Holy shit, can't believe I'm seeing someone else with this line of thinking. I swear it feels like the entire internet is just corporate shills and dipshits sometimes.
I mean not a bad idea, make a bare minimum game, and then have fans and others fix it for free and then even have others fix it, buy them out for less and profit more off of the work of others. Whoever works at Microsoft is legitimately evil
Being muzzled in the backseat is the perfect way of describing how I feel when Emil says stuff like "Shattered Space is one the best DLCs we have ever made" when it's mostly negative on Steam.
@@christianvondruska8244 exactly i liked Dawnguard in Skyrim alot,i think dragonborn dlc was meh but they were really cooking good with dawnguard yet they refused to let you marry Serana npc arround wich litteraly whole dlc is about lol,tho that asside i really enjoyed that dlc
@@christianvondruska8244 i personally didn't love the Dawngaurd dlc but I absolutely agree with you in terms of it's grandeur! It was absolutely an intoxicating to realm to deeply dive into, and that's what I craved at the time. There's no better comparison imo, even if it wasn't for me! Top notch work my friend
@OpoOnTheGo I'm not big on Dawnguard myself, I'm just saying that as an expansion of the main game's content it does what it sets out to do. It expands on vampires, werewolves, introduces a new Faction, race, weapon type, location, and biome. Compare that to whatever Shattered Space was with cut content, reskinned weapons, no player choice, limited playtime, and whatever else was wrong with it.
It is. It was announced before the game was released. It’s just a cut questline from the original build. That’s why I suspect it has nothing new in it.
Which I wouldn't mind at all of they didn't tried to blend it with the procedural. Exactly like fallout 4: in order to advance main quests you have to grind numerous radiant quests... I find this só disrespectful... I wish to God Bethesda would give me a good written videogame that's 20 hours long instead of whatever they do.
You just proved most of you haters don't have lives, so shitting on something makes you feel better...... Then so be it..... If that's how you cope..... That's how you COPE
@@patrickwilliamson29 that's because I like the game, so I'm defending it, fool, the real question is y are you haters interested in Starfield so much if y'all hate it. I mean a real disappointing game like outlaws isn't talked about anymore. But u type in Starfield, my god the vids are flooded with hate and love for the game, and it is more than a yr old. Shouldn't it be forgotten if it was so damn atrocious, and besides all you dumbfuck haters just recycle the same shit y'all have been saying about Starfield for the past yr..... So ya it still proves y'all got no lives..
Starfield was doomed from the start. Todd tried to reach for a mix of No Man's Sky, Red Dead Redemption, Fallout, etc etc, while simultaneously not reaching any elements of what made those other games great. He made his crew waste 10 years. Yes, 10 YEARS of their time on this dump of a game, simply because he got obsessed with SpAcE for a few years. Fuckin' sad.
Creation engine isn't suited for the kind of game Todd wanted... Starfield could be great, it's not impossible ESPECIALLY if you have endless cash to make a great space sim game. But Todd didn't even try do it the proper way. I know solo indie devs that make better space sims than Starfield.
@@efxnews4776 They could have done something with their cell-based engine even with all the loading screens, like making handcrafted open areas on at least a few planets, they know how to do that. Instead they mixed up some half baked systems that all individually suck compared to even 20 years old games. The result is a bastardized game that does nothing particularly good, it's neither a good space sim, or RPG, or shooter, or base builder. It could have been a decent game even with a all that jank if only the writing was decent. Emil Pagliarulo took a lot of (well deserved) flak for that, like he wrote every single quest, but the fact is that he's a lead writer without other writers down the line, most of the work is done by game designers who do their own thing in their corner, that's why everything feels so disconnected, from the gameplay to the narrative. There's generally a lack of unified workflow in that company. They still work as if they were in the 90's, when 10 devs did a bit of everything and could quickly communicate, but that's not possible when you have hundreds of employees.
Not really 10 years. Early conceptualization process started in 2013, yes, with Todd and 2 other people, but real work on the game didn't start until ~2018. It's still shit though, glad I pirated it.
"I hope that in two years I delete this video." I would love that as well, but I don't have any where near that kinda faith. Bethesda seems to be sticking their heads in the sand at this point.
@@HorseArmour I'm confused as to why you do. This is a genuine question. I'm not trying to berate or insult, but I desperately need to understand those still faithful to bethesda, or those still willing to spend money on their games, or to believe they'll eventually wake up. Why? I myself gave up on them on the launch of 76. That fiasco told me all I needed to know. I had low expectations for starfield, and even those were not met, yet people still went and bought shattered space, or some people still believe they have the prospect to make amends with the community, after blatantly trying to exploit the one thing that keeps them relevant: their modding community. It makes me sick that they'd try not once, but multiple times. With Fallout 4, with Skyrim SE, and then introducing Skyrim AE which broke everything just so the could shove their paid mods in our face again. Starfield was meant to be their redemption after the insult that was F76's release. And yet it's their greatest failure. Why do people still believe in them? Why do people not boycott them and let them float into irrelevancy? I don't understand.
@@Kyriakos703 I appreciate your question and honesty! I guess my main reason for still having faith is because I want another “classic” Bethesda game. Like… I really hope that when I boot up TES6 I let out a sigh of relief. That’s what I’m hoping for. But on the flip side, I totally see your point dude. They keep screwing up on pretty much everything they’ve done since (in my opinion) Skyrim. It’s definitely insane to still look at them and hope for the best haha
In order for Starfield to get good Bethesda would have to do a complete and total overhaul as well as add tons of new good content. But Bethesda shows absolutely no signs of understanding their failures and if anything doubles down on their bad decisions. And of course I wouldn't expect them to essentially remake the game. So Starfield will forever and ever be shit and I am afraid TES6 will be even shittier.
8:06 I wouldnt hold my breath. Bethesda doesn't treat fans like paying customers. They treat them like annoying kids who complain to a father who started buying the cheaper cornflakes.
Internet historian has a great video on the redemption of NMS. They worked damn hard to earn back trust and they’ve done that tenfold. They also recoded one of their old games so a disabled boy in the U.K. could go on playing it. All that is effort and care. Bethesda don’t care, they stopped a long time ago.
The problem isn't that it lacks content but that it lacks meaningful content. There's no truly unique weapons, no unique ship parts, no unique perks, etc. When I play Morrowind, dark souls or Fallout 4 I can start a new character and instantly visualise the steps I have to take for my current build but with Starfield I just draw a blank.There's just nothing to do other than starting the grind for leveling up. Of course from my perspective No man's sky isn't any better than Starfield because it's 100% procedurally generated.
Sean Murray is what people think Todd Howard is, but they couldn't be further apart. One is a passionate artist, and Todd is just a reluctant sales expert who stumbled into a lead creative position.
the fact that starfield is like “competing” with games like star wars outlaws which is incredibly sad because there shouldn’t be any competition between games this bad
Bethesda has fallen so hard that channels based on taking the piss out of them are practically a genre nowadays. They absolutely deserve it and I'm enjoying the content. Spacebourne 2 is another good example that contrasts with Starfield. A game by one guy and you can actually fly your spaceship.
In just the first 4 minutes you definitely hit on the most significant issues plaguing Bethesda, by contrast with Hello Games. The ones on the forefront being arrogance and incompetence. We can look at games like No Man's Sky and Cyberpunk 2077 that had disastrous launches, yet through a ton of developer-player interaction and hard work, both titles pulled themselves out of the muck. BGS, however, is a lot like Artax in "The Never-Ending Story". We players are like Atreyu: no matter what we do to try and steer Bethesda out of the swamp, letting them know what WE want and how they can find their footing again, Artax sinks into the swamp nonetheless. Except in this situation it's due to unimaginable stupidity and self-confidence, and not a curse of sadness. Like, how is it that Fallout 3 only had a team of 80 and had all of their DLCs released within a year, yet BGS currently has 450+ employees and Starfield's baseline map took 8 months for release, and nearly a full year for just the FIRST DLC? How does a game that is 80% randomly generated map content take a full year to release a single expansion? You're right on the money, man. They're starved for content, effort AND talent.
6:56 Management. The answer is management. The management and direction of a team means everything to what they are able to make. Clearly there is some issues. The way a team works and interfaces with eachother is a big factor too. All of the individuals on both of those teams are the same level of talented, but the way they work together is the difference maker. That all starts at top with management and direction.
You ever see those vids of 20-something y.o. Google employees going to work, and it's like adult daycare? I picture that. Like, how do they *physically* produce so little content with so many people on the dev team??? It can only be laziness, or lots of red tape/ departments taking ages to reply to eachother or something...
the little bits of humor always crack me up. the fact that you aren't trying to be funny 24/7 makes the funny parts hit extra hard. it's a good formula.
The saddest part is Bethesda acting like an indie studio after making so much goddamn money. The other BIG problem was the fact Todd overpromoted all his friends into positions they have no right to be in. Emil being the prime example. Dude was a good environmental designer. He is an absolutely atrocious writer. Dude couldn’t even write directions out of his own goddamn house let alone a compelling and immersive story. But, buddies with Todd, so he got promoted, and it shows. All you have to do is look at starfields “lore”
It shouldn't be a surprise that the video recommended next to this video in my feed is a review of 'paid mods' for Starfield. One has to wonder if that isn't what they're actually looking to achieve, a 'platform' where they can sell UGC and get rich of the work of the modders.
When Fallout 4 dropped skills for tiered perks. That was a red flag for me. Then Starfield released unshackled by the SPECIAL system, leaving only tiered perks. No attributes. No skills. Just perk points. I hate it. I’m dead curious what TESVI ends up looking like. Pretty rough i bet. I miss stat driven Bethesda games.
At its core what Starfield was trying to be, was just was not a good fit for Bethesda's style. For a story driven game everything is stretched so thin. Compressing things into one solar system with a few planets would keep things fresh even with a similar amount of content. Keeps the space theme and doesn't have you zipping around to yet another empty procedural gen planet
Agreed. I don't get how Bethesda ignored all the criticism NMS got on release for being "big, but repetitive and boring", because they seem to have exactly the same idea for Starfield "let's make it huge, but kinda empty and repetitive, after all, there's nothing on the moon and the astronauts weren't bored". Starfield should have been rejected early in the conceptual stage. Just describing the concept should have got all the red flags flying. Over 1,000 planets , but 90% will have nothing unique on them. We will be using our ageing engine that is way behind what other games have been doing (RDR2, W3 etc). We don't have any actual sci-fi writers, so Emil will have do do it. We can't do space flight, but hey, just fast travel to planets, it will be fine. Oh, and don't make it violent, deep or edgy, we want to appeal to young teenagers and gamer grandads. That should have been enough for them to realise it should never have left the drawing board.
@OrangeNash They should've taken inspiration from Outer Worlds. Wouldn't even have to be that similar, just copy the format of small condensed planet maps and a spaceship for you and your companions
Yeah, its not "one hand crafted planet" its one hand crafted "city" one hand craft "space station" and a few POI, the REST of "planet" is procedurally generated just like the rest of starfields empty procedurally generated planets...
I have just found your channel and it feels nice having someone with similar opinions to mine . Im a LONG time bethesda fan and ive been playing since morrowind and ive been loving almost every single game that Bethesda made up until fallout 4 (i didnt hate that game but it felt really dumbed down compared to new vegas) and then i played starfield..... I thought i liked it , i beat it and then i realized i did not want to play it again . This was a first for me , every single bethesda game i played i wanted to replay it after beating it but starfield felt like a chore . You are 100% right that starfield is content starved!
DUUUUDE you just described how I felt. I “thought” I liked it. Beat it. Then uninstalled it. Welcome to the channel! I’m really happy you decided to take the time to tell me your Bethesda story 🤣 Preciate you
Studios with 100s of employees are a huge red flag for me nowadays. Too many chefs in the kitchen. When you have such a massive team size it takes longer to come to consensus about things and you'll be revising systems dozens of times. I think Bethesda would be better off if they narrowed their scope massively and laid off half their staff.
Cool that you mentioned that because I also felt that way. Starfield feels like they smashed it together in 3months because it feels so immensely void of any content. (Quality and quantity) I wondered whether they secretly worked on TES6 the whole time and only put out starfield to fool us all into believing that TES6 is still 5+years away. I also thought whether they wanted to actively reduce everyones expectations for TES6. 🤔
This video is really helpful because I couldn't really understand the reaction to the game until now. So people are generally expecting Starfield to be a living game like Fortnite, Minecraft, or No Man's Sky with these regular updates that add mechanics and things. Don't really know what to say, Bethesda has almost never made games like that. It's a single player, synchronous game that's meant to be played and then it ends.
As someone that has played since Daggerfall, and modded more hours than is reasonable I think I am qualified to say that Bethesda will not turn Starfield around. If anyone turns Starfield around it will be mod authors and I dont have faith that would happen in any timeframe that matters. Do you think that 10 year's from now when the modders finally make Starfield good is a reasonable timeframe? I dont because by then something better would have come along even with the slop being dished out by triple A companies something will come along during the next 10 years, just speaking from experience here.
First off, I think you’re more than qualified to speak on this topic (lol). Second, yeah like I said in the video I “hope” they turn it around. Do I realistically think that will happen? Nope. But boy do I hope. And yeah I don’t think mod authors will give it a decent shot, I mean I wouldn’t.
I don't think I can fully agree truth be told. One of the biggest issues with the creation kit for starfield was no lip syncing, but now that we have that in the recent update, one of the biggest issues of quests and such can be fixed up a bit. Starfield has a lot of interesting systems, and It's a game with a ton of potential as a foundation... Just Bethesda refuses to use it themselves for some reason.
Personally in my experience I rate Starfield a 6 or 7 out of 10, I am aware that the game isn't perfect but I do agree with some of the stuff you put on the video, for me Shattered space ignited my curiosity to see what changed and try it out since I did the questionable decision to buy the premium edition before it even launched, and it was alright to a degree, my main theory why Starfield its on a subpar paradox of quality its because this is Bethesda's "New" universe set game in difference to Fallout franchise and the Elders Scrolls franchise, they both have a solid anchor at what bethesda can craft, but Starfield, being a new franchise/universe setting I can MILDLY understand the lacking aspects of the game to a degree but I wished it had more mechanics/features as most ppl say, for me Shattered Space so far its 7 out of 10 SO FAR, and since I was gifted 1.2k creation club coins I managed to get some new content so its entertaining to a large degree, I know I might get hit with some racket with this but I just hope starfield evolves in a way like no mans sky, or AT LEAST in a similar/vague rhythm of the engoodening in the future, I guess I have the trait of being overly optimism and yes I recognize there is bad stuff in the game (but again its my opinion) I just hope (even if it never happens) one day Bethesda pushes Starfield into the same tracks as No Man's Sky one day hopefully..
HG didnt tell us how wrong we are about the game and its problems. they didnt tell us that we couldnt know what a good or bad videogame is because we cant make on on our own. they didnt sell us DLCs tarned as mods. they didnt released a paid DLC, while the game is lacking content and depth. HG worked hard after the release to redeem themselves. BGS acts like we in the wrong and starfield isnt outdated and just loadingscreen filled as hell.
I just don't get how No Man Sky's space ship travel can be so much better than Starfields and NMS released a while ago too. My disappointment in starfield hit when I wanted to fly off in a spaceship and got a loading screen instead. And we all know how excessive the loading screens are just to travel around. Todd said they had waited a long time to make starfield because they didn't have the technology. They clearly still don't have that technology.
I like Todd being like "A thousand planets, this is the largest space simulation ever" while Elite Dangerous is sitting here, a decade old, with a quasi-realistic 1:1 model of the Milky Way You can *literally* pick a star and start the long journey to visit that star by jumping in that direction. I picked a constellation once, kept jumping in that direction, and when I got there I found a series of black holes The ED map is so large if you don't have an end game ship specifically made for long jumps it takes *HUNDREDS* of jumps to reach the center of the galaxy. There was a whole competition among the players on who could reach the far edge of the galaxy. There are entire exploration groups that do nothing but chart new planets. There are groups who spend their time running fuel out to players stranded in the middle of nowhere.
To be fair, the technology to do what Bethesda tries to do isn't a cheap and easy technology. Although games like Elite Dangerous, NMS and Star Citizen do have their ways to do it, this ain't cheap or easy. ED had some 200 investment at this point and is severely behind this other games in some aspects,. Sean Murray is a wizard, that guy just did magic with all those mathematics for NMS. And SC is literally the most costly game ever made and it's still A PROTOTYPE.
@@efxnews4776 Elite Dangerous did it with like 15M, their own publisher made them crowdfund the money to pay for it and they only had like random extra people working on it and it came out a decade ago Star Citizen is a scam NMS came out like 10 years ago as well Anyway my point was that Todd was just outright lying
@@NewMitchell-wh3fj i disagree that Star Citizen is an scam... They clearly have a product that no one has matched yet in the market. If Starfield is on the deep end with Bethesda outdated trash, Star Citizen is on tje top of the hill even if most of their tech is in a prototype state at this point. Elite Dangerous, from the games mentioned here is only better than Starfield and well, the numbers spea volumes for NMS is probably the most popular space sim ever made.
@@efxnews4776 Their "product" doesn't work, it's more than matched on the market lmao If you promise something, don't deliver it, lie about it, and keep taking money for it, it's a scam Star Citizen is only "top of the hill" if you're a rube or a grifter "most of their tech is in prototype stage" it's been over 10 years, they said SQ42 was playable 6+ years ago gtfo with that grifter nonsense
That's only true until Rockstar Games joins the picture. I guess its all about the Studio's integrity. While rockstar are greedy scums too, they have always prioritised high quality meticulous games before money, cause they know high quality games is how you gain more money.
In the next 8 or so years people are going to be comparing Starfield's greatness to Skyrim and Fallout. This is a cycle that happens with every game they release. When it launches and is new it is trashed. Oblivion was dumped on because it "dumbed down" Morrowind. Skyrim was dumped on because it "dumbed down" what we had in Oblivion. Fallout 4 was dumped on because a lot of the RPG mechanics in Fallout 3 and NV(which was another studio) weren't there. Now the script has entirely flipped. Bethesda games have never been studio driven, they've been community driven. It is the modding scene that makes their games excellent. The base games are always meh.
I remember no mans sky’s launch. Sean was thrown to the wolves because of how bad it was but they never gave up on it. Now, it looks great and what his original vision for it probably was.
honestly i 100% agree im currently replaying it after dropping it after doing one questline and its so painful to see how content starved it is there is so many missed opportunities and little things they could've added to just flush out the game more and i love bethesda I want this game to be good so bad cuz there so much missed potential cuz half of the time the game feels like its SO HALF BAKED
A comment I once saw in a Fallout-based discussion that seems 100% relevant here - *"Bethesda doesn't actually produce games, it produces kits that modders create games out of."* Certainly that was true of Fallouts 3 and 4, amongst other games. Bethesda threw some stuff together, made a token pass at a couple of patches, then sat back and waited for indie modders to properly fix the games for them. I don't doubt that is part of their thinking for Starfield as well - that, with time, there will be a whole slew of free mods out there to make the game awesome. Or even just playable.
Remember a sub 100 studio made Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim (100 or employees). With more employees, BGS just got worst. They can't seem to release content fast enough. In the same time frame as Starfield expansion, Fallout 4 had like 4 dlcs and two expansions. What is BGS doing with their time.
NMS is great now but to be fair Sean lies pre-launch would make peter molyneux blush NMS was missing (and still missing a few stuff) they showed on trailers on launch
Could any of us have fathomed in 2016 someone saying "Hello games delivered quantity and quality, and Bethesda delivered neither"? Like, it would have been unfathomable a statement to have made, even from the most die-hard Bethesda haters. Yet, today, to BGS fans... This is just a pretty fair assessment of the situation.
Don't forget they claim to have spent 8 years on that fallout 4 asset flip of a game and apparently Todd's dream project. I bet at least half of those were coffee break
Sean Murray's only true flaw is that he does not produce content faster than he already is. If I could sell a bit of my soul to allow him to double the output and eventually give depth to one or more existing gameplay mechanics, I probably would.
Todd Howard is the Jervis Johnson of Bethesda (something only older 40k fans will get) he's a guy who was in the background doing solid work but always a little resentful of all the praise the franchises worked on because he just wasn't that creative a resentment that grew till one day he was in charge and could prove he was better than them, so he surrounds himself with individuals whose primary qualification is giving him praise and arent good enough to overshadow him, but as he was stuck on those other franchises he set about destroying anything he didnt come up with, you can see this in Fallout 4, in the TV show, the reaction to Fallout London. Starfield was his chance to prove how great he was all along, that he could of made Fallout of Elder Scrolls if given a chance and so it will bever get better becuase this is all he's capable of and anyone on the team who was good enough to improve it is long since gone, replaced with sycophants
What Hello Games have done with NMS is such a stark contrast of philosophy when compared to the AAA mainstream. It feels like more and more studios are adopting this attitude where success is a given and adoration expected--then they'll turn around and insult the audience when their own failures come back to bite them. Bethesda, sadly, seems to be sinking into this whirlpool as well. Is it any surprise people turn toward studios like Hello Games when the alternative is so disappointingly toxic?
What do you even do in nms other than explore and build? Is there even any gameplay? Are there missions to play with an online community? That would make nms amazing
Maybe it's a bit similar to Andromeda, close to endless time and funds, and the result ends up being all over the place since people are just there to cash in their paychecks rather than being passionate about the game
I have a love hate relationship with hello games. They released a shit game, heard people angry with it, disappeared for a few months, came back with "sorry yall, here's a fixed game, we're going to be better" I love seeing people be cool, but i hate how it has apparently convinced everyone that every company will do what they did when those companies clearly don't care
I find it crazy that Bethesda pushed out a game that was worse than No Man's Sky was _at launch_ (I know... I was there at launch) and expected to be praised for it. Say what you will about how empty NMS was at launch, but didn't have Emil fucking Pagliarulo's grubby mitts on it... you didn't have to suffer through dialogue that makes you want to slit your own wrists. And I get what you mean about wanting Bethesda to get better. I've wanted that since Oblivion. Fallout 76 was the giant flashing neon sign (to me) that things were not going to be getting better anytime soon. Bless your heart for still having hope, though.
A big company with lots of employees like Bethesda doesn't mean things will get done faster, if their management is either incompetent or very rigid and stubborn. Also a certain chain of command has to be followed depending on their structure, so it adds even more time.
Second comment, I would love to hear your opinion on what needs to be added/altered in Starfield for it to start gaining back faith from fans. Stuff like the main quest and the fundamental design of the game obviously can't/won't be changed but what do you think Bethesda can do to alleviate some of the pain XD.
I don't want to be a downer, but I don't think it can be fixed. It's basically just a bunch of ideas loosely tied together, but there's no cohesive structure. NMS is a good comparison, both games have almost the same ending, but NMS understands that you want to keep all your cool items, bases and ships.
I think you missed one point. NMS updates where as far as I know always backed by a sale on all plattforms to get new players. And this works for NMS because of the way they changed a bad game (with many missing features) to a good game. Can you see this way with Starfield?
Top best kinds of videos that will make you famous; - Bethesda being terrible - Hazbin Hotel being overrated - Bojack Horseman being a masterpiece - Disney destroying everything they touch - War in Ukraine being bad - Responses to responses to your videos - Forgotten shows/films/games that NOBODY ever heard about (sometimes even for good reasons) having some overlooked bit of brilliance
10:10 Even compared to a questline/combat driven game, cyberpunk, it still is a flop. What are the excuses of Starfield fans?? Do they say "well, cyberpunk isn't a SPACE game". How about Mass Effect then? (I haven't played it) Does Borderlands: The pre-sequel have enough space to count? Eve Online? I was disappointed in the Outer Worlds, but it seems better than Starfield. Yes, I haven't played Starfield, but I'm not about to get led down this road: - You haven't even played it, how do you know you don't like it? - OK you played some and quit, but if you finished it THEN you'd like it. - You finished it and still don't like it? Well, if you finished it, you must have liked it!
The fact that people are still somewhat excited for the next ES game is crazy. The bar has raised so drastically and Bethesda had every opportunity with SF to show us they can keep up and they literally couldn't have failed harder. The next ES game is going to be so abysmally shit that I can't wait to see the reactions. Also on the NMS vs SF comparison, I find it hilarious that a multi-million dollar AAA studio, backed by a multi-billion dollar company couldn't produce a fraction of what an indie team did like 8 years ago. BGS is creatively bankrupt
If you into space like elite dangerous I recommend x4 foundations is an empire building but you can also trade you can do missions it's an rpg type as well is pretty fun.
I know what it's like to work on a creaky code base. The code base does its job, but doing anything with it is 10x harder than working with well maintained code. I have not seen Bethesda's code, but Starfield is pretty indicative of the difficulty of doing a 2024 game on Bethesda's engine. It can't be good.
Starfield and No Man's Sky are really apt comparisons and not in just space exploration theming.. They're both Forks in the road. Where both where panned for under-delivering in features and bugs, Starfield took a little later to reach that point once the honeymoon phase wore off. Though, one actually took the criticism to heart hunkered down and addressed the concerns and flaws of the game, and the other dug its heels in the sand put their fingers in their ears and told you, you were wrong for thinking anything is wrong with their game. Can you guess which one is which? All in all should either game been released in the state they were initially? No. But one has went the extra mile to redeem itself in it's playerbase's eyes from the unanimous hailstorm of criticism, to the point they're willing to pay for free content. While the others' playerbase is stuck wandering how exactly did we get here?
Because Hello Games cares about the game and the community, Bethesda cares about money and well that's it actually. When Todd said he admires what EA does with it's micro transactions I knew we all should've been worried. The next Elder Scrolls isn't going to be what we all want, it's gonna be Starfield all over again and Bethesda always lets the modders fix their games, they always have.
I hear what you are saying, bethesda needs to do better and Starfield certainly needs more content but the fact is, these two games are just not on an equal playing field in regards to some of the comparisons. -No Man's Sky was very bare bones for a LONG time. Like 2 years or more. It was hugely disappointing for many, it had less content than Starfield and actually fewer significant updates in the first year. -They are different games. No Man's Sky doesn't have all the NPC's, dialogue, companions, hand crafted worlds and content that Starfield does. That greatly changes how and what you can do in regards to altering the game. They also run on different engines. Bethesda's engine is highly moddable but at the same time they have to factor in for so many things, every damn apple, coffee cup, pencil etc. you placed has to be stored and remembered. To straight up help answer your question as to why a small team can outshine a big one on updates. -In the modern gaming landscape, being a huge 600 team AAA studio is often actually a detriment to innovation and creativity. These massive studios have massive budgets. They are are also looking for massive returns on their investments. Starfield and Bethesda are trying to get the biggest slice of pie they can. Dropping in game changing updates is going to take a lot of approvals and a lot of people getting on the same page, and a lot of checks and balances and QA, and everything that comes with it. It's a big task and again, they have to ask, is this going to be profitable, is this worth their time. No Man's Sky has target a niche core audience. They have a very strong and healthy demographic they cater to and at this point they know them well. They don't need to make nearly as much money to keep their 60 person team afloat. They don't have to answer to a Trillion dollar parent company and they don't have several other studios they have to keep alive. They are like a mom and pop restaurant who has a really loyal group of 100 customers who keep them running. Bethesda is McDonalds and they are serving all over the country. This isn't a total justification or excuse for Bethesda, yes they are doing poorly and we want better. They can do better and I hope they improve Starfield a lot. That said there are lots of reasons as to why they aren't updating this game on the same level as Hello Games, for that matter, very few devs are. Hello Games is maybe the absolute best example of a studio getting after in this department. This is comparing Michael Jordan to any other regular NBA all-star. Very few devs are going to be able to stack up to the update quality of Hello Games.
The 'dlc' was factually meant to be apart of the base game but had to be cut and worked on further. But Bethesda had no actual dlc ready by the promised window, so they decided to tack on new weapons and armor onto this restored cut content before slapping a price tag on it and releasing it. Starfield is dead to me, this from someone who had hopes it'd redeem itself at first dlc. Obviously first dlc is in fact, cut content that has been restored.. With a price tag.
"Compared to the 5 or 6 hundred that work at Bethesda" It is important to mention that Bethesda is a AAA Company, pretending to be a small studio, and having a moderate amount of staff. Bethesda is not a big company, and working with their shitfest of an engine, CE2, their small team is one of the reasons they suffer. (Though their directors are mostly at fault)
Had this conversation with a friend about Bethesda and how lacking it has been. You have to remember that a massive % are working on ESO6. So for their other games is probably worked by a skeleton crew thats overworked to hell and back. We were joking it was a hand full of people doing at least 5 different jobs at the same time trying to scramble up something. With what has happened i would not be surprised if Stanfield has 10% of no mans sky.
Don't love any company. Love your family and your friends.
Pinning this
ye
Holy shit, can't believe I'm seeing someone else with this line of thinking. I swear it feels like the entire internet is just corporate shills and dipshits sometimes.
Starfield was made to be lacking in content. It is a platform for paid mods.
“Modders playground” as everyone kept calling it lol
@HorseArmour then the modders called it trash....
@@badrhetoric5637 they sure did lmao
It was made by a team of sub par developers and a director with a mindset that modding over next ten years will make it their game.
I mean not a bad idea, make a bare minimum game, and then have fans and others fix it for free and then even have others fix it, buy them out for less and profit more off of the work of others. Whoever works at Microsoft is legitimately evil
Starfield cant be boring. When the astronauts went to the moon, they weren't bored
BUT BUT BUT BUT
Outstanding. Simply beautiful. Bethesda really has shown us with that one.
Being muzzled in the backseat is the perfect way of describing how I feel when Emil says stuff like "Shattered Space is one the best DLCs we have ever made" when it's mostly negative on Steam.
Meanwhile, the shivering isles is among the best DLCs actually ever made... but we're supposed to forget about that and settle for less
@@OpoOnTheGo Not just that but also Blood Moon in Morrowind and Dawnguard in Skyrim. When they're asking for $30 I expect a lot.
@@christianvondruska8244 exactly i liked Dawnguard in Skyrim alot,i think dragonborn dlc was meh but they were really cooking good with dawnguard
yet they refused to let you marry Serana npc arround wich litteraly whole dlc is about lol,tho that asside i really enjoyed that dlc
@@christianvondruska8244 i personally didn't love the Dawngaurd dlc but I absolutely agree with you in terms of it's grandeur! It was absolutely an intoxicating to realm to deeply dive into, and that's what I craved at the time. There's no better comparison imo, even if it wasn't for me! Top notch work my friend
@OpoOnTheGo I'm not big on Dawnguard myself, I'm just saying that as an expansion of the main game's content it does what it sets out to do. It expands on vampires, werewolves, introduces a new Faction, race, weapon type, location, and biome. Compare that to whatever Shattered Space was with cut content, reskinned weapons, no player choice, limited playtime, and whatever else was wrong with it.
What is really sad to me is the new starfield expansion seems like cut content.
It is as far as I can tell
It is. It was announced before the game was released. It’s just a cut questline from the original build. That’s why I suspect it has nothing new in it.
And not even good cut content.
Yes it was cut
Starfield is basically 5 faction quests 15 side quests, 30 aux quests, and then the rest is procedural.
God that’s so sad
Which I wouldn't mind at all of they didn't tried to blend it with the procedural. Exactly like fallout 4: in order to advance main quests you have to grind numerous radiant quests... I find this só disrespectful... I wish to God Bethesda would give me a good written videogame that's 20 hours long instead of whatever they do.
Shitting on bethesda is my new favorite genre of youtube videos
Sheeeeit
You just proved most of you haters don't have lives, so shitting on something makes you feel better...... Then so be it..... If that's how you cope..... That's how you COPE
@amitansurkar1769 lol you're also watching the videos bro, if the game was good we would all be playing it
@@patrickwilliamson29 that's because I like the game, so I'm defending it, fool, the real question is y are you haters interested in Starfield so much if y'all hate it. I mean a real disappointing game like outlaws isn't talked about anymore. But u type in Starfield, my god the vids are flooded with hate and love for the game, and it is more than a yr old. Shouldn't it be forgotten if it was so damn atrocious, and besides all you dumbfuck haters just recycle the same shit y'all have been saying about Starfield for the past yr..... So ya it still proves y'all got no lives..
@@amitansurkar1769Found Todd Howard's burner account
Starfield was doomed from the start. Todd tried to reach for a mix of No Man's Sky, Red Dead Redemption, Fallout, etc etc, while simultaneously not reaching any elements of what made those other games great.
He made his crew waste 10 years. Yes, 10 YEARS of their time on this dump of a game, simply because he got obsessed with SpAcE for a few years.
Fuckin' sad.
Creation engine isn't suited for the kind of game Todd wanted...
Starfield could be great, it's not impossible ESPECIALLY if you have endless cash to make a great space sim game.
But Todd didn't even try do it the proper way.
I know solo indie devs that make better space sims than Starfield.
@@efxnews4776 They could have done something with their cell-based engine even with all the loading screens, like making handcrafted open areas on at least a few planets, they know how to do that.
Instead they mixed up some half baked systems that all individually suck compared to even 20 years old games. The result is a bastardized game that does nothing particularly good, it's neither a good space sim, or RPG, or shooter, or base builder.
It could have been a decent game even with a all that jank if only the writing was decent.
Emil Pagliarulo took a lot of (well deserved) flak for that, like he wrote every single quest, but the fact is that he's a lead writer without other writers down the line, most of the work is done by game designers who do their own thing in their corner, that's why everything feels so disconnected, from the gameplay to the narrative.
There's generally a lack of unified workflow in that company. They still work as if they were in the 90's, when 10 devs did a bit of everything and could quickly communicate, but that's not possible when you have hundreds of employees.
Not really 10 years. Early conceptualization process started in 2013, yes, with Todd and 2 other people, but real work on the game didn't start until ~2018. It's still shit though, glad I pirated it.
@@rickhapstley3866they should have just done a colonized solar system out to Sedna tbh.
You forgot LOADING SCREENS! No man sky just has none during gameplay.
Yeah but they’re interesting!
@@yttrxstein4192 They're loading screens that make sense.
You don't have a loading screen entering or leaving planets.
Only systhem to systhem warp in nms
Warping and teleporting are the only loading screen and they dont look like loadings screens at all lol
@@nestor1924teleport is fast travel, and it is completely optional.
And warping is essentially a concealed loading screen.
"I hope that in two years I delete this video." I would love that as well, but I don't have any where near that kinda faith. Bethesda seems to be sticking their heads in the sand at this point.
I’ve got like a strand of faith left in me at this point for Starfield… or bethesdas future in general haha
@@HorseArmour I'm confused as to why you do. This is a genuine question. I'm not trying to berate or insult, but I desperately need to understand those still faithful to bethesda, or those still willing to spend money on their games, or to believe they'll eventually wake up.
Why? I myself gave up on them on the launch of 76. That fiasco told me all I needed to know. I had low expectations for starfield, and even those were not met, yet people still went and bought shattered space, or some people still believe they have the prospect to make amends with the community, after blatantly trying to exploit the one thing that keeps them relevant: their modding community. It makes me sick that they'd try not once, but multiple times. With Fallout 4, with Skyrim SE, and then introducing Skyrim AE which broke everything just so the could shove their paid mods in our face again.
Starfield was meant to be their redemption after the insult that was F76's release. And yet it's their greatest failure. Why do people still believe in them? Why do people not boycott them and let them float into irrelevancy? I don't understand.
@@Kyriakos703 I appreciate your question and honesty! I guess my main reason for still having faith is because I want another “classic” Bethesda game. Like… I really hope that when I boot up TES6 I let out a sigh of relief. That’s what I’m hoping for.
But on the flip side, I totally see your point dude. They keep screwing up on pretty much everything they’ve done since (in my opinion) Skyrim. It’s definitely insane to still look at them and hope for the best haha
In order for Starfield to get good Bethesda would have to do a complete and total overhaul as well as add tons of new good content. But Bethesda shows absolutely no signs of understanding their failures and if anything doubles down on their bad decisions. And of course I wouldn't expect them to essentially remake the game. So Starfield will forever and ever be shit and I am afraid TES6 will be even shittier.
Spoiler alert:
In 2 years, Bethesda will get worse.
Starfield is a mountain of shit. If you give it more content you'll just have a bigger mountain of shit. Nobody wants a shit mountain.
Nobody wants that
At least a mountain of poop can fertilize a huge amount of land, & garbage can be recycled.
What can SF even do 😂
But can you climb it?
Yes, the problem isn't a lack of content, it's a lack of quality
8:06 I wouldnt hold my breath. Bethesda doesn't treat fans like paying customers. They treat them like annoying kids who complain to a father who started buying the cheaper cornflakes.
I hate you bc you’re right 😂
Internet historian has a great video on the redemption of NMS. They worked damn hard to earn back trust and they’ve done that tenfold.
They also recoded one of their old games so a disabled boy in the U.K. could go on playing it. All that is effort and care. Bethesda don’t care, they stopped a long time ago.
Dude I’ve seen that video, it’s a very good video haha
Internet historian? I liked his man stuck in cave video
@@robc9655 The video he plagiarized, you mean?
@@jamesoldham9995From who
@@jamesoldham9995 thanks for picking up on the hope
It really comes down to Hello Games having a soul.
And NMS does not have one
You're delusional
Yeah let's ignore tge first 3 tears when they went radio silent. NMS is still boring as shit
The problem isn't that it lacks content but that it lacks meaningful content. There's no truly unique weapons, no unique ship parts, no unique perks, etc. When I play Morrowind, dark souls or Fallout 4 I can start a new character and instantly visualise the steps I have to take for my current build but with Starfield I just draw a blank.There's just nothing to do other than starting the grind for leveling up.
Of course from my perspective No man's sky isn't any better than Starfield because it's 100% procedurally generated.
Starfield is ok, if you compare it to a fan made mod circa 2005
Sean Murray is what people think Todd Howard is, but they couldn't be further apart. One is a passionate artist, and Todd is just a reluctant sales expert who stumbled into a lead creative position.
the fact that starfield is like “competing” with games like star wars outlaws which is incredibly sad because there shouldn’t be any competition between games this bad
Bethesda has fallen so hard that channels based on taking the piss out of them are practically a genre nowadays. They absolutely deserve it and I'm enjoying the content.
Spacebourne 2 is another good example that contrasts with Starfield. A game by one guy and you can actually fly your spaceship.
Hm I’ve never heard of this game, I’ll check it out on steam though for sure. Appreciate you :)
In just the first 4 minutes you definitely hit on the most significant issues plaguing Bethesda, by contrast with Hello Games. The ones on the forefront being arrogance and incompetence. We can look at games like No Man's Sky and Cyberpunk 2077 that had disastrous launches, yet through a ton of developer-player interaction and hard work, both titles pulled themselves out of the muck.
BGS, however, is a lot like Artax in "The Never-Ending Story". We players are like Atreyu: no matter what we do to try and steer Bethesda out of the swamp, letting them know what WE want and how they can find their footing again, Artax sinks into the swamp nonetheless. Except in this situation it's due to unimaginable stupidity and self-confidence, and not a curse of sadness.
Like, how is it that Fallout 3 only had a team of 80 and had all of their DLCs released within a year, yet BGS currently has 450+ employees and Starfield's baseline map took 8 months for release, and nearly a full year for just the FIRST DLC? How does a game that is 80% randomly generated map content take a full year to release a single expansion?
You're right on the money, man. They're starved for content, effort AND talent.
I read your whole comment, I appreciate it. You make some good points here Mr Doyle
A neverending Story is something i haven't heard in years
6:56 Management. The answer is management. The management and direction of a team means everything to what they are able to make. Clearly there is some issues. The way a team works and interfaces with eachother is a big factor too. All of the individuals on both of those teams are the same level of talented, but the way they work together is the difference maker. That all starts at top with management and direction.
Yeah you make some good points here
Also comparing to a semi recent $30 expansion. Phantom liberty for 2077 may as well be a spin off. Adds like 20-25 hours of content
I’ve yet to play PL, I really really need to set aside some time to play it!
@@HorseArmourIt is a fantastic expansion!
Seriously im playing cyberpunk 2077 now and i cant stop phantom liberty is seriously impressive
@@HorseArmourCDPR has that old Bethesda magic that is missing in Bethesda games this days...
You ever see those vids of 20-something y.o. Google employees going to work, and it's like adult daycare?
I picture that. Like, how do they *physically* produce so little content with so many people on the dev team???
It can only be laziness, or lots of red tape/ departments taking ages to reply to eachother or something...
the little bits of humor always crack me up. the fact that you aren't trying to be funny 24/7 makes the funny parts hit extra hard. it's a good formula.
Hey I appreciate it! Glad you enjoyed the video Zack
The saddest part is Bethesda acting like an indie studio after making so much goddamn money.
The other BIG problem was the fact Todd overpromoted all his friends into positions they have no right to be in.
Emil being the prime example. Dude was a good environmental designer. He is an absolutely atrocious writer. Dude couldn’t even write directions out of his own goddamn house let alone a compelling and immersive story. But, buddies with Todd, so he got promoted, and it shows. All you have to do is look at starfields “lore”
I'll never get tired of videos shitting on Midfield while it's repeatedly getting annihilated by an 8 year old indie game
Never gets old
It shouldn't be a surprise that the video recommended next to this video in my feed is a review of 'paid mods' for Starfield. One has to wonder if that isn't what they're actually looking to achieve, a 'platform' where they can sell UGC and get rich of the work of the modders.
It feels more like a store front honestly lmao
When Fallout 4 dropped skills for tiered perks. That was a red flag for me. Then Starfield released unshackled by the SPECIAL system, leaving only tiered perks. No attributes. No skills. Just perk points. I hate it. I’m dead curious what TESVI ends up looking like. Pretty rough i bet. I miss stat driven Bethesda games.
I appreciate your content brother.
Keep it up!
Thanks dude!
At its core what Starfield was trying to be, was just was not a good fit for Bethesda's style. For a story driven game everything is stretched so thin. Compressing things into one solar system with a few planets would keep things fresh even with a similar amount of content. Keeps the space theme and doesn't have you zipping around to yet another empty procedural gen planet
Agreed. I don't get how Bethesda ignored all the criticism NMS got on release for being "big, but repetitive and boring", because they seem to have exactly the same idea for Starfield "let's make it huge, but kinda empty and repetitive, after all, there's nothing on the moon and the astronauts weren't bored".
Starfield should have been rejected early in the conceptual stage. Just describing the concept should have got all the red flags flying. Over 1,000 planets , but 90% will have nothing unique on them. We will be using our ageing engine that is way behind what other games have been doing (RDR2, W3 etc). We don't have any actual sci-fi writers, so Emil will have do do it. We can't do space flight, but hey, just fast travel to planets, it will be fine. Oh, and don't make it violent, deep or edgy, we want to appeal to young teenagers and gamer grandads.
That should have been enough for them to realise it should never have left the drawing board.
@OrangeNash They should've taken inspiration from Outer Worlds. Wouldn't even have to be that similar, just copy the format of small condensed planet maps and a spaceship for you and your companions
Yeah, its not "one hand crafted planet" its one hand crafted "city" one hand craft "space station" and a few POI, the REST of "planet" is procedurally generated just like the rest of starfields empty procedurally generated planets...
"I got you baby cakes"
I loled
I have just found your channel and it feels nice having someone with similar opinions to mine . Im a LONG time bethesda fan and ive been playing since morrowind and ive been loving almost every single game that Bethesda made up until fallout 4 (i didnt hate that game but it felt really dumbed down compared to new vegas) and then i played starfield..... I thought i liked it , i beat it and then i realized i did not want to play it again . This was a first for me , every single bethesda game i played i wanted to replay it after beating it but starfield felt like a chore . You are 100% right that starfield is content starved!
DUUUUDE you just described how I felt. I “thought” I liked it. Beat it. Then uninstalled it. Welcome to the channel! I’m really happy you decided to take the time to tell me your Bethesda story 🤣 Preciate you
Studios with 100s of employees are a huge red flag for me nowadays. Too many chefs in the kitchen. When you have such a massive team size it takes longer to come to consensus about things and you'll be revising systems dozens of times. I think Bethesda would be better off if they narrowed their scope massively and laid off half their staff.
I agree, and I actually liked Starfield on launch...there's just not enough STUFF in there to keep me coming back very often
Keep up the good work man.
Preciate it Jake!
Cool that you mentioned that because I also felt that way.
Starfield feels like they smashed it together in 3months because it feels so immensely void of any content. (Quality and quantity)
I wondered whether they secretly worked on TES6 the whole time and only put out starfield to fool us all into believing that TES6 is still 5+years away. I also thought whether they wanted to actively reduce everyones expectations for TES6. 🤔
This video is really helpful because I couldn't really understand the reaction to the game until now. So people are generally expecting Starfield to be a living game like Fortnite, Minecraft, or No Man's Sky with these regular updates that add mechanics and things. Don't really know what to say, Bethesda has almost never made games like that. It's a single player, synchronous game that's meant to be played and then it ends.
As someone that has played since Daggerfall, and modded more hours than is reasonable I think I am qualified to say that Bethesda will not turn Starfield around. If anyone turns Starfield around it will be mod authors and I dont have faith that would happen in any timeframe that matters. Do you think that 10 year's from now when the modders finally make Starfield good is a reasonable timeframe? I dont because by then something better would have come along even with the slop being dished out by triple A companies something will come along during the next 10 years, just speaking from experience here.
First off, I think you’re more than qualified to speak on this topic (lol). Second, yeah like I said in the video I “hope” they turn it around. Do I realistically think that will happen? Nope. But boy do I hope.
And yeah I don’t think mod authors will give it a decent shot, I mean I wouldn’t.
I don't think I can fully agree truth be told. One of the biggest issues with the creation kit for starfield was no lip syncing, but now that we have that in the recent update, one of the biggest issues of quests and such can be fixed up a bit. Starfield has a lot of interesting systems, and It's a game with a ton of potential as a foundation... Just Bethesda refuses to use it themselves for some reason.
> Be Todd Howard
> Work tirelessly on Skyrim in space
> Some British guy called Sean makes a better one years before you can release yours.
No Mans Sky going from the black sheep is the gold standard is the character arc we should all hope for
A million points to you for using the correct spelling of Armour
Personally in my experience I rate Starfield a 6 or 7 out of 10, I am aware that the game isn't perfect but I do agree with some of the stuff you put on the video, for me Shattered space ignited my curiosity to see what changed and try it out since I did the questionable decision to buy the premium edition before it even launched, and it was alright to a degree, my main theory why Starfield its on a subpar paradox of quality its because this is Bethesda's "New" universe set game in difference to Fallout franchise and the Elders Scrolls franchise, they both have a solid anchor at what bethesda can craft, but Starfield, being a new franchise/universe setting I can MILDLY understand the lacking aspects of the game to a degree but I wished it had more mechanics/features as most ppl say, for me Shattered Space so far its 7 out of 10 SO FAR, and since I was gifted 1.2k creation club coins I managed to get some new content so its entertaining to a large degree, I know I might get hit with some racket with this but I just hope starfield evolves in a way like no mans sky, or AT LEAST in a similar/vague rhythm of the engoodening in the future, I guess I have the trait of being overly optimism and yes I recognize there is bad stuff in the game (but again its my opinion) I just hope (even if it never happens) one day Bethesda pushes Starfield into the same tracks as No Man's Sky one day hopefully..
HG didnt tell us how wrong we are about the game and its problems. they didnt tell us that we couldnt know what a good or bad videogame is because we cant make on on our own. they didnt sell us DLCs tarned as mods. they didnt released a paid DLC, while the game is lacking content and depth.
HG worked hard after the release to redeem themselves. BGS acts like we in the wrong and starfield isnt outdated and just loadingscreen filled as hell.
tbh no mans sky isnt really a fun game tho. I only played it after it was supposedly fixed. and the game is a nothing.
I just don't get how No Man Sky's space ship travel can be so much better than Starfields and NMS released a while ago too. My disappointment in starfield hit when I wanted to fly off in a spaceship and got a loading screen instead. And we all know how excessive the loading screens are just to travel around.
Todd said they had waited a long time to make starfield because they didn't have the technology. They clearly still don't have that technology.
I like Todd being like "A thousand planets, this is the largest space simulation ever" while Elite Dangerous is sitting here, a decade old, with a quasi-realistic 1:1 model of the Milky Way
You can *literally* pick a star and start the long journey to visit that star by jumping in that direction. I picked a constellation once, kept jumping in that direction, and when I got there I found a series of black holes
The ED map is so large if you don't have an end game ship specifically made for long jumps it takes *HUNDREDS* of jumps to reach the center of the galaxy. There was a whole competition among the players on who could reach the far edge of the galaxy. There are entire exploration groups that do nothing but chart new planets. There are groups who spend their time running fuel out to players stranded in the middle of nowhere.
To be fair, the technology to do what Bethesda tries to do isn't a cheap and easy technology.
Although games like Elite Dangerous, NMS and Star Citizen do have their ways to do it, this ain't cheap or easy.
ED had some 200 investment at this point and is severely behind this other games in some aspects,.
Sean Murray is a wizard, that guy just did magic with all those mathematics for NMS.
And SC is literally the most costly game ever made and it's still A PROTOTYPE.
@@efxnews4776 Elite Dangerous did it with like 15M, their own publisher made them crowdfund the money to pay for it and they only had like random extra people working on it and it came out a decade ago
Star Citizen is a scam
NMS came out like 10 years ago as well
Anyway my point was that Todd was just outright lying
@@NewMitchell-wh3fj i disagree that Star Citizen is an scam...
They clearly have a product that no one has matched yet in the market.
If Starfield is on the deep end with Bethesda outdated trash, Star Citizen is on tje top of the hill even if most of their tech is in a prototype state at this point.
Elite Dangerous, from the games mentioned here is only better than Starfield and well, the numbers spea volumes for NMS is probably the most popular space sim ever made.
@@efxnews4776 Their "product" doesn't work, it's more than matched on the market lmao
If you promise something, don't deliver it, lie about it, and keep taking money for it, it's a scam
Star Citizen is only "top of the hill" if you're a rube or a grifter
"most of their tech is in prototype stage" it's been over 10 years, they said SQ42 was playable 6+ years ago
gtfo with that grifter nonsense
I've never played no man sky, but im happy there's fans who are happy about the game now. The game came a long way from before
This was a pleasant reminder that I should do another playthrough of NMS.
Yes you should :)
In software development, small dedicated teams beat big corporate teams hands down every time.
That's only true until Rockstar Games joins the picture. I guess its all about the Studio's integrity. While rockstar are greedy scums too, they have always prioritised high quality meticulous games before money, cause they know high quality games is how you gain more money.
People keep saying it’s one hand crafted planet, no it’s a hand crafted small square of a planet.
Even worse hahaha
In the next 8 or so years people are going to be comparing Starfield's greatness to Skyrim and Fallout. This is a cycle that happens with every game they release. When it launches and is new it is trashed. Oblivion was dumped on because it "dumbed down" Morrowind. Skyrim was dumped on because it "dumbed down" what we had in Oblivion. Fallout 4 was dumped on because a lot of the RPG mechanics in Fallout 3 and NV(which was another studio) weren't there. Now the script has entirely flipped. Bethesda games have never been studio driven, they've been community driven. It is the modding scene that makes their games excellent. The base games are always meh.
I remember no mans sky’s launch. Sean was thrown to the wolves because of how bad it was but they never gave up on it. Now, it looks great and what his original vision for it probably was.
honestly i 100% agree im currently replaying it after dropping it after doing one questline and its so painful to see how content starved it is there is so many missed opportunities and little things they could've added to just flush out the game more and i love bethesda I want this game to be good so bad cuz there so much missed potential cuz half of the time the game feels like its SO HALF BAKED
Yeah it almost feels like that next to no one is actually working on Starfield.
I thought you were messing with me on the sandworms.
Nope they’re in the game!
Forget about this game. Not worth any attention.
A comment I once saw in a Fallout-based discussion that seems 100% relevant here - *"Bethesda doesn't actually produce games, it produces kits that modders create games out of."*
Certainly that was true of Fallouts 3 and 4, amongst other games. Bethesda threw some stuff together, made a token pass at a couple of patches, then sat back and waited for indie modders to properly fix the games for them. I don't doubt that is part of their thinking for Starfield as well - that, with time, there will be a whole slew of free mods out there to make the game awesome. Or even just playable.
Love the thumbnail 🤣
Its kinda of strange that hand crafted is a term we use now for video games. I get that they mean non procedurally generated but still.
Never thought about that… isn’t that sad dude..
I'm the person that played NMS at launch and never touched it again. The gameplay loop was so boring that no amount of patches will ever fix that
oh bruh they changed it so much its a completely different game now
Remember a sub 100 studio made Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim (100 or employees). With more employees, BGS just got worst. They can't seem to release content fast enough. In the same time frame as Starfield expansion, Fallout 4 had like 4 dlcs and two expansions. What is BGS doing with their time.
NMS is great now but to be fair Sean lies pre-launch would make peter molyneux blush NMS was missing (and still missing a few stuff) they showed on trailers on launch
Could any of us have fathomed in 2016 someone saying "Hello games delivered quantity and quality, and Bethesda delivered neither"?
Like, it would have been unfathomable a statement to have made, even from the most die-hard Bethesda haters.
Yet, today, to BGS fans... This is just a pretty fair assessment of the situation.
Don't forget they claim to have spent 8 years on that fallout 4 asset flip of a game and apparently Todd's dream project.
I bet at least half of those were coffee break
Sean Murray's only true flaw is that he does not produce content faster than he already is. If I could sell a bit of my soul to allow him to double the output and eventually give depth to one or more existing gameplay mechanics, I probably would.
Todd Howard is the Jervis Johnson of Bethesda (something only older 40k fans will get) he's a guy who was in the background doing solid work but always a little resentful of all the praise the franchises worked on because he just wasn't that creative a resentment that grew till one day he was in charge and could prove he was better than them, so he surrounds himself with individuals whose primary qualification is giving him praise and arent good enough to overshadow him, but as he was stuck on those other franchises he set about destroying anything he didnt come up with, you can see this in Fallout 4, in the TV show, the reaction to Fallout London. Starfield was his chance to prove how great he was all along, that he could of made Fallout of Elder Scrolls if given a chance and so it will bever get better becuase this is all he's capable of and anyone on the team who was good enough to improve it is long since gone, replaced with sycophants
Theres an ongoing meme in the NMS community about wanting to give them more money
What Hello Games have done with NMS is such a stark contrast of philosophy when compared to the AAA mainstream. It feels like more and more studios are adopting this attitude where success is a given and adoration expected--then they'll turn around and insult the audience when their own failures come back to bite them. Bethesda, sadly, seems to be sinking into this whirlpool as well. Is it any surprise people turn toward studios like Hello Games when the alternative is so disappointingly toxic?
What do you even do in nms other than explore and build? Is there even any gameplay? Are there missions to play with an online community? That would make nms amazing
Maybe it's a bit similar to Andromeda, close to endless time and funds, and the result ends up being all over the place since people are just there to cash in their paychecks rather than being passionate about the game
I have a love hate relationship with hello games.
They released a shit game, heard people angry with it, disappeared for a few months, came back with "sorry yall, here's a fixed game, we're going to be better"
I love seeing people be cool, but i hate how it has apparently convinced everyone that every company will do what they did when those companies clearly don't care
No man's sky launch was a disgrace and it damaged gaming forever. Nothing they do will redeem them in my eyes.
Got to love a no man sky glazing video
Hello game's update artworks would make really good posters..
I find it crazy that Bethesda pushed out a game that was worse than No Man's Sky was _at launch_ (I know... I was there at launch) and expected to be praised for it. Say what you will about how empty NMS was at launch, but didn't have Emil fucking Pagliarulo's grubby mitts on it... you didn't have to suffer through dialogue that makes you want to slit your own wrists.
And I get what you mean about wanting Bethesda to get better. I've wanted that since Oblivion. Fallout 76 was the giant flashing neon sign (to me) that things were not going to be getting better anytime soon. Bless your heart for still having hope, though.
A big company with lots of employees like Bethesda doesn't mean things will get done faster, if their management is either incompetent or very rigid and stubborn. Also a certain chain of command has to be followed depending on their structure, so it adds even more time.
never buy Bethesda on D1.
Learned my lesson
Never buy Bethesda.
Thank god that this channel exists. Getting tired of bethesda's latest decisions and practices.
The unfixed crashes & the endless loading screens means I dont play the game anymore
Nice nice, but did you mention that NMS’s updates were free?
Happy for Hello Games. They stumbled out of the gate but they kept grinding away and are a great example of how you SHOULD run a game like that.
In my eyes it’s one of the best examples on how a studio should handle a fumble.
Second comment, I would love to hear your opinion on what needs to be added/altered in Starfield for it to start gaining back faith from fans. Stuff like the main quest and the fundamental design of the game obviously can't/won't be changed but what do you think Bethesda can do to alleviate some of the pain XD.
Never even thought about that, I might try to come up with something. I appreciate it! :)
I don't want to be a downer, but I don't think it can be fixed.
It's basically just a bunch of ideas loosely tied together, but there's no cohesive structure.
NMS is a good comparison, both games have almost the same ending, but NMS understands that you want to keep all your cool items, bases and ships.
No mans sky by hello games. Bg3 by larian. Hd2 by arrowhead. All critically acclaimed by gamers. All privately held. Starting to notice a pattern here
I want Starfield to be good, and pull a NMS. I don't really think they will, that's what hurts =(
It does hurt.. we’re in this together. I wonder if there’s any Bethesda fan support groups? 🤣
No Man's Sky video disguised at a Starfield video.
I think you missed one point. NMS updates where as far as I know always backed by a sale on all plattforms to get new players.
And this works for NMS because of the way they changed a bad game (with many missing features) to a good game. Can you see this way with Starfield?
Top best kinds of videos that will make you famous;
- Bethesda being terrible
- Hazbin Hotel being overrated
- Bojack Horseman being a masterpiece
- Disney destroying everything they touch
- War in Ukraine being bad
- Responses to responses to your videos
- Forgotten shows/films/games that NOBODY ever heard about (sometimes even for good reasons) having some overlooked bit of brilliance
10:10 Even compared to a questline/combat driven game, cyberpunk, it still is a flop. What are the excuses of Starfield fans?? Do they say "well, cyberpunk isn't a SPACE game". How about Mass Effect then? (I haven't played it) Does Borderlands: The pre-sequel have enough space to count? Eve Online? I was disappointed in the Outer Worlds, but it seems better than Starfield.
Yes, I haven't played Starfield, but I'm not about to get led down this road:
- You haven't even played it, how do you know you don't like it?
- OK you played some and quit, but if you finished it THEN you'd like it.
- You finished it and still don't like it? Well, if you finished it, you must have liked it!
The fact that people are still somewhat excited for the next ES game is crazy. The bar has raised so drastically and Bethesda had every opportunity with SF to show us they can keep up and they literally couldn't have failed harder. The next ES game is going to be so abysmally shit that I can't wait to see the reactions.
Also on the NMS vs SF comparison, I find it hilarious that a multi-million dollar AAA studio, backed by a multi-billion dollar company couldn't produce a fraction of what an indie team did like 8 years ago. BGS is creatively bankrupt
If you into space like elite dangerous I recommend x4 foundations is an empire building but you can also trade you can do missions it's an rpg type as well is pretty fun.
Very fun game dude
The only excuse for shattered space is 95% of Bethesda already moving on to tes6
I know what it's like to work on a creaky code base. The code base does its job, but doing anything with it is 10x harder than working with well maintained code. I have not seen Bethesda's code, but Starfield is pretty indicative of the difficulty of doing a 2024 game on Bethesda's engine. It can't be good.
No man’s sky is boring as hell IMO. The updates don’t fix that. The core gameplay loop is just bad.
I forgot a different person made no man sky. Thought it was all todds fault
Starfield and No Man's Sky are really apt comparisons and not in just space exploration theming..
They're both Forks in the road. Where both where panned for under-delivering in features and bugs, Starfield took a little later to reach that point once the honeymoon phase wore off.
Though, one actually took the criticism to heart hunkered down and addressed the concerns and flaws of the game, and the other dug its heels in the sand put their fingers in their ears and told you, you were wrong for thinking anything is wrong with their game. Can you guess which one is which?
All in all should either game been released in the state they were initially? No. But one has went the extra mile to redeem itself in it's playerbase's eyes from the unanimous hailstorm of criticism, to the point they're willing to pay for free content. While the others' playerbase is stuck wandering how exactly did we get here?
Because Hello Games cares about the game and the community, Bethesda cares about money and well that's it actually. When Todd said he admires what EA does with it's micro transactions I knew we all should've been worried. The next Elder Scrolls isn't going to be what we all want, it's gonna be Starfield all over again and Bethesda always lets the modders fix their games, they always have.
I hear what you are saying, bethesda needs to do better and Starfield certainly needs more content but the fact is, these two games are just not on an equal playing field in regards to some of the comparisons.
-No Man's Sky was very bare bones for a LONG time. Like 2 years or more. It was hugely disappointing for many, it had less content than Starfield and actually fewer significant updates in the first year.
-They are different games. No Man's Sky doesn't have all the NPC's, dialogue, companions, hand crafted worlds and content that Starfield does. That greatly changes how and what you can do in regards to altering the game. They also run on different engines. Bethesda's engine is highly moddable but at the same time they have to factor in for so many things, every damn apple, coffee cup, pencil etc. you placed has to be stored and remembered.
To straight up help answer your question as to why a small team can outshine a big one on updates.
-In the modern gaming landscape, being a huge 600 team AAA studio is often actually a detriment to innovation and creativity. These massive studios have massive budgets. They are are also looking for massive returns on their investments. Starfield and Bethesda are trying to get the biggest slice of pie they can. Dropping in game changing updates is going to take a lot of approvals and a lot of people getting on the same page, and a lot of checks and balances and QA, and everything that comes with it. It's a big task and again, they have to ask, is this going to be profitable, is this worth their time.
No Man's Sky has target a niche core audience. They have a very strong and healthy demographic they cater to and at this point they know them well. They don't need to make nearly as much money to keep their 60 person team afloat. They don't have to answer to a Trillion dollar parent company and they don't have several other studios they have to keep alive. They are like a mom and pop restaurant who has a really loyal group of 100 customers who keep them running. Bethesda is McDonalds and they are serving all over the country.
This isn't a total justification or excuse for Bethesda, yes they are doing poorly and we want better. They can do better and I hope they improve Starfield a lot. That said there are lots of reasons as to why they aren't updating this game on the same level as Hello Games, for that matter, very few devs are. Hello Games is maybe the absolute best example of a studio getting after in this department. This is comparing Michael Jordan to any other regular NBA all-star. Very few devs are going to be able to stack up to the update quality of Hello Games.
well the reason probably is they are all hands on deck for the next Elder Scrolls just like whats happened with the Spiderman 2 DLC
Thank you, I'm reinstalling 'no mans sky' tonight.
You welcome :)
The 'dlc' was factually meant to be apart of the base game but had to be cut and worked on further. But Bethesda had no actual dlc ready by the promised window, so they decided to tack on new weapons and armor onto this restored cut content before slapping a price tag on it and releasing it.
Starfield is dead to me, this from someone who had hopes it'd redeem itself at first dlc. Obviously first dlc is in fact, cut content that has been restored.. With a price tag.
"Compared to the 5 or 6 hundred that work at Bethesda"
It is important to mention that Bethesda is a AAA Company, pretending to be a small studio, and having a moderate amount of staff.
Bethesda is not a big company, and working with their shitfest of an engine, CE2, their small team is one of the reasons they suffer. (Though their directors are mostly at fault)
Had this conversation with a friend about Bethesda and how lacking it has been. You have to remember that a massive % are working on ESO6. So for their other games is probably worked by a skeleton crew thats overworked to hell and back. We were joking it was a hand full of people doing at least 5 different jobs at the same time trying to scramble up something.
With what has happened i would not be surprised if Stanfield has 10% of no mans sky.