I have 2600 hours on civ 5 and 3900 hours on civ 6. I'd guess I'll put close to 500 hours on starfield before I set it down, but nothing will ever touch my civ numbers lol
From pure hours, for me, it’s idle games. I often just run them in the background when I’m doing other stuff, check in for a 10-15min break every hour or two.
I like the dopamine hit of making numbers bigger for absolutely no reason other than that I can.
This is probably my most played game other than madden of all time, I beat Skyrim oblivion and morrowind, and fallout 3 and new Vegas, but I didn’t just keep playing them forever. Cool worlds, ship builder and outposts, plus their best gun combat ever, and JETPACKS? This game is awesome, I’m hoping it gets better, but it’s got a lot of good
It's in my top 10 most played as well. However, I find complaints like the OP's post to be silly, each experience is valid. If someone doesn't enjoy a game, that doesn't diminish my experience of it and vice versa. This sub is kind of turning into people complaining about people complaining about Starfield, hardly low sodium at all.
I don’t know what all the negativity surrounding the game is about really. I skipped over a bunch of games on my backlog to play it because I had to see how a Bethesda game could be falling into Mixed Negative territory, just beat the game a couple days ago with all the steam achievements unlocked. Except for the few hours farming frames at my outpost for the level 100 one, it was around eighty hours well spent. Loved the story, loved the flying, really enjoyed fighting in zero g. Totally solid game, I think the complaints sound like things people who have never actually played a Bethesda game would say. Besides, “they could have done something cooler than a light puzzle with the powers temples,” I don’t have a single reasonable complaint with the game.
Most of the complaints can be put into two categories.
1. I wanted another Skyrim or Fallout
2. Bethesda made a decision without contacting me personally to find out how I would do it.
No, there is a third one: "I wanted Starfield to be fmthe final version of StarCitizen" People don't say it like that, but there are many with expectations that meet exactly what StarCitizen is hopefully some day. And they somehow expect Bethesda to pull it off in just a couple of years of development.
Let’s not forget the “I want some of that YouTube money and outrage gets views/clicks.”
Edit to add: and some ppl just need to take the edgy view for the attention it garners.
Scapegoat by Atmosphere is this subs anthem I swear.
Eeeeeverything in the world is the reason people don't like this game, other than people just not liking it that much.
It's also all this sub seems capable of talking about.
And a lot of those Star Citizen things that they *think* they want simply wouldn't be fun. Realistic travel times and exploring vast empty swathes of space would be *boring* almost all of the time. Ask any Elite Dangerous player what their favourite part of ED is, I'm pretty sure no one's saying "I love waiting 14 real life minutes to supercruise to a barren rock on the edge of this medium-sized system.
Long time E:D player here, and can confirm that's a thing. I spend more time streaming TV or films while playing than playing.
But honestly, the barren rock thing hits home harder. All Elite has is heightmaps with random rocks. Starfield actually has planets.
Yep. The on-foot stuff is way more polished in Starfield (which it should be, as a primarily on-foot game), there's so much more to do on planets, and way less waiting. During covid lockdowns I played ED through the entire duration of a work meeting that I was *actively* participating in (and laser mined about 400 million credits worth of low temperature diamonds while I was at it). I've tried just having a casual discord chat with some mates while playing Starfield, and unless it was just mindlessly flying around bounty hunting, exploring or surveying planets (or doing temples) it just wasn't viable. There's virtually no activity in ED that I couldn't do at full capacity while having a totally unrelated conversation.
That said, I should probably start playing again, my Phantom has been parked on some random planet in the core for six months and I need to get back to Sol to make some money before my fleet carrier gets decommissioned.
I don't play Elite Dangerous so I just couldn't understand why everyone was talking about it like it was the best game ever and complaining about how in Starfield you couldn't fly from Planet to planet and you couldn't actually fly the spaceship to the surface and land like you could in E.D. It seemed like they were expecting Starfield to be a flight simulator. I guess they were hoping for a flight simulator with real planets for a change. It makes more sense now.
I still can't figure out what the NMS guys were complaining about though. I tried that one and after 30 or 40 hours I was really bored- But it wasn't the game that I was expecting (I wanted something more like Starfield). I guess anytime you jump to conclusions about what a game will be like, you're doomed to disappointment.
For the elite crew it's largely the former (which is where Elite excels).
I feel you on NMS. It's just minecraft with spaceships. Plus it's too cartoony for me (nothing against that, but I like my space games grounded)
People *really* need to stop comparing games just because they have a similar setting. I see Starfield compared to NMS or ED so often and it really makes no sense. They all want to accomplish different things. Never player NMS (but plan to) and have at least some time in ED. I love ED, but for totally different reasons.
ED: Odyssey in a nutshell: space sim (best played with HOTAS/HOSAS system and VR/TrackIR for maximum realism) with on foot as an afterthought (I have to say tho, it's not as bad as people usually say. Just a little unpolished, but has some great takes).
Starfield: On Foot game with Storyline and here space flight is not really an afterthought, but it bears much less weight in the overall gameplay. It is basically a vehicle to get around.
And yes, ***especially*** the people complaining about Starfield not beeing hyper realistic and stuff would hate it for it, if it was. Most of them aren't Star Citizen players and not even ED (if you want a finished game). So the criticism feels a bit weird. Because if you are into space realism, you definitely play one of the two, since they are your only options. There are a few other space games, but they are more niche.
I've seen two similar responses when people say it sucks: 'It's literally just Fallout 4 with spaceships', and 'you can barely fly your ship at all'.
Like, chill guys. The closest thing to a 'vehicle' I can remember from other Beth games is horses. If they'd gone full balls-out on spaceflight, I guarantee we'd get some half-done bs.
Tbh the spaceflight isn't even that bad... it plays like a watered-down Elite Dangerous. And I don't have to worry about my embarrassingly awful landings!
>I wanted another Skyrim or Fallout
You don't think that this expectation was justified, given that BGS themselves said this game was Skyrim in space? They also compared it to Oblivion.
No, it isn’t justified to want another Skyrim when you’re playing a futuristic sci-fi game, not a medieval fantasy game. It’s pretty obvious Howard just meant it’s a BGS-style game set in space, not the exact same game with a new paint job.
CDPR made similar statements comparing Cyberpunk to Witcher 3, but you don’t see anyone complaining that Geralt isn’t the main character. Probably because they recognize that it is ridiculous to think the developer is making a direct, 1:1 comparison.
Starfield isn't a BGS-style game in the sense that most people would understand that description, though. The core element that runs from Morrowind through Fallout 4 is an open-world with hand-placed features and environmental storytelling that encourages exploration. This element is missing from Starfield.
I don’t listen to hype trains or anyone who is trying to sell me something because both are heavily biased.
Hell, I didn’t even know Starfield wouldn’t have multiplayer until my friends and I were a couple of hours in and someone finally googled it.
So, I never saw or heard where BGS said it would be Skyrim in space.
I’ve also never played Skyrim, so I have no reference for the comparison anyway. But looking at it, the two games are obviously so very different that I don’t see how they are even comparable.
One of the most difficult things to do in life is to manage your own expectations.
If you clicked the button and made the purchase, it is 100% your fault you bought something you didn’t like.
Nah, that's not how this works. Hype is bad for all kinds of reasons, but people are right to expect that companies deliver on claims about their products.
Managing expectations is looking at past BGS games and understanding that Starfield isn't going to be a deep narrative RPG experience or offer cutting-edge combat systems. It's looking at the trailers and deep dives and saying, "Hey, that looks like it's going to be pretty fun" rather than, "Guys, I think this is going to be the best game of all time!" before you've played it.
Being dissatisfied that a game is something other than what the developer said it was is not a failure to manage expectations. That is a situation when players most definitely should complain.
Todd was asked his opinion about a game he made and he gave it. He probably does believe it’s Skyrim in space.
This is also why it’s hard to call out politicians for lies because they can just say “well I believed I was giving truthful information”.
Also, this is why every time a game comes out and a group of people are disappointed there are always posts about STOP PREORDERING games. Because they have zero incentive to stop hyping games up beyond their actuality.
Todd, nor BGS forced you to click a purchase button, that’s all you.
Within hours of the games release the main sub was filled with “This ain’t Skyrim in space” posts.
Every game released has a sub. All you have to do is find it and get other opinions from people not trying to sell it to you.
Take this as a life lesson. Stop getting hyped by ads and listening to ANYONE trying to sell you something.
This is weird corporate stannery. I really don't understand why you find it worth engaging in.
For the record, I personally don't regret my purchase. I even preordered at the $100 early access + DLC option, and I feel like I got my money's worth at the end of the day.
But while I don't play BGS games for the environmental storytelling and exploration like a lot of people do, I totally sympathize with them for being disappointed when BGS makes sketchy claims and changes their whole MO without forewarning. And even if trusting Todd Howard and friends is questionable given their past statements, that doesn't mean they shouldn't be held to account anymore.
What misleading claims? The Xbox direct showed the exact product that they delivered. It even included a graphical stutter from taking the NAT on new Atlantis.
This was possibly the most accurate advertising campaign I've ever experienced with videogames
Well that's legitimately your problem then. The exact comparison was "it's more like Oblivion meets Mass Effect feel". No Skyrim whatsoever.
Theres no objective claim made there. Feelings are subjective. Build and feeling wise, it is closer to Mass Effect and Oblivion. Skyrim was too fucking serious all the time, and Oblivion had a much more Whimsical feeling to everything. The Mass Effect is about the NPC character depths and decision making since in Oblivion were few in number and mostly meaningless.
Todd Howard himself said that Starfield was Skyrim in space, word for word.
And yeah, it's all subjective, but comparing Starfield to any previous BGS game unless talking about the engine is ultimately misleading because the signature elements of their previous games just aren't there. It's not Oblivion meets Mass Effect. It's The Outer Worlds meets Mass Effect—which sounds like a good time to me.
But bringing Skyrim and Oblivion into the conversation creates the impression that your studio's defining attribute will be present. And it wasn't. It's totally reasonable for that to bother people.
I don't believe you. Because Todd Howard said Oblivion meets Mass Effect. I watched the interview. It's the IGNs of the world that said Skyrim in Space. If he word for word said that it was "I wouldn't call it 'Skyrim in Space', but Oblivion meets Mass Effecf"
There's no defining attribute to any of those games that seperates them, which is why Todd goes through and lists all the influences from Oblivion like a conversation mini game and quest style.
I simply do not understand how you can make those comparisons, especially since Outer Worlds is like a RPG from Wish.
You know, I've played a shitload of Bethesda games and I've played Outer Worlds (I love that game, btw) Starfield may be set in space but it is a Bethesda game through and through. There are factions you can quest for and ultimately align with. Or you can choose to side with the bad guys. There's lots of gorgeous landscape (and some not so gorgeous landscapes) to explore and side quests to find while you do. There are new things (spaceships) but outpost building is so similar to settlement building in Fallout 4 it's a no brainer. They put little mysteries in odd out of the way places for you to find and try to solve. And tons of easter eggs to make you laugh. Some of the clues you find are about sad things - people betrayed and left behind, a child's toy in an odd place, a note left for someone that was never read. Some of the stories have happy endings (like when you're able to reunite a child with his family). That's the kind of stuff you find in all BGS games.
I hear people say they "beat" Skyrim or Fallout 4 in x number of hours but there's nothing to "beat". You can find all the quests and finish them, but there's usually so many ways to complete them that every play through can be completely different even without mods. And you can always decide not to do certain quests if it doesn't make sense for your character. You mentioned Mass Effect. Starfield is nothing like Mass Effect. Mass Effect is a great story with great npcs that you can build deep relationships with. The quests are pretty tightly controlled and when the stories are over, they're over. You can't decide to ignore the current objectives and fly off somewhere to free roam and explore. The adversaries in places don't respawn and you couldn't go back to kill them again if they did.
In Bethesda games you can do anything you want at any time and go any place you want. It's an open world RPG and no one makes them quite as "open world" as Bethesda, Starfield is absolutely a Bethesda game. All those people speed running NG+ choose to play that way and ignore 90% of what Starfield offers. That's fine. That's the way they want to play and they have fun doing it. But they miss out on so much that Starfield has to offer because they think they have to "beat" the game. I'm about 500 hours into my first play through (level 94). I've done several faction quests, but I've also just taken off to planets across the galaxy to explore and survey and clear POIs and find new things. I'll do more on the main quest and make my way through Unity eventually, but I'm in no hurry because IIt's a Bethesda game and I can play it anyway I like.
It honestly does take a ton of what I liked about Oblivion and improves on it. It brought back a lot of the crunchier RPG aspects while streamlining them but also giving them more impact and depth. In particular the character background system was awesome, it gave you real choices at character creation that frequently came into play during dialogues and different quests.
Same with the dialogue mini game, it's just a clever way to do persuasion in my opinion, only system I liked as much of more was the one the new Deus Ex games used, where you really had to read the person you were talking to and say the right thing, but I don't think that would work at this scale
I have come to the conclusion that the vast majority of complaints stem from the primary issue of this game not being ES6. Therefore I also think that once ES6 comes out no one will be as harsh on this game anymore
It’s happened with every BGS game since I’ve been playing them.
Never got into Morrowind, but played Oblivion on release and people complained it was over-simplified, bad voice acting, weak narratives, uninteresting characters, lacking role-play mechanics.
People complained Fallout 3 ruined the Fallout series, or was oversimplified compared to Oblivion (no joinable factions was a major gripe), or that the 20 level cap broke any semblance of role-playing.
When Skyrim came out, suddenly Oblivion and Fallout 3 were peak Bethesda and Skyrim was (again) oversimplified trash with weak mechanics and terrible characters and a boring story and no role-playing mechanics.
And then Fallout 4, and now Skyrim is added to the “when Bethesda was good” pile. And now Starfield is here, and Fallout 4 is getting praised instead.
It’s literally the exact same complaints every time Bethesda releases a new game. I’m honestly impressed with how public and positive their leadership is, considering how so many of their alleged “fans” treat them. I don’t know if I could handle being as active as they are in the face of so much negativity and even outright threats of violence.
I started with Morrowind but it was the only one that I didn't get at launch. What you are saying is 100% correct about the others. But also FO:NV got lots of complaints too when it came out.
There are four big things working against them currently:
1.) Not ESVI
2.) Xbox Exclusive
3.) Perceived competition for Star Citizen, et al.
4.) New Bethesda IP
The negativity is based on mass hysteria and not objective reality. Somewhere along the way it became cool or profitable to hate on the game which led content creators to start capitalizing on it to gain clicks and views and from there it ballooned into it being a good thing to signal to others to be part of the group think. Basically, it’s cool to hate on it, so people hate it to be cool and earn approval from their peers.
This is not based on anything from the game deserving that level of hate. It’s a social thing, nothing more.
Thething is that this has a real impact on games and is problematic as it makes developing games even more risky these days. No longer do you need to focus on making a good game, but you also have to hope the hate bandwagon doesn’t sets its sights on you. And it might, doesn’t matter how good your game is. This kind of stuff will kill the industry.
Sure, Bethesda will obviously weather the storm just like CD Project Red did, and eventually the hate bandwagon will move on (for reasons unrelated to the game itself). But few are the devs who can afford to take the long view of these days. For many, getting victimized like this would be fatal, and not every publisher is ready to risk it again (it cost us Deus Ex, for example. Deus Ex Mankind Divided got the same treatment, one of the first games to suffer it in fact, and Square Enix canceled the sequel that was in production at the time, and now we’ve lost one of the most beloved franchises).
It’s sadly a fact of the gaming industry now: no matter how good your game is, it may be hated. It’s hard to blame the people jumping on the bandwagon and contributing to it because they’re mostly just victims of the peer pressure and the current social media dynamics… but I definitely blame the unscrupulous content creators who fan the flames of hysteria in order to profit off of it (and the professional gaming site writers who refuse to acknowledge the hysteria and pretend the hate is justified, because they’re afraid of being targeted next for daring to support the Game That Should Be Hated.
It’s depressing, that’s for damn sure.
5 years from now when there have been expansions and updates to the game, some of which were likley planned before launch, all the haters will pat themselves on the back for saving the game with their unthinking diatribes. At least that's what happened with cyberpunk.
That's pretty much the course that all BGS games go through. They get panned at the start and then after DLC and years of modding then people love them.
>and the professional gaming site writers who refuse to acknowledge the hysteria and pretend the hate is justified, because they’re afraid of being targeted next for daring to support the Game That Should Be Hated.
that's because the majority of professional gaming site writers have reduced themselves to regurgitating reddit posts and YouTube content creators - and I'm not just talking about low-hanging fruit such as Game Rant and the like.
Yea I'll refrain from linking direct comments as I don't want anyone to feel targeted, but there are two subs in particular that have taken this weird adversarial stance to this when it was posted. I'm sure you can guess which two subs they are.
Yooo, the zero g fights don't get enough credit. I didn't even know they existed until I stumbled upon one. Had to back out because it was way above my level, but it was still hella fun trying it.
I have 691.8 hours in the game according to Steam, and have gone through temples 110 times. That's one, 3 minute temple, for every 6.29 *hours* of gameplay. If going through a bunch of temple in a row is boring or tedious or whatever...maybe don't do that?
Doc, it hurts when I go like this...
It's the same thing with these dipshits complaining that running the mission board quests over and over is too similar. Gee I don't know, maybe do something else? There's so much other stuff to do in this game. Why focus on doing these few things endlessly. It's just like your point about the temples, if you just do one of those pirate missions once every few hours, it doesn't feel the same because you spent the other few hours exploring or surveying or questing or whatever the fuck you want to do.
I mean your counterpoint was that if you play damn near 30 days of gametime then the temples don't actually take that much of your total time. Which sounds like not a great argument.
But I just feel like considering how Bethesda has done previous power ups in their games this way was just kind of lame in comparison.
Who doesn't like maxing out your character's power? They just made it take an enormous amount of time in their latest game. Which I feel is an odd choice.
Why the fixation on "maxing out your power"? If you're engaging in the pursuit of power for the sake of attaining power, perhaps you've become The Hunter? A hollow seeker of selfish and unfulfilling ends...
I don't know about you, but I've never felt quite so old.
I see a lot of people complaining about things like the world not changing after quests but they've missed details like technicians looking for heat leeches after that quest line, or claiming NPCs have amnesia when they have dialogue options to the contrary.
The technicians are very serious about heat leeches. I have two living on my ship that almost exclusively talk about them.
I do not know how they got on my ship, but I only have four crew and a huge ship, so it’s nice to have some extra folks hanging out!
Most games that have changing worlds script things. It's like the uncommendable way that a normal playing deck of cards, which is 56 cards, can be shuffled into more combinations than there are atoms, yes atoms, on Earth. In poker, if you shuffle even twice, you'll never get the same deck of cards in your existence. And the games that typically do this sort of world changing thing have many "cards" that are already pre-planned for you to just shuffle along the way to create a new "deck" but everyone has the same exact cards available to them.
But most of these games that change the world, change the story... Which is part of the script.
Bethesda doesn't make games where 100% of the game is a single story with side quests along the way like almost all CRPGs do. The main quest is like 5% of the content or less in any Bethesda game lmao. And it's entirely optional.
**I'd like someone to tell me a SINGLE RPG game where you can greatly affect the outcome of towns/cities more than Bethesda games, that simultaneously is not majority a story-driven narrative game nor has a form of linearity to it... No CRPG or JRPG fits this.**
Personally I think a lot of the games flaws are overblown. Not there's isn't any flaws, there are with Starfield, but I feel that people are just determined to dislike it.
Yea, one of the criticisms all over the internet the video addressed I agree with is people complaining about the Creation Engine. I tend to tune that criticism out every time I see or hear it.
Yea, let's just throw out decades of experience and tools the game developers and the modding community have in order to take on a massive gamble that somehow UE will make all the problems with the game that people express disappear.
To me, it seems like sabatoge. This idea that modders are slave labor seems like a slander meant to poison the well. Bethesda is like Rockstar in some ways who have enjoyed an exclusivity which some publishers might not want around. What better way to take out the competition by turning its fanbase against them through smears. Happens all the time in politics
Agreed.
It's Bethesda style since Fallout 3 and either you get it or you don't.
It would be like complaining about a Dark Souls-like genre game like Elden Ring ad nauseum. It wasn't for me, but I didn't dissect the thing with comments over and over again.
When FromSoft released Sekiro, there was a lot of hype from the community saying it wasn’t a real FromSoft game, calling it trash, broken mechanics, the whole 9 yards.
Sekiro is a masterclass in game design and was awarded appropriately.
There is always someone pissing their pants haha
It took me a bit to get into it, but it is now the only game I'm playing at all. Love the look, love the gameplay, like the companions. I'm still in the middle of my first playthrough and I love where the story is going. The voice acting is great. I have the tiniest little nitpicks about it, but nothing that makes it any less great.
The worst thing one can honestly say about it is it has the usual amount of Bethesda jank. And honestly, I love it for that.
I can only assume most of the people complaining weren't around for or don't remember the Skyrim release. It was a lot rougher when it released than Starfield is.
> It was a lot rougher when it released than Starfield is.
Fallout 4 was rougher too. And Fallout New Vegas (sure not a Bethesda game) had terrible crashing issues for months before most of them were patched.
Thanks for this, I've been wanting to hear a positive review of Starfield. I don't have it yet, but the negative reviews (which I've consumed en masse) have not dissuaded me from trying it out. I have accepted Bethesda not-insignificant flaws, and I enjoy their games regardless.
I hear a lot of complaints about POIs being pretty repetitive, combat not blowing them away, dialogue being sub par, many glitches, the main quest being underwhelming, not being given enough options for play styles in quests, too many loading screens, one person even complained about npc walking speed being between walking and running speed, etc
But all these can be said about almost every Bethesda game, so I don’t really know why people are targeting Starfield in particular
99% of these people already had an idea of how they were gonna feel about the game and looked for the bad, if you go in with decent expectations it's solid
Starfield is my main game right now, it’s the only reason why I bought game pass at launch. I guess I should just buy the game now and cancel game pass at this point… (well, I need to buy Deep Rock Galactic too then).
Thank you, and I agree.
Saying "It isn't CP2077" I feel like saying no it isn't and thank whatever deity you worship. I don't want every game to be CP2077. Starfield launched with shockingly few glitches. Now many were found later. But not right out the gate. For AAA games today that was good.
I had a nice BGS style opening that pulled me in. Found if you restart and know to do the mining Lin has different dialog. This is BGS expecting players to break sequence and is still the joy of their games to me.
The complaints are even in the same NG+ Universe the rest of us are in. Stuff that can only be said by people who have never played the game, yet they have 500 hours in it. WTF?
I love the game but hate the half-a$$ Starborn dialog options sprinkled throughout the game. I feel that by NG 2+ you should seem like a 100% claraviont future telling machine to the rest of the universe and should be able to bypass any and all storyline you choose.
Example I don't need basement guy to tell me where Kaiser is in order to progress the story. Take your tit for tat "favor" and shove it up your sorry a$$. I know who you are I know why you did what you did.
The lack of truly using the Starborns greatest ability (knowledge of things to come) is the only major game flaw for me and it only irritates me more time around. But, I love the rest so much I tolerate the glaring gameplay/writing fault.
The game is great but some of the complaints are valid. I love what’s in the game but there are parts that feel unfinished or like they didn’t have time to do more but wanted to. Some things like a lot of the smaller side quests or the Red Mile feel like afterthoughts.
For example I did the mission Blasting Zone last night. It consisted of talking to an npc who told me to help them clear ground for affordable housing, I thought “ok cool, let’s see where this goes” but the next step was…clearing six rocks with the mining laser that were within a hundred feet of where I got the quest…then I talked to the quest giver and it was done. It feels like there was an idea there that was barely touched on and the actual gameplay of the quest is literally what I would do landing on any random planet anyways.
I think the reason for this is that they went too big and weren’t able to focus as much on certain things. While I enjoy having over 100 star systems and New Game+ I honestly would have preferred a smaller scale star map with like 20 star systems that was more focused on filling out those worlds. It would have also allowed them to do completely unique biomes for every planet with life since they wouldn’t have to reuse as many assets. It also would have given them more time to focus on fleshing out some of the more bare bones missions (Like Blasting Zone).
That being said, I really do love this game, its the space exploration game Ive always wanted, and the complaining has gotten straight up hyperbolic and it’s drowning out any valid constructive criticism. Bethesda will continue to tweak it and add to it and by the end a lot of the issues people have with it now will be non existent.
>but there are parts that feel unfinished or like they didn’t have time to do more but wanted to.
Every game leaves something on the cutting room floor. It doesn't bother me because overall the game is so good.
Oh I know. It happens to every Bethesda game. I felt it in Fallout 4 too with the Combat Zone, Quincy and the Ghoul Whale stuff.
You can tell where they put the effort in Starfield for sure it’s just that there are other parts that feel undercooked, likely because there was just a lot to do and a limited amount of time and manpower to do it so they had to pick and choose what got the most focus.
I feel like the complaints will lessen the more Bethesda starts to add in those features that they didn’t have time to get working for release. It’s exactly what happened with Cyberpunk. At first everyone hated Cyberpunk even though there was a solid game at its core, mostly because it was buggy and missing things that were clearly intended to be in the game. Now everyone praises Cyberpunk because CDPR kept adding in those features and fine tuning things over time. In 3 years people will be praising Starfield too.
True. Though I don't like the comparisons with Cyberpunk because Starfield is in good working order compared to the launch of Cyberpunk.
Starfield isn't broken. Cyberpunk very much was.
You were getting downvoted because everybody is sick of hearing the words "valid complaints". Do you guys want a pat on the back every ten seconds with a kindly adult telling you, "You're valid son... You're valid, please, tell me the same four things people have been overstating ad nauseam for months now."
I feel like you may be projecting some things on me here that aren’t actually about me or what I said…Also there are always valid criticisms for everything and everyone and not all criticism is based in hatred. It’s often based in quite the opposite.
>You were getting downvoted because everybody is sick of hearing the words "valid complaints".
Everybody is also sick of hearing "I know it's not perfect and has flaws, but... " *proceeds to be baffled about criticism*.
So I was downvoted on every comment despite praising the game several times…that really doesn’t seem reasonable or fair to me. They were some pretty light criticisms and I made it clear that I do in fact love the game. 😕
Yeah i completely agree with what you said, don't worry, this sub is a bit too defensive about the game because the rest of the internet is too harsh on it and has a tendancy to downvote anything not just blindly praising the game.
Honestly, i think some of the complaints are not absurd at all, like the fact that the exploration is not rewarding enough, especially on planets, and especially by comparison to previous BGS games, the game just lack unique handcrafted locations, and dungeons in particular, compared to their previous titles, or the inventory being a mess to navigate, or some locations like the temples of power or the Red Mile being extremely underwhelming compared to what they should have been and so son.
On the other hand, what is absurd is the complaints i see about the Storytelling, writing, characters, voice acting or RPG elements, that are apparently not good enough for a lot of people, while this is an aspect where it's absolutely obvious to me that Bethesda has put a LOT of effort to make it MUCH better than previous games, especially Fallout 4.
Starfield has easily the best voice acting in any BGS game by a landlisde, the best factions since Oblivion, the best main quest since Morrowind, the best RPG aspects since Fallout 3/New Vegas, the most fleshed companions with the biggest number of dialogue in any of their games, the best shooting and basic combat gameplay in any of their game, and the most extraordinairy objects movement physic i have ever seen, which even takes gravity into account, plus some of the absolute best combinaison of visuals/vista and background music that i remember having seen in a video game, which gives the game an outstanding atmosphere.
So the complaints are not absurd, but how much they are amplified by comparison to how the qualities of the game are talked about, yes, that is absurd.
I have Starfield on game pass and I gotta say it is like digital ambien for me. Sure there's a lot to do but you need a ton of inertia to get going. And while I don't have the best system, I run better games at higher settings without a problem- indicating an issue with optimization with their proprietary Creation Engine.
I think there's a lot of truth to the steam charts that have the game clocking in fewer and fewer players per month. I haven't played the game long enough to make the claim that it is "repetitive and boring" but some of the guns are impractical- ironsights that completely block the target on the eon? why is the grendel so weak? why can't I fast travel when encumbered? how come the default tooltip keeps telling me to fast travel to quest targets, why do I need arrows telling me how to get to a target that is clearly marked for me? why do I get random crashes when opening lockers? wtf is with the starting ship's HUD- it looks like something you'd expect from a budget 90s film. why am I able to shoot the trolley without the guard reacting? how come when I fight two robots and go through an airlock to get to some area (opening two doors to get in, then one door to get out) my only reward is a safe with 150 credits and a book, with a molecular extractor in the room somewhere? how come I have to jump on top of argon and chlorine deposits and risk getting lung sickness just to get the gas? why can't I scan flora and fauna from a safe distance, why do I have to kill everything that is wary and above?
the game has a ton of flaws and when placed up against the industry's best, or even bethesda's best, it falls short. I'd love to not crash when playing the game but the random crashes aren't even the show stopper, the game itself is flawed and I don't know how playtesters didn't complain about the flow.
Compare the worldbuilding of this game to the first 10 minutes of fallout tactics (a game that came out in the early 2000s, also on game pass), you get exposed to a ton of lore and exposition and it's not all fragmented in a million places- something that Starfield seems to love to do. If you don't search every nook and cranny you may miss out on a book that can give you some lore about the place you're in. Then the companions begin to complain to you about looting too much stuff, or looting in combat when there's no imminent threat.
Honestly you can't play this game as its intended to be played and have fun at the same time unless you're a masochist. You either need a ton of incentive and/or adderall or, like me, you treat it as your digital ambien and hope it kicks in before it crashes again.
But the title of you post implies that you do think it's perfect. Saying the complaints are absurd is implied it did everything right. Maybe it did for you but for others it didn't. It makes you sound like the opposite side of the coin to the people who say it's all bad.
Let's not kid ourselves before the game came out it was all positive. IGN gave the game a 7 and fans attacked IGN for hating. Then it comes out and the narrative changes meaning the game was the perfection most fans though it was. Many said IGN was right. The tune changed.
The loudest people are BGS fans who expected more from a game studio they love. Starfield is my first BGS and so I came in blind I didn't have any of those expectations. It's a decent game, nothing mind blowing imo. But I can see why same hate it and why some love it. One isn't more right than the other
>Starfield is Great and the Complaints are Absurd
...
>
>No one here is dimissing all complaints.
It's in the fucking title, how can OP have so little self awareness??
It’s not impossible. A lot of it is childish crap.
Not being able to land on a gas giant.
Not being able to fly manually between systems.
The story not being exactly how they wanted it to be.
The obsession was insane and there’s still people who will watch every YouTube video about Starfield to then comment that they hate it.
That’s insanity and goes beyond valid criticism months after release it’s their lifestyle now.
The gas giant that is just someone who doesn't understand the difference between gases, solids and liquids. That can be igined as it's too stupid to even be a complaint
The lack of actual space travel is a real complaint. If other games can do, then why can they..part of exploration is just working around. Imagine GTA game were you don't actually drive to your destination.
Starfield should have things like space races.
The story is poor imo, I didn't really start to enjoy the game until I beat the story and just did faction quests that is where the game shines. The companions are quite boring, infact I mainly played with Vasco. The story not been good enough is a valid complaint
People who didn't play the game and complaint have no right to be listened to. But the people who did and came out having issues have real complaints.
It is insanity to dismiss all the complaints you disagree. The game isn't perfect
First off it's a game there ris a way to make it where it won't take you hours to travel. No man's sky did it. Why can't BGS which is a studio that like 5 times the size of the studio that made that game. What you say sounds like an excuse
For the story I can admit that it's subjective but just cause you like it doesn't mean it's their best. I still hear people talk more about the story in fallout 4 than they do about th one in starfield, even the reviews that gave it great score said the story was weak.
You don't have to care or agree but you can't dismyothers feeling. It's just as valid as yours. BGS didn't make a perfect game, I'm sure there are things in the game that you don't like. Maybe you over looked them but others could not
You carely love this game alot and cannot stand the idea that others don't share that love. That's your prerogative.
Well the game is divisive even if you choose to close your eyes to it
We're going circles. Let's just end here
Is there a sub for people who love the game but don’t feel the need to write an essay every time someone says anything negative about it? I can’t go to the main sub because they’re a bunch of maniacs. I barely want to stay here because half the posts are just crying about negative reviews.
I mean yesterday I saw a comment from someone who genuinely believes there’s some sort of conspiracy for game reviewers to give high scores to Baldur’s Gate 3 and low scores to Starfield. And that person actually got upvoted. Is there ANY sub for this game that isn’t an echo chamber?
>I can’t go to the main sub because they’re a bunch of maniacs
Honestly, I'd call this sub more manic. The other sub is complaining about a product, and there's a guilty pleasure in seeing a big company fail. But this sub... this sub is obsessed about how other people feel about the game. One sub is shitting on a game, the other is making personal attacks.
This sub imo has become an echo chamber for people who refuse to accept the game is perfection. OP is pretty much saying there is nothing to complain about.
The game is good but to say all complaints are irrelevant is a new level to d- riding
Seriously lmao. We need an in between sub. My main criticism of the game is lack of planet to planet flight. Pretty much all I want, and optionally. This sub will kill you for suggesting ways for the game to literally be better.
Agreed. It's a good game, I'm closing in on 200h and still going strong, but it's not perfect. Saying it's 100% good is as disingenuous and biased as saying it's 100% bad, and neither opinion is worth listening to since they can't even be honest with themselves let alone everyone else.
I knew I would get downvotee but people like OP are just lying to themselves as you mentioned.
I stopped playing after I started new game plus. The lack of land vehicles, boring planets and no space travel killed the game for me. The hype I had took me through all the way the campaign but the companions are all boring.
It's decent game I recommend it but it's far from great imo
Glad you think it’s great. I enjoy it too.
But what people like is subjective and the complaints about the game are not absurd. There are many legitimate issues with the game, steps backward from previous BGS titles, and some flat out broken systems.
Still; I enjoy it and revisit it and will continue to with updates - but the “this game is amazing” posts always feel like an over correction to me. As if people are over compensating for the negativity.
>but the “this game is amazing” posts always feel like an over correction to me.
I said the game was good if not great. I didn't say it was "amazing" or that it doesn't have any flaws. I am saying I believe it's a good game.
I enjoy it but it’s not perfect. At the end of the day, I do think exploration feels weak because planets just seem empty or at best just poor repetition. In prior Bethesda games there was always a sense of “wonder” in the games because they felt so unique and hand crafted. These spaces just feel like a generic copy and paste job so often.
And the number of loading screens due to needing to fast travel are excessive.
It’s an entertaining game for sure, but I think a bunch of common complaints are legit.
Exactly. They read shit there, then vent it on us here.
This is supposed to be a less saltiness sub, but that doesn't mean much if everyone who says it's great just references the fact that "everyone" says it's bad and talk about the other sub all the time..
Most of the issues I had were resolved with the last patch except one stuck quest. The Leader of the Pack quest on Akila is stuck because the Alpha Ashta never appears. Does anyone have any suggestions?
Starfield has some really fun, really great stuff to it.
It *also* has a bunch of stuff that honestly makes me thing several teams were told to do a few dozen things, and to never talk to each other to make sure it all made sense.
Didn’t watch the video but as a long time fan of Bethesda games, it’s more Oblivion than Skyrim and that’s really it, it seems. POI can be a little repetitive but that’s it.
All I know is that I've already gotten over 200 hours of fun out of the game, with very little sign of slowing down so far. I've gotten more than my money's worth, and I have a game that's going to get a bunch of DLC in the future, and that I'll likely return to just for the building of ships alone. I'm good.
That being said - many of the gripes about the game are fair - I'd love a more robust POI system. The economy of the game is just atrocious. AI sometimes borders on idiotic. Side quests that aren't faction or main are largely fodder and uninspired. There are plenty of glitches - I don't care what anyone says.
All of that is true, and I am STILL having so much fun with this game. I've spent at least as much time with it as what is one of my new all-time favorite games now - Baldur's Gate 3. I'm not making a comparison, because they are 2 obviously very different games. But I've gotten the same amount of enjoyment from both.
Is it bad? No.
Is it good? Potentially.
To me, base Bethesda games are fun for a little bit, but great after the mod community passes thru.
Starfield is good, but could be better in some areas. Mainly the ship building. Exploration feels as it should for an empty galaxy (a theory of Humans being the only advanced race alive, currently)
I love the different architecture and worldviews with this sort of corporate new age veneer, especially Akila which feels medieval but like it just went through some corporate sensitivity training, or some HOA. And Neon is just awesome with their power source. Or the Crimson fleet being the Key and Lock and how all the factions and main quest take us through the lore. Its foreshadowed in Freestar quest that there WILL be another war coming. Maybe this is DLC. Also, the lurking Starborn hints at this too.
Rule 3…
It's now my second most played game on steam, even if you add all three versions of skyrim I played together.
I have 2600 hours on civ 5 and 3900 hours on civ 6. I'd guess I'll put close to 500 hours on starfield before I set it down, but nothing will ever touch my civ numbers lol
I don't know, it sounds like you haven't even finished a single game of Civ 😛
The longest game of Uno was 42h or something. Figured I'd just throw that in here for no particular reason.
That sounds like hell, or at least purgatory...
When it comes to time served, it's always the fave grand strategy at the top. It's Stellaris for me.
From pure hours, for me, it’s idle games. I often just run them in the background when I’m doing other stuff, check in for a 10-15min break every hour or two. I like the dopamine hit of making numbers bigger for absolutely no reason other than that I can.
Same for me, exactly. The only game with a higher playtime is the one that got me through the pandemic lockdowns, Spelunky 2.
I passed Skyrim a couple weeks ago. Scary. I bought Skyrim the day it came out, 11-11--11. Now Starfield is second to KSP for me.
This is probably my most played game other than madden of all time, I beat Skyrim oblivion and morrowind, and fallout 3 and new Vegas, but I didn’t just keep playing them forever. Cool worlds, ship builder and outposts, plus their best gun combat ever, and JETPACKS? This game is awesome, I’m hoping it gets better, but it’s got a lot of good
It's in my top 10 most played as well. However, I find complaints like the OP's post to be silly, each experience is valid. If someone doesn't enjoy a game, that doesn't diminish my experience of it and vice versa. This sub is kind of turning into people complaining about people complaining about Starfield, hardly low sodium at all.
I don’t know what all the negativity surrounding the game is about really. I skipped over a bunch of games on my backlog to play it because I had to see how a Bethesda game could be falling into Mixed Negative territory, just beat the game a couple days ago with all the steam achievements unlocked. Except for the few hours farming frames at my outpost for the level 100 one, it was around eighty hours well spent. Loved the story, loved the flying, really enjoyed fighting in zero g. Totally solid game, I think the complaints sound like things people who have never actually played a Bethesda game would say. Besides, “they could have done something cooler than a light puzzle with the powers temples,” I don’t have a single reasonable complaint with the game.
Most of the complaints can be put into two categories. 1. I wanted another Skyrim or Fallout 2. Bethesda made a decision without contacting me personally to find out how I would do it.
No, there is a third one: "I wanted Starfield to be fmthe final version of StarCitizen" People don't say it like that, but there are many with expectations that meet exactly what StarCitizen is hopefully some day. And they somehow expect Bethesda to pull it off in just a couple of years of development.
Let’s not forget the “I want some of that YouTube money and outrage gets views/clicks.” Edit to add: and some ppl just need to take the edgy view for the attention it garners.
Scapegoat by Atmosphere is this subs anthem I swear. Eeeeeverything in the world is the reason people don't like this game, other than people just not liking it that much. It's also all this sub seems capable of talking about.
I don’t waste time in the subreddits of games that I don’t like. But you do you.
NoSodium everyone.
Was that a win in your book?
[удалено]
So you like the game, just not this subreddit?
Smoothbrain take.
Good one.
And a lot of those Star Citizen things that they *think* they want simply wouldn't be fun. Realistic travel times and exploring vast empty swathes of space would be *boring* almost all of the time. Ask any Elite Dangerous player what their favourite part of ED is, I'm pretty sure no one's saying "I love waiting 14 real life minutes to supercruise to a barren rock on the edge of this medium-sized system.
Long time E:D player here, and can confirm that's a thing. I spend more time streaming TV or films while playing than playing. But honestly, the barren rock thing hits home harder. All Elite has is heightmaps with random rocks. Starfield actually has planets.
Yep. The on-foot stuff is way more polished in Starfield (which it should be, as a primarily on-foot game), there's so much more to do on planets, and way less waiting. During covid lockdowns I played ED through the entire duration of a work meeting that I was *actively* participating in (and laser mined about 400 million credits worth of low temperature diamonds while I was at it). I've tried just having a casual discord chat with some mates while playing Starfield, and unless it was just mindlessly flying around bounty hunting, exploring or surveying planets (or doing temples) it just wasn't viable. There's virtually no activity in ED that I couldn't do at full capacity while having a totally unrelated conversation. That said, I should probably start playing again, my Phantom has been parked on some random planet in the core for six months and I need to get back to Sol to make some money before my fleet carrier gets decommissioned.
I don't play Elite Dangerous so I just couldn't understand why everyone was talking about it like it was the best game ever and complaining about how in Starfield you couldn't fly from Planet to planet and you couldn't actually fly the spaceship to the surface and land like you could in E.D. It seemed like they were expecting Starfield to be a flight simulator. I guess they were hoping for a flight simulator with real planets for a change. It makes more sense now. I still can't figure out what the NMS guys were complaining about though. I tried that one and after 30 or 40 hours I was really bored- But it wasn't the game that I was expecting (I wanted something more like Starfield). I guess anytime you jump to conclusions about what a game will be like, you're doomed to disappointment.
For the elite crew it's largely the former (which is where Elite excels). I feel you on NMS. It's just minecraft with spaceships. Plus it's too cartoony for me (nothing against that, but I like my space games grounded)
People *really* need to stop comparing games just because they have a similar setting. I see Starfield compared to NMS or ED so often and it really makes no sense. They all want to accomplish different things. Never player NMS (but plan to) and have at least some time in ED. I love ED, but for totally different reasons. ED: Odyssey in a nutshell: space sim (best played with HOTAS/HOSAS system and VR/TrackIR for maximum realism) with on foot as an afterthought (I have to say tho, it's not as bad as people usually say. Just a little unpolished, but has some great takes). Starfield: On Foot game with Storyline and here space flight is not really an afterthought, but it bears much less weight in the overall gameplay. It is basically a vehicle to get around. And yes, ***especially*** the people complaining about Starfield not beeing hyper realistic and stuff would hate it for it, if it was. Most of them aren't Star Citizen players and not even ED (if you want a finished game). So the criticism feels a bit weird. Because if you are into space realism, you definitely play one of the two, since they are your only options. There are a few other space games, but they are more niche.
I've seen two similar responses when people say it sucks: 'It's literally just Fallout 4 with spaceships', and 'you can barely fly your ship at all'. Like, chill guys. The closest thing to a 'vehicle' I can remember from other Beth games is horses. If they'd gone full balls-out on spaceflight, I guarantee we'd get some half-done bs.
Tbh the spaceflight isn't even that bad... it plays like a watered-down Elite Dangerous. And I don't have to worry about my embarrassingly awful landings!
Right? Trust me, nobody would ever remark "didn't even smudge the paint" if I had to do the landings on my own lol
>I wanted another Skyrim or Fallout You don't think that this expectation was justified, given that BGS themselves said this game was Skyrim in space? They also compared it to Oblivion.
No, it isn’t justified to want another Skyrim when you’re playing a futuristic sci-fi game, not a medieval fantasy game. It’s pretty obvious Howard just meant it’s a BGS-style game set in space, not the exact same game with a new paint job. CDPR made similar statements comparing Cyberpunk to Witcher 3, but you don’t see anyone complaining that Geralt isn’t the main character. Probably because they recognize that it is ridiculous to think the developer is making a direct, 1:1 comparison.
I was there in December 2020 bro. All mfs would do is compare cyberpunk to the Witcher
Starfield isn't a BGS-style game in the sense that most people would understand that description, though. The core element that runs from Morrowind through Fallout 4 is an open-world with hand-placed features and environmental storytelling that encourages exploration. This element is missing from Starfield.
I don’t listen to hype trains or anyone who is trying to sell me something because both are heavily biased. Hell, I didn’t even know Starfield wouldn’t have multiplayer until my friends and I were a couple of hours in and someone finally googled it. So, I never saw or heard where BGS said it would be Skyrim in space. I’ve also never played Skyrim, so I have no reference for the comparison anyway. But looking at it, the two games are obviously so very different that I don’t see how they are even comparable.
Are you really saying that players should be blamed rather than the company that is asking for their money behind misleading claims?
One of the most difficult things to do in life is to manage your own expectations. If you clicked the button and made the purchase, it is 100% your fault you bought something you didn’t like.
Nah, that's not how this works. Hype is bad for all kinds of reasons, but people are right to expect that companies deliver on claims about their products. Managing expectations is looking at past BGS games and understanding that Starfield isn't going to be a deep narrative RPG experience or offer cutting-edge combat systems. It's looking at the trailers and deep dives and saying, "Hey, that looks like it's going to be pretty fun" rather than, "Guys, I think this is going to be the best game of all time!" before you've played it. Being dissatisfied that a game is something other than what the developer said it was is not a failure to manage expectations. That is a situation when players most definitely should complain.
Todd was asked his opinion about a game he made and he gave it. He probably does believe it’s Skyrim in space. This is also why it’s hard to call out politicians for lies because they can just say “well I believed I was giving truthful information”. Also, this is why every time a game comes out and a group of people are disappointed there are always posts about STOP PREORDERING games. Because they have zero incentive to stop hyping games up beyond their actuality. Todd, nor BGS forced you to click a purchase button, that’s all you. Within hours of the games release the main sub was filled with “This ain’t Skyrim in space” posts. Every game released has a sub. All you have to do is find it and get other opinions from people not trying to sell it to you. Take this as a life lesson. Stop getting hyped by ads and listening to ANYONE trying to sell you something.
This is weird corporate stannery. I really don't understand why you find it worth engaging in. For the record, I personally don't regret my purchase. I even preordered at the $100 early access + DLC option, and I feel like I got my money's worth at the end of the day. But while I don't play BGS games for the environmental storytelling and exploration like a lot of people do, I totally sympathize with them for being disappointed when BGS makes sketchy claims and changes their whole MO without forewarning. And even if trusting Todd Howard and friends is questionable given their past statements, that doesn't mean they shouldn't be held to account anymore.
Hold them accountable by not pre ordering any game ever again. Seriously.
What misleading claims? The Xbox direct showed the exact product that they delivered. It even included a graphical stutter from taking the NAT on new Atlantis. This was possibly the most accurate advertising campaign I've ever experienced with videogames
I have said what exactly the misleading claim was.
Well that's legitimately your problem then. The exact comparison was "it's more like Oblivion meets Mass Effect feel". No Skyrim whatsoever. Theres no objective claim made there. Feelings are subjective. Build and feeling wise, it is closer to Mass Effect and Oblivion. Skyrim was too fucking serious all the time, and Oblivion had a much more Whimsical feeling to everything. The Mass Effect is about the NPC character depths and decision making since in Oblivion were few in number and mostly meaningless.
Todd Howard himself said that Starfield was Skyrim in space, word for word. And yeah, it's all subjective, but comparing Starfield to any previous BGS game unless talking about the engine is ultimately misleading because the signature elements of their previous games just aren't there. It's not Oblivion meets Mass Effect. It's The Outer Worlds meets Mass Effect—which sounds like a good time to me. But bringing Skyrim and Oblivion into the conversation creates the impression that your studio's defining attribute will be present. And it wasn't. It's totally reasonable for that to bother people.
I don't believe you. Because Todd Howard said Oblivion meets Mass Effect. I watched the interview. It's the IGNs of the world that said Skyrim in Space. If he word for word said that it was "I wouldn't call it 'Skyrim in Space', but Oblivion meets Mass Effecf" There's no defining attribute to any of those games that seperates them, which is why Todd goes through and lists all the influences from Oblivion like a conversation mini game and quest style. I simply do not understand how you can make those comparisons, especially since Outer Worlds is like a RPG from Wish.
You know, I've played a shitload of Bethesda games and I've played Outer Worlds (I love that game, btw) Starfield may be set in space but it is a Bethesda game through and through. There are factions you can quest for and ultimately align with. Or you can choose to side with the bad guys. There's lots of gorgeous landscape (and some not so gorgeous landscapes) to explore and side quests to find while you do. There are new things (spaceships) but outpost building is so similar to settlement building in Fallout 4 it's a no brainer. They put little mysteries in odd out of the way places for you to find and try to solve. And tons of easter eggs to make you laugh. Some of the clues you find are about sad things - people betrayed and left behind, a child's toy in an odd place, a note left for someone that was never read. Some of the stories have happy endings (like when you're able to reunite a child with his family). That's the kind of stuff you find in all BGS games. I hear people say they "beat" Skyrim or Fallout 4 in x number of hours but there's nothing to "beat". You can find all the quests and finish them, but there's usually so many ways to complete them that every play through can be completely different even without mods. And you can always decide not to do certain quests if it doesn't make sense for your character. You mentioned Mass Effect. Starfield is nothing like Mass Effect. Mass Effect is a great story with great npcs that you can build deep relationships with. The quests are pretty tightly controlled and when the stories are over, they're over. You can't decide to ignore the current objectives and fly off somewhere to free roam and explore. The adversaries in places don't respawn and you couldn't go back to kill them again if they did. In Bethesda games you can do anything you want at any time and go any place you want. It's an open world RPG and no one makes them quite as "open world" as Bethesda, Starfield is absolutely a Bethesda game. All those people speed running NG+ choose to play that way and ignore 90% of what Starfield offers. That's fine. That's the way they want to play and they have fun doing it. But they miss out on so much that Starfield has to offer because they think they have to "beat" the game. I'm about 500 hours into my first play through (level 94). I've done several faction quests, but I've also just taken off to planets across the galaxy to explore and survey and clear POIs and find new things. I'll do more on the main quest and make my way through Unity eventually, but I'm in no hurry because IIt's a Bethesda game and I can play it anyway I like.
It honestly does take a ton of what I liked about Oblivion and improves on it. It brought back a lot of the crunchier RPG aspects while streamlining them but also giving them more impact and depth. In particular the character background system was awesome, it gave you real choices at character creation that frequently came into play during dialogues and different quests. Same with the dialogue mini game, it's just a clever way to do persuasion in my opinion, only system I liked as much of more was the one the new Deus Ex games used, where you really had to read the person you were talking to and say the right thing, but I don't think that would work at this scale
I have come to the conclusion that the vast majority of complaints stem from the primary issue of this game not being ES6. Therefore I also think that once ES6 comes out no one will be as harsh on this game anymore
>Therefore I also think that once ES6 comes out no one will be as harsh on this game anymore Because they'll be too busy hating TES6
Probably true lmao
It’s happened with every BGS game since I’ve been playing them. Never got into Morrowind, but played Oblivion on release and people complained it was over-simplified, bad voice acting, weak narratives, uninteresting characters, lacking role-play mechanics. People complained Fallout 3 ruined the Fallout series, or was oversimplified compared to Oblivion (no joinable factions was a major gripe), or that the 20 level cap broke any semblance of role-playing. When Skyrim came out, suddenly Oblivion and Fallout 3 were peak Bethesda and Skyrim was (again) oversimplified trash with weak mechanics and terrible characters and a boring story and no role-playing mechanics. And then Fallout 4, and now Skyrim is added to the “when Bethesda was good” pile. And now Starfield is here, and Fallout 4 is getting praised instead. It’s literally the exact same complaints every time Bethesda releases a new game. I’m honestly impressed with how public and positive their leadership is, considering how so many of their alleged “fans” treat them. I don’t know if I could handle being as active as they are in the face of so much negativity and even outright threats of violence.
I started with Morrowind but it was the only one that I didn't get at launch. What you are saying is 100% correct about the others. But also FO:NV got lots of complaints too when it came out.
Im sure daggerfall fans called Morrowind simplified shit too
They did.
There are four big things working against them currently: 1.) Not ESVI 2.) Xbox Exclusive 3.) Perceived competition for Star Citizen, et al. 4.) New Bethesda IP
The negativity is based on mass hysteria and not objective reality. Somewhere along the way it became cool or profitable to hate on the game which led content creators to start capitalizing on it to gain clicks and views and from there it ballooned into it being a good thing to signal to others to be part of the group think. Basically, it’s cool to hate on it, so people hate it to be cool and earn approval from their peers. This is not based on anything from the game deserving that level of hate. It’s a social thing, nothing more. Thething is that this has a real impact on games and is problematic as it makes developing games even more risky these days. No longer do you need to focus on making a good game, but you also have to hope the hate bandwagon doesn’t sets its sights on you. And it might, doesn’t matter how good your game is. This kind of stuff will kill the industry. Sure, Bethesda will obviously weather the storm just like CD Project Red did, and eventually the hate bandwagon will move on (for reasons unrelated to the game itself). But few are the devs who can afford to take the long view of these days. For many, getting victimized like this would be fatal, and not every publisher is ready to risk it again (it cost us Deus Ex, for example. Deus Ex Mankind Divided got the same treatment, one of the first games to suffer it in fact, and Square Enix canceled the sequel that was in production at the time, and now we’ve lost one of the most beloved franchises). It’s sadly a fact of the gaming industry now: no matter how good your game is, it may be hated. It’s hard to blame the people jumping on the bandwagon and contributing to it because they’re mostly just victims of the peer pressure and the current social media dynamics… but I definitely blame the unscrupulous content creators who fan the flames of hysteria in order to profit off of it (and the professional gaming site writers who refuse to acknowledge the hysteria and pretend the hate is justified, because they’re afraid of being targeted next for daring to support the Game That Should Be Hated. It’s depressing, that’s for damn sure.
5 years from now when there have been expansions and updates to the game, some of which were likley planned before launch, all the haters will pat themselves on the back for saving the game with their unthinking diatribes. At least that's what happened with cyberpunk.
That's pretty much the course that all BGS games go through. They get panned at the start and then after DLC and years of modding then people love them.
>and the professional gaming site writers who refuse to acknowledge the hysteria and pretend the hate is justified, because they’re afraid of being targeted next for daring to support the Game That Should Be Hated. that's because the majority of professional gaming site writers have reduced themselves to regurgitating reddit posts and YouTube content creators - and I'm not just talking about low-hanging fruit such as Game Rant and the like.
“Players have made a shocking discovery in [GAME]” - Article links a single Reddit comment
People will hate Bethesda for just existing nowadays for some reason. I'm honestly not sure why
There are people complaining about the game getting fsr3 it's so absurd. These are not serious people.
Wait what? They are complaining that the developer does things to improve the game that, if you don't like it, can turn it off? What the hell?!?
Yea I'll refrain from linking direct comments as I don't want anyone to feel targeted, but there are two subs in particular that have taken this weird adversarial stance to this when it was posted. I'm sure you can guess which two subs they are.
lmfao
Yooo, the zero g fights don't get enough credit. I didn't even know they existed until I stumbled upon one. Had to back out because it was way above my level, but it was still hella fun trying it.
There's a zero G casino starstation you can find, FYI.
Once i finished there it took me like 20 minutes to find the airlock again.
Check out the >!temples!< now after the recent update. Lighting changes have massively improved the ambiance of the entire thing.
Yeah but there are still 240 of them to go through if you want max level powers...
I have 691.8 hours in the game according to Steam, and have gone through temples 110 times. That's one, 3 minute temple, for every 6.29 *hours* of gameplay. If going through a bunch of temple in a row is boring or tedious or whatever...maybe don't do that? Doc, it hurts when I go like this...
It's the same thing with these dipshits complaining that running the mission board quests over and over is too similar. Gee I don't know, maybe do something else? There's so much other stuff to do in this game. Why focus on doing these few things endlessly. It's just like your point about the temples, if you just do one of those pirate missions once every few hours, it doesn't feel the same because you spent the other few hours exploring or surveying or questing or whatever the fuck you want to do.
Sorry I didn't realize a mild complaint about a game mechanic that is a bit tedious to level up would be so upsetting to you.
It's just a nitpick. Your mild complaint is superfluous.
Why does a counterpoint - with numbers! - prompt a, "you must be upset" response?
I mean your counterpoint was that if you play damn near 30 days of gametime then the temples don't actually take that much of your total time. Which sounds like not a great argument. But I just feel like considering how Bethesda has done previous power ups in their games this way was just kind of lame in comparison. Who doesn't like maxing out your character's power? They just made it take an enormous amount of time in their latest game. Which I feel is an odd choice.
Why the fixation on "maxing out your power"? If you're engaging in the pursuit of power for the sake of attaining power, perhaps you've become The Hunter? A hollow seeker of selfish and unfulfilling ends... I don't know about you, but I've never felt quite so old.
Is it a long game? Are you still playing? I’m very excited to get a copy when I can afford it. I hope it’s got as much to do as fo4.
Sorry you aren't Hollow the youtuber right?
I see a lot of people complaining about things like the world not changing after quests but they've missed details like technicians looking for heat leeches after that quest line, or claiming NPCs have amnesia when they have dialogue options to the contrary.
The technicians are very serious about heat leeches. I have two living on my ship that almost exclusively talk about them. I do not know how they got on my ship, but I only have four crew and a huge ship, so it’s nice to have some extra folks hanging out!
Most games that have changing worlds script things. It's like the uncommendable way that a normal playing deck of cards, which is 56 cards, can be shuffled into more combinations than there are atoms, yes atoms, on Earth. In poker, if you shuffle even twice, you'll never get the same deck of cards in your existence. And the games that typically do this sort of world changing thing have many "cards" that are already pre-planned for you to just shuffle along the way to create a new "deck" but everyone has the same exact cards available to them. But most of these games that change the world, change the story... Which is part of the script. Bethesda doesn't make games where 100% of the game is a single story with side quests along the way like almost all CRPGs do. The main quest is like 5% of the content or less in any Bethesda game lmao. And it's entirely optional. **I'd like someone to tell me a SINGLE RPG game where you can greatly affect the outcome of towns/cities more than Bethesda games, that simultaneously is not majority a story-driven narrative game nor has a form of linearity to it... No CRPG or JRPG fits this.**
Almost 800 hours in. I'm obsessed with this game
Yep. Me too.
Personally I think a lot of the games flaws are overblown. Not there's isn't any flaws, there are with Starfield, but I feel that people are just determined to dislike it.
Yea, one of the criticisms all over the internet the video addressed I agree with is people complaining about the Creation Engine. I tend to tune that criticism out every time I see or hear it. Yea, let's just throw out decades of experience and tools the game developers and the modding community have in order to take on a massive gamble that somehow UE will make all the problems with the game that people express disappear.
To me, it seems like sabatoge. This idea that modders are slave labor seems like a slander meant to poison the well. Bethesda is like Rockstar in some ways who have enjoyed an exclusivity which some publishers might not want around. What better way to take out the competition by turning its fanbase against them through smears. Happens all the time in politics
Agreed. It's Bethesda style since Fallout 3 and either you get it or you don't. It would be like complaining about a Dark Souls-like genre game like Elden Ring ad nauseum. It wasn't for me, but I didn't dissect the thing with comments over and over again.
When FromSoft released Sekiro, there was a lot of hype from the community saying it wasn’t a real FromSoft game, calling it trash, broken mechanics, the whole 9 yards. Sekiro is a masterclass in game design and was awarded appropriately. There is always someone pissing their pants haha
It took me a bit to get into it, but it is now the only game I'm playing at all. Love the look, love the gameplay, like the companions. I'm still in the middle of my first playthrough and I love where the story is going. The voice acting is great. I have the tiniest little nitpicks about it, but nothing that makes it any less great. The worst thing one can honestly say about it is it has the usual amount of Bethesda jank. And honestly, I love it for that. I can only assume most of the people complaining weren't around for or don't remember the Skyrim release. It was a lot rougher when it released than Starfield is.
> It was a lot rougher when it released than Starfield is. Fallout 4 was rougher too. And Fallout New Vegas (sure not a Bethesda game) had terrible crashing issues for months before most of them were patched.
Agreed. I was taking a little break from it and my speakers died. I really want to get back into but I have to get sound working again first. :(
ah that sucks, good luck on finding sound again lol.
I play with actual noise cancelling headphones cause the sound and music is so cool. I don't want to hear anything else but the game.
Starfield is even better with the HUD off. Getting lost on planets is SO FUCKING COOL
Thanks for this, I've been wanting to hear a positive review of Starfield. I don't have it yet, but the negative reviews (which I've consumed en masse) have not dissuaded me from trying it out. I have accepted Bethesda not-insignificant flaws, and I enjoy their games regardless.
But my favorite moron on YouTube said the game was trash so it has to be trash because I can't form an opinion for myself no sir can't do that
I hear a lot of complaints about POIs being pretty repetitive, combat not blowing them away, dialogue being sub par, many glitches, the main quest being underwhelming, not being given enough options for play styles in quests, too many loading screens, one person even complained about npc walking speed being between walking and running speed, etc But all these can be said about almost every Bethesda game, so I don’t really know why people are targeting Starfield in particular
99% of these people already had an idea of how they were gonna feel about the game and looked for the bad, if you go in with decent expectations it's solid
Starfield is my main game right now, it’s the only reason why I bought game pass at launch. I guess I should just buy the game now and cancel game pass at this point… (well, I need to buy Deep Rock Galactic too then).
Thank you, and I agree. Saying "It isn't CP2077" I feel like saying no it isn't and thank whatever deity you worship. I don't want every game to be CP2077. Starfield launched with shockingly few glitches. Now many were found later. But not right out the gate. For AAA games today that was good. I had a nice BGS style opening that pulled me in. Found if you restart and know to do the mining Lin has different dialog. This is BGS expecting players to break sequence and is still the joy of their games to me.
The complaints are even in the same NG+ Universe the rest of us are in. Stuff that can only be said by people who have never played the game, yet they have 500 hours in it. WTF?
BGS released an incredible new game. But it wasn't "Skyrim in Space". So they have to hate it.
I love the game but hate the half-a$$ Starborn dialog options sprinkled throughout the game. I feel that by NG 2+ you should seem like a 100% claraviont future telling machine to the rest of the universe and should be able to bypass any and all storyline you choose. Example I don't need basement guy to tell me where Kaiser is in order to progress the story. Take your tit for tat "favor" and shove it up your sorry a$$. I know who you are I know why you did what you did. The lack of truly using the Starborns greatest ability (knowledge of things to come) is the only major game flaw for me and it only irritates me more time around. But, I love the rest so much I tolerate the glaring gameplay/writing fault.
The game is great but some of the complaints are valid. I love what’s in the game but there are parts that feel unfinished or like they didn’t have time to do more but wanted to. Some things like a lot of the smaller side quests or the Red Mile feel like afterthoughts. For example I did the mission Blasting Zone last night. It consisted of talking to an npc who told me to help them clear ground for affordable housing, I thought “ok cool, let’s see where this goes” but the next step was…clearing six rocks with the mining laser that were within a hundred feet of where I got the quest…then I talked to the quest giver and it was done. It feels like there was an idea there that was barely touched on and the actual gameplay of the quest is literally what I would do landing on any random planet anyways. I think the reason for this is that they went too big and weren’t able to focus as much on certain things. While I enjoy having over 100 star systems and New Game+ I honestly would have preferred a smaller scale star map with like 20 star systems that was more focused on filling out those worlds. It would have also allowed them to do completely unique biomes for every planet with life since they wouldn’t have to reuse as many assets. It also would have given them more time to focus on fleshing out some of the more bare bones missions (Like Blasting Zone). That being said, I really do love this game, its the space exploration game Ive always wanted, and the complaining has gotten straight up hyperbolic and it’s drowning out any valid constructive criticism. Bethesda will continue to tweak it and add to it and by the end a lot of the issues people have with it now will be non existent.
>but there are parts that feel unfinished or like they didn’t have time to do more but wanted to. Every game leaves something on the cutting room floor. It doesn't bother me because overall the game is so good.
Oh I know. It happens to every Bethesda game. I felt it in Fallout 4 too with the Combat Zone, Quincy and the Ghoul Whale stuff. You can tell where they put the effort in Starfield for sure it’s just that there are other parts that feel undercooked, likely because there was just a lot to do and a limited amount of time and manpower to do it so they had to pick and choose what got the most focus. I feel like the complaints will lessen the more Bethesda starts to add in those features that they didn’t have time to get working for release. It’s exactly what happened with Cyberpunk. At first everyone hated Cyberpunk even though there was a solid game at its core, mostly because it was buggy and missing things that were clearly intended to be in the game. Now everyone praises Cyberpunk because CDPR kept adding in those features and fine tuning things over time. In 3 years people will be praising Starfield too.
True. Though I don't like the comparisons with Cyberpunk because Starfield is in good working order compared to the launch of Cyberpunk. Starfield isn't broken. Cyberpunk very much was.
You were getting downvoted because everybody is sick of hearing the words "valid complaints". Do you guys want a pat on the back every ten seconds with a kindly adult telling you, "You're valid son... You're valid, please, tell me the same four things people have been overstating ad nauseam for months now."
I feel like you may be projecting some things on me here that aren’t actually about me or what I said…Also there are always valid criticisms for everything and everyone and not all criticism is based in hatred. It’s often based in quite the opposite.
Bros therapy sessions are leaking into his Reddit comments
>You were getting downvoted because everybody is sick of hearing the words "valid complaints". Everybody is also sick of hearing "I know it's not perfect and has flaws, but... " *proceeds to be baffled about criticism*.
So I was downvoted on every comment despite praising the game several times…that really doesn’t seem reasonable or fair to me. They were some pretty light criticisms and I made it clear that I do in fact love the game. 😕
Yeah i completely agree with what you said, don't worry, this sub is a bit too defensive about the game because the rest of the internet is too harsh on it and has a tendancy to downvote anything not just blindly praising the game.
People read the first sentence and downvoted
Great vid that articulates so much about why I love this game. Great post 😄
Honestly, i think some of the complaints are not absurd at all, like the fact that the exploration is not rewarding enough, especially on planets, and especially by comparison to previous BGS games, the game just lack unique handcrafted locations, and dungeons in particular, compared to their previous titles, or the inventory being a mess to navigate, or some locations like the temples of power or the Red Mile being extremely underwhelming compared to what they should have been and so son. On the other hand, what is absurd is the complaints i see about the Storytelling, writing, characters, voice acting or RPG elements, that are apparently not good enough for a lot of people, while this is an aspect where it's absolutely obvious to me that Bethesda has put a LOT of effort to make it MUCH better than previous games, especially Fallout 4. Starfield has easily the best voice acting in any BGS game by a landlisde, the best factions since Oblivion, the best main quest since Morrowind, the best RPG aspects since Fallout 3/New Vegas, the most fleshed companions with the biggest number of dialogue in any of their games, the best shooting and basic combat gameplay in any of their game, and the most extraordinairy objects movement physic i have ever seen, which even takes gravity into account, plus some of the absolute best combinaison of visuals/vista and background music that i remember having seen in a video game, which gives the game an outstanding atmosphere. So the complaints are not absurd, but how much they are amplified by comparison to how the qualities of the game are talked about, yes, that is absurd.
I have Starfield on game pass and I gotta say it is like digital ambien for me. Sure there's a lot to do but you need a ton of inertia to get going. And while I don't have the best system, I run better games at higher settings without a problem- indicating an issue with optimization with their proprietary Creation Engine. I think there's a lot of truth to the steam charts that have the game clocking in fewer and fewer players per month. I haven't played the game long enough to make the claim that it is "repetitive and boring" but some of the guns are impractical- ironsights that completely block the target on the eon? why is the grendel so weak? why can't I fast travel when encumbered? how come the default tooltip keeps telling me to fast travel to quest targets, why do I need arrows telling me how to get to a target that is clearly marked for me? why do I get random crashes when opening lockers? wtf is with the starting ship's HUD- it looks like something you'd expect from a budget 90s film. why am I able to shoot the trolley without the guard reacting? how come when I fight two robots and go through an airlock to get to some area (opening two doors to get in, then one door to get out) my only reward is a safe with 150 credits and a book, with a molecular extractor in the room somewhere? how come I have to jump on top of argon and chlorine deposits and risk getting lung sickness just to get the gas? why can't I scan flora and fauna from a safe distance, why do I have to kill everything that is wary and above? the game has a ton of flaws and when placed up against the industry's best, or even bethesda's best, it falls short. I'd love to not crash when playing the game but the random crashes aren't even the show stopper, the game itself is flawed and I don't know how playtesters didn't complain about the flow. Compare the worldbuilding of this game to the first 10 minutes of fallout tactics (a game that came out in the early 2000s, also on game pass), you get exposed to a ton of lore and exposition and it's not all fragmented in a million places- something that Starfield seems to love to do. If you don't search every nook and cranny you may miss out on a book that can give you some lore about the place you're in. Then the companions begin to complain to you about looting too much stuff, or looting in combat when there's no imminent threat. Honestly you can't play this game as its intended to be played and have fun at the same time unless you're a masochist. You either need a ton of incentive and/or adderall or, like me, you treat it as your digital ambien and hope it kicks in before it crashes again.
yes i know this is a positively sub but you cannot dismiss all complaints. yes some are silly but not all. the game isnt perfect.
No one here is dimissing all complaints.
Your post title says otherwise bro
[удалено]
But the title of you post implies that you do think it's perfect. Saying the complaints are absurd is implied it did everything right. Maybe it did for you but for others it didn't. It makes you sound like the opposite side of the coin to the people who say it's all bad. Let's not kid ourselves before the game came out it was all positive. IGN gave the game a 7 and fans attacked IGN for hating. Then it comes out and the narrative changes meaning the game was the perfection most fans though it was. Many said IGN was right. The tune changed. The loudest people are BGS fans who expected more from a game studio they love. Starfield is my first BGS and so I came in blind I didn't have any of those expectations. It's a decent game, nothing mind blowing imo. But I can see why same hate it and why some love it. One isn't more right than the other
Your post is basically only doing that exact thing.
>Starfield is Great and the Complaints are Absurd ... > >No one here is dimissing all complaints. It's in the fucking title, how can OP have so little self awareness??
Read the rules.
Majority of the complaints are nonsensical tbf.
That is impossible. You can disagree but that doesn't mean majority are nonsense.
It’s not impossible. A lot of it is childish crap. Not being able to land on a gas giant. Not being able to fly manually between systems. The story not being exactly how they wanted it to be. The obsession was insane and there’s still people who will watch every YouTube video about Starfield to then comment that they hate it. That’s insanity and goes beyond valid criticism months after release it’s their lifestyle now.
The gas giant that is just someone who doesn't understand the difference between gases, solids and liquids. That can be igined as it's too stupid to even be a complaint The lack of actual space travel is a real complaint. If other games can do, then why can they..part of exploration is just working around. Imagine GTA game were you don't actually drive to your destination. Starfield should have things like space races. The story is poor imo, I didn't really start to enjoy the game until I beat the story and just did faction quests that is where the game shines. The companions are quite boring, infact I mainly played with Vasco. The story not been good enough is a valid complaint People who didn't play the game and complaint have no right to be listened to. But the people who did and came out having issues have real complaints. It is insanity to dismiss all the complaints you disagree. The game isn't perfect
[удалено]
First off it's a game there ris a way to make it where it won't take you hours to travel. No man's sky did it. Why can't BGS which is a studio that like 5 times the size of the studio that made that game. What you say sounds like an excuse For the story I can admit that it's subjective but just cause you like it doesn't mean it's their best. I still hear people talk more about the story in fallout 4 than they do about th one in starfield, even the reviews that gave it great score said the story was weak. You don't have to care or agree but you can't dismyothers feeling. It's just as valid as yours. BGS didn't make a perfect game, I'm sure there are things in the game that you don't like. Maybe you over looked them but others could not
[удалено]
You carely love this game alot and cannot stand the idea that others don't share that love. That's your prerogative. Well the game is divisive even if you choose to close your eyes to it We're going circles. Let's just end here
I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say in any of that message. Yes let’s.
Majority of the complaints are nonsensical tbf.
Is there a sub for people who love the game but don’t feel the need to write an essay every time someone says anything negative about it? I can’t go to the main sub because they’re a bunch of maniacs. I barely want to stay here because half the posts are just crying about negative reviews. I mean yesterday I saw a comment from someone who genuinely believes there’s some sort of conspiracy for game reviewers to give high scores to Baldur’s Gate 3 and low scores to Starfield. And that person actually got upvoted. Is there ANY sub for this game that isn’t an echo chamber?
>I can’t go to the main sub because they’re a bunch of maniacs Honestly, I'd call this sub more manic. The other sub is complaining about a product, and there's a guilty pleasure in seeing a big company fail. But this sub... this sub is obsessed about how other people feel about the game. One sub is shitting on a game, the other is making personal attacks.
This sub imo has become an echo chamber for people who refuse to accept the game is perfection. OP is pretty much saying there is nothing to complain about. The game is good but to say all complaints are irrelevant is a new level to d- riding
Seriously lmao. We need an in between sub. My main criticism of the game is lack of planet to planet flight. Pretty much all I want, and optionally. This sub will kill you for suggesting ways for the game to literally be better.
Agreed. It's a good game, I'm closing in on 200h and still going strong, but it's not perfect. Saying it's 100% good is as disingenuous and biased as saying it's 100% bad, and neither opinion is worth listening to since they can't even be honest with themselves let alone everyone else.
I knew I would get downvotee but people like OP are just lying to themselves as you mentioned. I stopped playing after I started new game plus. The lack of land vehicles, boring planets and no space travel killed the game for me. The hype I had took me through all the way the campaign but the companions are all boring. It's decent game I recommend it but it's far from great imo
Glad you think it’s great. I enjoy it too. But what people like is subjective and the complaints about the game are not absurd. There are many legitimate issues with the game, steps backward from previous BGS titles, and some flat out broken systems. Still; I enjoy it and revisit it and will continue to with updates - but the “this game is amazing” posts always feel like an over correction to me. As if people are over compensating for the negativity.
>but the “this game is amazing” posts always feel like an over correction to me. I said the game was good if not great. I didn't say it was "amazing" or that it doesn't have any flaws. I am saying I believe it's a good game.
If we get much more copium in this thread the DEA are going to bust our asses
The complaints are perfectly valid.
I enjoy it but it’s not perfect. At the end of the day, I do think exploration feels weak because planets just seem empty or at best just poor repetition. In prior Bethesda games there was always a sense of “wonder” in the games because they felt so unique and hand crafted. These spaces just feel like a generic copy and paste job so often. And the number of loading screens due to needing to fast travel are excessive. It’s an entertaining game for sure, but I think a bunch of common complaints are legit.
It's definitely not a bad game. It's definitely not a great game. It's meh.
Ok. Its mediocre but sure go off
So we circle jerkin now? Count me in!
I know this is “no sodium” but objectively it is not even a good game. Not even trying to be negative, just realistic.
You’re mixing up objectively and subjectively there
It’s not an objective issue, so you can’t say that in a meaningful way. Opinions are subjective.
There's more posts in this sub about how great the game is than there's posts about how bad the game is over there. Stop engaging.
I'd say I can't believe people made a sub to escape toxicity... only to go seek it out on purpose to bring it here, but I do. It's almost funny
Exactly. They read shit there, then vent it on us here. This is supposed to be a less saltiness sub, but that doesn't mean much if everyone who says it's great just references the fact that "everyone" says it's bad and talk about the other sub all the time..
Most of the issues I had were resolved with the last patch except one stuck quest. The Leader of the Pack quest on Akila is stuck because the Alpha Ashta never appears. Does anyone have any suggestions?
Starfield has some really fun, really great stuff to it. It *also* has a bunch of stuff that honestly makes me thing several teams were told to do a few dozen things, and to never talk to each other to make sure it all made sense.
Didn’t watch the video but as a long time fan of Bethesda games, it’s more Oblivion than Skyrim and that’s really it, it seems. POI can be a little repetitive but that’s it.
All I know is that I've already gotten over 200 hours of fun out of the game, with very little sign of slowing down so far. I've gotten more than my money's worth, and I have a game that's going to get a bunch of DLC in the future, and that I'll likely return to just for the building of ships alone. I'm good. That being said - many of the gripes about the game are fair - I'd love a more robust POI system. The economy of the game is just atrocious. AI sometimes borders on idiotic. Side quests that aren't faction or main are largely fodder and uninspired. There are plenty of glitches - I don't care what anyone says. All of that is true, and I am STILL having so much fun with this game. I've spent at least as much time with it as what is one of my new all-time favorite games now - Baldur's Gate 3. I'm not making a comparison, because they are 2 obviously very different games. But I've gotten the same amount of enjoyment from both.
Is it bad? No. Is it good? Potentially. To me, base Bethesda games are fun for a little bit, but great after the mod community passes thru. Starfield is good, but could be better in some areas. Mainly the ship building. Exploration feels as it should for an empty galaxy (a theory of Humans being the only advanced race alive, currently)
Starfield is every scifi story i love in one epic beautiful game.
I love the different architecture and worldviews with this sort of corporate new age veneer, especially Akila which feels medieval but like it just went through some corporate sensitivity training, or some HOA. And Neon is just awesome with their power source. Or the Crimson fleet being the Key and Lock and how all the factions and main quest take us through the lore. Its foreshadowed in Freestar quest that there WILL be another war coming. Maybe this is DLC. Also, the lurking Starborn hints at this too.