it, as coming off TOTK which has a great tutorial, forcing players to engage with all its mechanics, basically experiencing 90% of the game in the first couple of hours, Starfield is the reverse and is almost schizophrenic in its structure. That's not good design. Should have been a smaller, more focused game without so much procedural nonsense. I think they cynically made a game to be played for a long time, sacrificing quality to an extent. However, I would still give it an 8 as it has worked on me.
 
Top Bottom