GHG
Member
Probably he just orders a game watches some videos and than asks a refund
That's what I ended up wishing I did with cyberpunk after about 10 hours at launch.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Starfield xbox series Gameplay leaked
- Thread starter Bernoulli
- Start date
That's what I ended up wishing I did with cyberpunk after about 10 hours at launch.
Gudji
Member
Even mass effect andromeda did this better, crazy.
dotnotbot
Member
Last edited:
GymWolf
Gold Member
I honestly just hope with all my heart that the game is not gonna be a cakewalk from start to finish, this would be more devastating than any half assed or missing animation in the damn metro, at least for me.
If you can't make decent ia, at least put a LOT of enemies coming from everywhere that deal a fuckload of damage, artificial challenge is better than no challenge, please don't be another cyberpunk.
If you can't make decent ia, at least put a LOT of enemies coming from everywhere that deal a fuckload of damage, artificial challenge is better than no challenge, please don't be another cyberpunk.
Presumably it has difficulty levels.
Most mass market games on normal difficulty have been laughably easy to the point of making a mockery of the core gameplay for like 15+ years now.
I never ever play anything on normal.
Last edited:
GymWolf
Gold Member
Most games on hard\very hard are still cakewalks these days, having multiple modes usually means jack shit if you are god after 10-20 hours in a 100+ hours game.
Maybe i wasn't clear, let me re-phrase: i hope hard mode is actually hard and not a cakewalk like most hard modes in modern games.
At least starfield doesn't need to be completed once or multiple times to unlock hard mode (looking at you, ff16)
Last edited:
The internetz, sensation galore .. every game has rough spots
You don't like the hype ?
it's a Bethesda RPG, will fly of the shelves.This is what I was talking about earlier in the thread. You're gonna get a lot of this.
"But Star Citizen…."
The games engine is like over 25 years old at it's core, man. The game has been in development for 8 years or whatever too
And people are hyped because they think there's a good chance it will be a very good game. Not that it'll be the perfect technological marvel ultra realistic perfectly seamless space sim of all time.
They're hopeful for a great game.
Last edited:
Flutta
Banned
More like artifical hype. But yeah you prob right game will sell alot, don't believe alot of those buyers know what they are buying thoYou don't like the hype ?
. This game looks like a "full time job" rather than entertainment.
CherryFalls
Banned
My review ater 1000 hours unlocked all endings:
Disappointed and Lost in Space
I had been eagerly anticipating Starfield for years, hoping it would be the next great leap in space exploration games. Unfortunately, my excitement quickly turned into frustration and regret as I delved into this game. Starfield promised a universe of possibilities, but all I found was a universe of disappointment.
First off, the graphics are shockingly outdated. In an era where games are pushing the boundaries of realism and beauty, Starfield feels like a relic from a decade ago. The textures are muddy, the character models lack detail, and the environments are bland and repetitive. I had expected breathtaking vistas and awe-inspiring celestial bodies, but what I got was a collection of pixelated messes.
The gameplay mechanics are equally lackluster. The spaceship controls are clunky and unintuitive, making exploration a chore rather than a joy. Combat encounters are riddled with bugs, from enemies getting stuck in walls to weapons mysteriously malfunctioning mid-fight. It's clear that the developers rushed to release the game without properly refining these crucial aspects.
One of the biggest selling points was the promise of a dynamic and immersive open world. Sadly, the world of Starfield is anything but immersive. NPCs follow rigid patterns, utter repetitive lines of dialogue, and lack any depth or personality. The so-called "living, breathing universe" feels more like a lifeless cardboard cutout.
The story is convoluted and fails to captivate. I struggled to connect with the characters or care about their objectives. The plot twists felt forced and the dialogue was cringe-worthy at times, making it hard to take anything seriously. It's a shame, as a strong narrative could have salvaged some of the game's shortcomings.
Perhaps the most baffling aspect is the numerous technical glitches and crashes I encountered. It's as if the game wasn't thoroughly tested before release, leaving players to deal with constant freezes, crashes, and progress-wiping bugs. This level of unpolished gameplay is unacceptable in today's gaming landscape.
In conclusion, Starfield falls far short of the hype it generated. The outdated graphics, clunky gameplay, lack of immersion, weak story, and numerous technical issues make it a frustrating and unenjoyable experience. I cannot recommend this game to anyone in its current state. It's clear that the developers prioritized rushing the release over delivering a polished and engaging game. Save your money and your time, and steer clear of this interstellar disappointment.
4/10
Disappointed and Lost in Space
I had been eagerly anticipating Starfield for years, hoping it would be the next great leap in space exploration games. Unfortunately, my excitement quickly turned into frustration and regret as I delved into this game. Starfield promised a universe of possibilities, but all I found was a universe of disappointment.
First off, the graphics are shockingly outdated. In an era where games are pushing the boundaries of realism and beauty, Starfield feels like a relic from a decade ago. The textures are muddy, the character models lack detail, and the environments are bland and repetitive. I had expected breathtaking vistas and awe-inspiring celestial bodies, but what I got was a collection of pixelated messes.
The gameplay mechanics are equally lackluster. The spaceship controls are clunky and unintuitive, making exploration a chore rather than a joy. Combat encounters are riddled with bugs, from enemies getting stuck in walls to weapons mysteriously malfunctioning mid-fight. It's clear that the developers rushed to release the game without properly refining these crucial aspects.
One of the biggest selling points was the promise of a dynamic and immersive open world. Sadly, the world of Starfield is anything but immersive. NPCs follow rigid patterns, utter repetitive lines of dialogue, and lack any depth or personality. The so-called "living, breathing universe" feels more like a lifeless cardboard cutout.
The story is convoluted and fails to captivate. I struggled to connect with the characters or care about their objectives. The plot twists felt forced and the dialogue was cringe-worthy at times, making it hard to take anything seriously. It's a shame, as a strong narrative could have salvaged some of the game's shortcomings.
Perhaps the most baffling aspect is the numerous technical glitches and crashes I encountered. It's as if the game wasn't thoroughly tested before release, leaving players to deal with constant freezes, crashes, and progress-wiping bugs. This level of unpolished gameplay is unacceptable in today's gaming landscape.
In conclusion, Starfield falls far short of the hype it generated. The outdated graphics, clunky gameplay, lack of immersion, weak story, and numerous technical issues make it a frustrating and unenjoyable experience. I cannot recommend this game to anyone in its current state. It's clear that the developers prioritized rushing the release over delivering a polished and engaging game. Save your money and your time, and steer clear of this interstellar disappointment.
4/10
Last edited:
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Ill never forget when Alan Wake was launching on 360 and some early leakers got the game and took a picture of a texture on a harvester or something in a field and posted it and fanboys attacked the game all the way up until and after release. It was legit pathetic actions towards an exclusive game.
Looks like this will be no different, how many years later?
Looks like this will be no different, how many years later?
Last edited:
Flutta
Banned
Funny thing is SC has been in development longer than SF
.But yeah i get what you are saying. I will prob play it when the mod community makes the game look a tad bit better.
Last edited:
Flutta
Banned
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
More like artifical hype. But yeah you prob right game will sell alot, don't believe alot of those buyers know what they are buying tho
Artificial hype!
Funny thing is SC has been in development longer than SF
But yeah i get what you are saying. I will prob play it when the mod community makes the game look a tad bit better.
I'll give props to Bethesda for releasing an actual game that people can play.
Starcheif
Member
What would they be patching? Is this not just a decision from the developer on how fast travel works?I think they will patch it day 100
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
This is satire right?
Low Moral Fibre
Member
Starfield will look poor overall, have tons of jank and dated choices thanks to the engine but I guarantee it will be my most played game this and probably next year.
Look at BG3 - the graphics are very mediocre with laughable facial animations compared to some AAA cinematic games but compare it to something like Pillars of Eternity or the Pathfinder games and it looks like it's from 50 years in the future - if POE2 has 9/10 graphics for a CRPG then BG3 must be 20/10.
The genre Starfield is in is similar in that none of the games that have this level of scope have good graphics. You have arguably The Witcher 3 which has great environments but terrible animations then you are on to stuff like Elex or Gothic which all look considerably worse that Starfield does.
If anyone could make games like Bethesda then we would see tons of clones but the fact is we don't despite the fact they sell well and continue to sell well over multiple generations.
I do like the Ubisoft type open world games where there is much more limited scope, zero persistence in the world and most of the NPCs are no-clip (which let's face it is all the Sony open world games are just more polished) but they are essentially a different genre.
Look at BG3 - the graphics are very mediocre with laughable facial animations compared to some AAA cinematic games but compare it to something like Pillars of Eternity or the Pathfinder games and it looks like it's from 50 years in the future - if POE2 has 9/10 graphics for a CRPG then BG3 must be 20/10.
The genre Starfield is in is similar in that none of the games that have this level of scope have good graphics. You have arguably The Witcher 3 which has great environments but terrible animations then you are on to stuff like Elex or Gothic which all look considerably worse that Starfield does.
If anyone could make games like Bethesda then we would see tons of clones but the fact is we don't despite the fact they sell well and continue to sell well over multiple generations.
I do like the Ubisoft type open world games where there is much more limited scope, zero persistence in the world and most of the NPCs are no-clip (which let's face it is all the Sony open world games are just more polished) but they are essentially a different genre.
Last edited:
GymWolf
Gold Member
Miniclips do no favour to this game (except when they show the improved graphic and animations), this is the type of game that must be personally played.
Usually with bethesda is the sum of the parts more than how good those parts actually are.
Yeah of course there's all that.
On the other hand it's also fair to look at some stuff and say it looks a bit wonky. Or whatever. It's a matter of opinion.
The important thing is whether anything that people judge to look not to their pleasing in some way, whether that is actually detrimental to the game in a significant sense.
Because I've seen wonky animations but it would be silly, I feel, to claim that those animations will stop this from being a good game.
What's annoying is when people imply or explicitly claim that some issue they've spotted where something could be smoother or is not best-in-industry standard, means the game overall is going to be poor.
I've seen things I don't love. The engine shows its old roots. But I don't think anything I've seen indicates this couldn't be a great game.
Gudji
Member
It will look way better on the screen but yeah it seems its kinda of a mixed bag. The cities look incredible tho.
Flutta
Banned
Sure, but you can say that about alot of games.
After been playing games for a long time you build up a sense/feeling on how some games may turn out just by looking at some gameplay/trailers. Me personally i'm not easily impressed nowadays and from what i've seen this game looks like fallout in space with a NMS twist? If you liked either of those you def have blast.
Topher
Identifies as young
GymWolf
Gold Member
Dude i know, i'm just trying to be devil's advocate.
And for the record, i don't like neither of those 2, so i hope it's gonna be better than both
Flutta
Banned
Yeah def. I mean who doesn't like the idea of playing an RPG in space ffsDude i know, i'm just trying to be devil's advocate.
And for the record, i don't like neither of those 2, so i hope it's gonna be better than both
. Truth of the matter is i've been burned so many times with promises and hype that turned out to be nothing more than empty words. It's made me cautious and hesitant about jumping into anything new, you know?
Last edited:
DO NOT trust this review. Davy Jones is a joke and he lies for everything. He can't play games he's "hyped" (RE 4R, God of War Ragnarok):
- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.www.youtube.com
On the Last of Us PART II he did not play abby section and made a review still with a 10/10.
If you want I can translate this here:
Just trust someone that gives your preferred company / games good feedback or, in this case, 10/10.
8.5 is a good score!l btw!
Wildebeest
Member
Are all you hopeless controller fisted degenerates really going to be playing this exclusively in third person mode?
Last edited:
Bernoulli
M2 slut
depends on the animations in 3rd vs FPS
Lucifers Beard
Member
This looks awesome, these other 'reviews' must be trolling.This dude posted 2 hours and nobody liked his post?
I got more likes for posting a fucking ladder.
Shame gaffers, go and do your job
Starfield xbox series Gameplay leaked
This part is terrible Dunno what's worse: the water or cape physics.www.neogaf.com
Evil Calvin
Afraid of Boobs
I didn't see the direct.
SimTourist
Banned
This is the engine that can't do ladders, seamless interiors or vehicles.
Ogbert
Member
Maxwell Jacob Friedman
leads to fear. Fear leads to xbox.
Ah yea the one game where the gamers have to fix fhe product to be a 10, now imagine if we applies that to every single game. I also love Bathesda always has some sort of excuse "well its bathesda the shooting is suppose to be bad" "Well its bathesda the story is suppose to be"
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
No, controller degenerate here, first person most of the way.
Maybe just pop into third person to look at the character model customization. But mostly first person.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Gudji
Member
So far from the Davy review some stuff he doesn't like:
- amount of loading screens is insane most are fast but they're everywhere even when you're leaving the planet, it's very immersion breaking
- Bad facial animations compared to the rest of the game
- Bad or very basic AI, no challenge at all
- Lack of enemy variety, he said you'll be fighting mostly humans in space suits and there's some wild life in the planets but not that much (he mentioned he didn't get to explore all the planets in the game but yeah)
- Inventory management is a problem because they wanted to make it realistic and so you can't carry every item (guess its like previous bethesda games)
- Lack of map when you're in a planet or city. He says he talked to other people reviewing the game and they have the same complain, you actually get lost while in the cities
- Lack of tutorials for the majority of mechanics in the game (how to fast travel, how to modify ships, how to "lockpick", etc). Gives example that some games are very intuitive in this regard but starfield isn't one of them
- Says that for him the open world was not interesting to explore because of the map size (some maps are gigantic but they're very empty), also said that it's not a true open world game like we have in other games (I guess he's talking about the tile thing)
- There's no land vehicles in-game and you can't use the ship while in planets
- He says the ships are really impressive both exterior and interior but he didn't like the space combat at all
- At one point he had to travel to a star system and the game wouldn't let him go there from the fast travel menu because he hadn't discovered yet, so he travelled with the ship until he got there and then he still had to use the menu to enter (with a loading screen), he said there's probably another way of doing that but the game doesn't explain it
- Says he liked the missions of the game but that some people might think that they're kind of repetitive. The planet variety, different locations and characters helped easing that for him (states its the best part of the game)
- Says some skill tree stuff shouldn't be there (Guess he's talking about movement stuff like climbing ledges, improved jetpack, etc), he still liked the progression overall though
The other stuff must be really good if he gave it a 8.5 score.
- amount of loading screens is insane most are fast but they're everywhere even when you're leaving the planet, it's very immersion breaking
- Bad facial animations compared to the rest of the game
- Bad or very basic AI, no challenge at all
- Lack of enemy variety, he said you'll be fighting mostly humans in space suits and there's some wild life in the planets but not that much (he mentioned he didn't get to explore all the planets in the game but yeah)
- Inventory management is a problem because they wanted to make it realistic and so you can't carry every item (guess its like previous bethesda games)
- Lack of map when you're in a planet or city. He says he talked to other people reviewing the game and they have the same complain, you actually get lost while in the cities
- Lack of tutorials for the majority of mechanics in the game (how to fast travel, how to modify ships, how to "lockpick", etc). Gives example that some games are very intuitive in this regard but starfield isn't one of them
- Says that for him the open world was not interesting to explore because of the map size (some maps are gigantic but they're very empty), also said that it's not a true open world game like we have in other games (I guess he's talking about the tile thing)
- There's no land vehicles in-game and you can't use the ship while in planets
- He says the ships are really impressive both exterior and interior but he didn't like the space combat at all
- At one point he had to travel to a star system and the game wouldn't let him go there from the fast travel menu because he hadn't discovered yet, so he travelled with the ship until he got there and then he still had to use the menu to enter (with a loading screen), he said there's probably another way of doing that but the game doesn't explain it
- Says he liked the missions of the game but that some people might think that they're kind of repetitive. The planet variety, different locations and characters helped easing that for him (states its the best part of the game)
- Says some skill tree stuff shouldn't be there (Guess he's talking about movement stuff like climbing ledges, improved jetpack, etc), he still liked the progression overall though
The other stuff must be really good if he gave it a 8.5 score.
Last edited:
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
I forgave a lot in Skyrim due to the overall but even I would give it a 7/10 for me so this may line up with that.
Everyone should be ok if it's a 7-8 game.
It's concerning how many late ready to knight this game when there is some things shown now that say this may be about that score and there's nothing wrong with that.
I'm not a fan of more loading when it breaks the immersion but I'm more inclined to try this if some of the reviews are anything to go by.
Not the game of forever but that's ok.....I hope lol
For a guy who doesn't like Bethesda games and did spend the time to actually interact with many of Starfield's systems, 8.5 is a pretty great score.
Last edited:
Thick Thighs Save Lives
NeoGAF's Physical Games Advocate Extraordinaire
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Put some big ol' anime tiddies on the ground and then it'll be acceptable graphics.
Timberwolf25
Member
Gladd will be livestreaming it in about 30 minutes.
IDappa
Member
Just bought it 5 seconds ago, feel the same. I just cannot help but buy new games.... I think part of me wants to be in on the conversation, I want to get a feeling of it myself.Well shit, just bought the premium edition from cdkeys, i hate myself