• 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 .
Like I said, discounting a game, as all companies do this time of year, bad!

Giving the game away free with your console, amazing.

ron burgundy anchorman GIF


Also Starfield is $55 on the Xbox holiday sale. You’re making this big distinction about Spider-Man 2 bundles being to “get you in the system”, you’re already in the system if you’re shopping the Xbox store for discounted digital games.

When you obnoxiously mentioned Spider-Man and Mario, did you just forget Sony is literally giving the game away for free right now? Be better. This is absolute nonsense.

Yeah, I forgot about the best-selling game bundle on the market right now.... or the reality is that's a completely different situation.

Again, why isn't Spider-Man 2 discounted by itself? What is the key difference?

The big difference is Sony is using Spider-Man to grow its userbase while Microsoft is trying to sell as many units as possible for Starfield after the game disappointed in terms of performance. Which of these three games has entirely fallen off the charts? Where did Forza chart at all?

THAT is the reason why they're individually discounted, but I'll let you have the last word, you clearly don't care about the reality here.
 

BigLee74

Member
Fucking snore!

Imagine jumping on a review thread to try and diss a game getting a temporary 15% discount on its own digital store, during a Black Friday sale, 12 weeks after its release.

And then arguing about it.

😂

This game lives in the head!
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Again, why isn't Spider-Man 2 discounted by itself? What is the key difference?

One difference is the fact that Spider-man 2 was released just over a month ago whereas Starfield was released three months ago. Obviously the longer the game is on the market, the more likely it is to go on sale. I'm not going to try and draw any conclusions either way because it is just speculation.

Fucking snore!

Imagine jumping on a review thread to try and diss a game getting a temporary 15% discount on its own digital store,

It was discounted pretty much everywhere.
 
Last edited:

Bumblebeetuna

Gold Member
Yeah, I forgot about the best-selling game bundle on the market right now.... or the reality is that's a completely different situation.

Again, why isn't Spider-Man 2 discounted by itself? What is the key difference?

The big difference is Sony is using Spider-Man to grow its userbase while Microsoft is trying to sell as many units as possible for Starfield after the game disappointed in terms of performance. Which of these three games has entirely fallen off the charts? Where did Forza chart at all?

THAT is the reason why they're individually discounted, but I'll let you have the last word, you clearly don't care about the reality here.

Oh yeah I’m sure MS is livid about the sales.
Explains why it’s day one on GamePass. Also if it tanked on charts and MS is freaking out, why wait until the yearly holiday sale 😆 You sound like the one who needs a dose of reality.

I legitimately think you just forgot Sony is giving their game away. Have some dignity, friend.
 

clarky

Banned
I honestly feel like this could be another Cyberpunk 2077 situation, just not as severe but the game will get gradually better with more updates and the launch of their expansion.

Starfield launched in much better condition than CP they were not even remotely close.

But yeah id expect some of the critismisms to be addressed in the expansion.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
I honestly feel like this could be another Cyberpunk 2077 situation

Nah, I don't see anything in Starfield that is even remotely close to that situation.

For Starfield to even be in that ballpark, they would need to launch with no Ai regarding flight, no ship battles, zero customization (still gone from CP mind you) and then 3 years later be like, "ok so we figured out how to get people to shoot at you in ships"

Sir...nothing that released this year is in the ballpark of CP2077, I'd argue we've yet to get 1 game this generation that has released in such a horrid state as to miss entire core functions.

If GTA 6 released where you can't shoot out of your car and cops can't drive, then fuck, you got a solid argument lol Right now, CP2077 holds that crown and we don't have a replacement for that level of fuck ups.

I think of course Starfield will get better with updates, but its current state is a feature rich game already with lots of different elements and systems in place. So I think they can add more features, they can add a lot more elements, but its because they already have a sound base in the first place to build upon.

For example, if they add some massive mothership where a smaller ship can fly into, you already have elements of ship building and managing ships to make that make sense.

If they add some element of building space stations, they already have one of building bases on planets

It means they can properly add those ideas a bit more smoother as the concept and base of the game has some of those elements in place.


HOWEVER, you would not be able to just fucking on the fly add ship battles as some last minute feature.

So fuck all the missions that could have used that element ACTUALLY in the main game? So such a missing feature, even if added back would still make the game lessor cause its main missions didn't incorporate those elements. As in, the main story of Cyberpunk is not magically now add having a mission in the main story to run away from the cops or to do a drive by on this gang as a mission to send a message etc, cause it was added after the fact.


Starfield fans need not worry about any of that shit, they already have a game with a sound, solid base that anything additionally added on, supports the existing concept already established. Thus far, what I even want from Starfield sounds more like Starfield 2 type things anyway lol


I'm fine with what I'm currently playing and the more I play, the more I feel they did a good job with this concept. It is able to convey the thing they are seeking or aiming for imho and not too many features are missing that I feel the absence breaks the concept.

I expect to board ships and steal ships and I can
I expect to board space stations, vacant and inhabited and I can
I expect to mod ships and buy parts and a I can
I expect to join factions and do quest for them and I can
I expect to be able to buy homes and build bases and I can
I expected to able to manage a crew with different skills and I can.

Vast majority of what I expect and wanted from some Space single player RPG, was actually met and anything extra is merely a cherry on top.
 
Last edited:
I honestly feel like this could be another Cyberpunk 2077 situation, just not as severe but the game will get gradually better with more updates and the launch of their expansion.
I doubt it. Technically this game aint that bad at all and im even playing on XsX. Compared to CP2077 launch, Starfield is a masterpiece. What this game need is more unique content but even if you combined all the dev teams in the world, they would never be able to populate and hand craft missions for 1000s of planets. Main mission is good but its one big empty slot. They should of made the fuel system important so you woulnt just jump from system to system as you wish. It would of slowed down the pace and you would spend more time in each star. system, relying on docks and having to refuel before a big trip etc.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
What this game need is more unique content but even if you combined all the dev teams in the world, they would never be able to populate and hand craft missions for 1000s of planets.

I'm actually ok with most of the planets not having anything on them. I get why they went with that style, the game's concept and world about discovery, must truly have the player seek that out by really representing part of space the way it currently is. This means, in order to really have the player feel like they found something really amazing, it must be 1 out of 100 planets or something they find some really odd or unique thing.

We already have games where every world is "something" like Starfox or No Man Sky and I feel that style is fine for what they are trying to convey, but I'm perfectly fine with the worlds literally having nothing, cause that literally is how real life actually is, MOST worlds will not have basic life or intelligent, it is something so rare, that its doubtful someone will come across it even if they spent their whole lives going thru hundreds of planets, so I'd argue 1 out of 100 is pretty fucking generous lol

So they are going for something a bit different and I respect them for really actually trying that. It will make people's bases and even the Mods or DLC made very different with so many planets that can used for something. Gamers tend to want this idea of everything they touch to be "something", but that isn't what real life is really like and it removes the ability to be surprised if there is this expectation that every where you go, will have "something" .

. They should of made the fuel system important so you woulnt just jump from system to system as you wish.

For a design aspect, I think its needed to be the way it currently is to allow the player to explore without much limitation....BUT, I'd love to see what you are talking about in a survival mode in the future.

Fallout 4's Survival mode was released like a year after, I'd love to see something like that in Starfield with what you are talking about.
 

Mephisto40

Member
I'm actually ok with most of the planets not having anything on them. I get why they went with that style, the game's concept and world about discovery, must truly have the player seek that out by really representing part of space the way it currently is. This means, in order to really have the player feel like they found something really amazing, it must be 1 out of 100 planets or something they find some really odd or unique thing.
There is only about 7 planets in the entire game with unique things on them, all the rest of them have the same 20 copy pasted locations on them
 

Zathalus

Member
Most companies don't, especially for successful games.
Almost every single Sony first party game gets a discount after 5 months. FF16 got a discount just 2 months after release date. Rift Apart got a discount less then 2 months after release date. Even sales juggernauts like CoD get discounts less then 2 months later.

Trying to make any statement about the success (or lack thereof) of Starfield using discounts (over a holiday season no less) is pointless.
 

Astray

Member
Maybe if you try to explain why Spider-Man 2 and Mario Wonder aren't individually discounted but Forza and Starfield are... Why is there no official Forza or Starfield bundle this holiday season?
This is the part that boggles me the most. Those games are likely the best system seller they have at the moment, so why not bundle them?

(Starfield should have got a Special Edition console too as a matter of fact, I got my brother a Starfield controller and it looks snazzy as fuck!).
 
Last edited:

Mephisto40

Member
This is the part that boggles me the most. Those games are likely the best system seller they have at the moment, so why not bundle them?

(Starfield should have got a Special Edition console too as a matter of fact, I got my brother a Starfield controller and it looks snazzy as fuck!).
Because they would much rather you paid for a gamepass subscription than giving you a game for free is the simple answer
 

Astray

Member
Because they would much rather you paid for a gamepass subscription than giving you a game for free is the simple answer
But it wouldn't be for free.

My Halo Infinite Special Edition XSX made me pay for the game too (Yes i got it from the store not through scalpers).

Starfield is a much-hyped game, it would have sold systems if they actually let it.
 

Mephisto40

Member
But it wouldn't be for free.

My Halo Infinite Special Edition XSX made me pay for the game too (Yes i got it from the store not through scalpers).

Starfield is a much-hyped game, it would have sold systems if they actually let it.
It's a much hyped game that failed to deliver, Starfield has not been a success
 

Bernardougf

Gold Member
This is the part that boggles me the most. Those games are likely the best system seller they have at the moment, so why not bundle them?

(Starfield should have got a Special Edition console too as a matter of fact, I got my brother a Starfield controller and it looks snazzy as fuck!).
They want to hook you win with gamepass ... so if they choose is better to give gamepass for free than the game itself ... they want you to taste that "free" gaming and maybe become one more gamepass zombie follower
 
Last edited:

Zathalus

Member
This is the part that boggles me the most. Those games are likely the best system seller they have at the moment, so why not bundle them?

(Starfield should have got a Special Edition console too as a matter of fact, I got my brother a Starfield controller and it looks snazzy as fuck!).
I think it because Microsoft would want you to sub to Gamepass.
 
If they bundle Starfield with the XSX, the person who buys it is drastically less likely to buy GamePass as a result.

Despite being a failure, it's the most played single player xbox game on the platform right now. Ultimately, the decision to drop the price is an interesting one, because it makes it easier to circumvent GamePass.

Among paid games, even with the discount though the game still won't sell. It's 95th on the top paid games on Xbox. So I think the discount was them trying to hedge their bets (unsuccessfully).

Among games priced 50-70 dollars, it is 8th.

The results for Forza are even more devastating. You would think there is some sort of boycott against it based on the results.
 

Buggy Loop

Member
Nah, I don't see anything in Starfield that is even remotely close to that situation.

For Starfield to even be in that ballpark, they would need to launch with no Ai regarding flight, no ship battles, zero customization (still gone from CP mind you) and then 3 years later be like, "ok so we figured out how to get people to shoot at you in ships"

Sir...nothing that released this year is in the ballpark of CP2077, I'd argue we've yet to get 1 game this generation that has released in such a horrid state as to miss entire core functions.

If GTA 6 released where you can't shoot out of your car and cops can't drive, then fuck, you got a solid argument lol Right now, CP2077 holds that crown and we don't have a replacement for that level of fuck ups.

I think of course Starfield will get better with updates, but its current state is a feature rich game already with lots of different elements and systems in place. So I think they can add more features, they can add a lot more elements, but its because they already have a sound base in the first place to build upon.

For example, if they add some massive mothership where a smaller ship can fly into, you already have elements of ship building and managing ships to make that make sense.

If they add some element of building space stations, they already have one of building bases on planets

It means they can properly add those ideas a bit more smoother as the concept and base of the game has some of those elements in place.


HOWEVER, you would not be able to just fucking on the fly add ship battles as some last minute feature.

So fuck all the missions that could have used that element ACTUALLY in the main game? So such a missing feature, even if added back would still make the game lessor cause its main missions didn't incorporate those elements. As in, the main story of Cyberpunk is not magically now add having a mission in the main story to run away from the cops or to do a drive by on this gang as a mission to send a message etc, cause it was added after the fact.


Starfield fans need not worry about any of that shit, they already have a game with a sound, solid base that anything additionally added on, supports the existing concept already established. Thus far, what I even want from Starfield sounds more like Starfield 2 type things anyway lol


I'm fine with what I'm currently playing and the more I play, the more I feel they did a good job with this concept. It is able to convey the thing they are seeking or aiming for imho and not too many features are missing that I feel the absence breaks the concept.

I expect to board ships and steal ships and I can
I expect to board space stations, vacant and inhabited and I can
I expect to mod ships and buy parts and a I can
I expect to join factions and do quest for them and I can
I expect to be able to buy homes and build bases and I can
I expected to able to manage a crew with different skills and I can.

Vast majority of what I expect and wanted from some Space single player RPG, was actually met and anything extra is merely a cherry on top.

Outside that they would need to basically destroy the engine and start from scratch to satisfy most of the fundamental criticism of the loading screens and planet traversal, it goes deeper than core game mechanics. The quests are just not fun. They're badly written. I'm not sure Bethesda can actually fix that. It's basically a new game at that point. Can a DLC be better written with better quests? Sure. But the base game? I think we're stuck with this.

I pretty much agree with all of this video.



Cyberpunk 2077 at least had a good foundation under all the missing features. Starfield is tied to creation engine and they don't have any talent for writing, which has been going on for a while, Fallout 3 vs Fallout New Vegas already kind of showcased it's not their strong side.

Peoples are triggered by the empty planet comment from the dev, I'm a LOT more triggered by this comment. "Most quests will also vary on your character's skills and decisions, massively changing the outcome of your playthrough" ...

What a load of BS. BG3 can claim that. Not Starfield. The outcome of every playthrough for one is deciding between you, one of the Starborn, or both of them. That's it. Nothing massive changes. Even the quests they direct you into 1 path even if they initially mirror many possibilities. It's one of the worst RPG in recent times.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
Cyberpunk 2077 at least had a good foundation under all the missing features. Starfield is tied to creation engine and they don't have any talent for writing
^ lol yea, thats not what I'm referring to...

Foundation as in a set number of features and systems that allow the concept to be fleshed out.

Based building
Ship building
Space battles
Boarding ships, stealing ships (ability to target certain parts of the ship like Grav drive)
Feature to add crew, manage them on ships, bases etc.

I'm not fucking talking about the engine or anyone's opinion on the engine...I'm talking about the actual features the game has to establish its universe is enough to build off of and its main missions can use those features to support the narrative and build future concepts from existing features.

ie Space Station building
Bigger ships that house smaller ships
etc. Because they have those features in the game, expanding on those ideas is a simpler task

I'm not even sure how CP2077 can have a good foundation, when the features missing are literally foundation type core elements.

Its why adding fucking cops and bad guys driving cars, doesn't magically make the game fold that into the main quest, they could have if it was there from the very start, from the very beginning as a CORE ELEMENT.

So adding that feature 3 years later, means its a hollow feature as the game narrative doesn't get to take advantage of it existing from the start

Having Space battles and ship building from the start in Starfield allows for them to have those missions where you must fight space Pirates, save some person, steal some ship, steal some parts, even giving parts to another ship....only to find out its an ambush lol THOSE fucking moments are why it makes sense to have an actual SOUND BASE.

Please understand what is being stated about this in regards to core design. This is not shit you can just add later on, its stuff that must be in the game from the start or you might as well remake the game or something, nothing in Starfield right now fits that in regards to anything really missing.
Outside that they would need to basically destroy the engine and start from scratch to satisfy most of the fundamental criticism of the loading screens and planet traversa

Sure, but to fit their concept, they are fine with loading screens and the Planet Traversal stuff is overrated. The core concept of what they are doing with this game can be done without it tbh.

It will be a great add for the sequel, but the general idea of what they are going for can still work without.

I think they could have solved that btw by just making the planets smaller when you land on them, making some massive planet imho is overrated and to keep the immersion, I would have elected to just make the planet a size that someone could travel around without any interruption.

Their games are more about what you do and

I'm fine with the Grav Jumps.

I'm fine with the loading to get to a planet.

I don't fucking care about any of the in-between as we already have No Man Sky and I doubt the best shit anyone telling you about that game is the merely landing on a planet lol That is a cool feature the first time, the rest of your enjoyment comes from what you are doing in the game after. So I get what Bethesda was going for the more I continue to play it.

What I'm not fine with that I feel should change to add more to the concept.

I'm not fine with landing on a planet and you are loaded miles away from the objective lol To me....this is pointless. I don't explore anything, I'm just mindlessly spending all this time going to this area when a big ass ship could have just LANDED ME THERE lol (Keep in mind, that is why I don't give a fucking about the real time planet entry crap, even if that was a feature in Starfield, chances are I fucking just opt to fast travel vs spending all this time flying to a planet to get to 1 place, I care about what I"m doing there lol)

I'm not fine with the loading from getting into a ship lol I feel that maybe could have been done in real time and maybe they could have did away with the weird ladder thing.


Welcome changes in a sequel, but not foundation breaking type missing elements.
 
Top Bottom