I enjoyed outer worlds more just for the enjoyment it gave me, it didn’t take itself seriously and let me have fun instead of trying to act like I’m some hero with a power fantasy
Yes freedom is the word id use! Freedom to play how you want and that makes for great replay ability. Starfield forces you play the way it wants you too. You are the hero and that’s that.
I used to think the Outer Worlds was kinda meh. But after being disappointed by Starfield, I came back to The Outer Worlds and now have a much greater appreciation for the story, world building, and hand crafted environments. When considering that this was an indie game on a small budget, the game was made very well.
@@jayporter1981 yes it’s a game I returned to as well! I think it’s a slow starter but as you put in more time it starts to build up quickly. The character writing and quest design is what sets it apart. I think it was just a rough draft from Obsidian, and now they are working on new games including outer worlds 2 that I feel will not only meet, it actually exceed expectations. If you’ve played new vegas as well, it shows obsidian know how to build a good RPG. With a greater budget and more time, I look forward to seeing how it performs!
i was absolutely obsessed with The Outer Worlds when it came out. I never thought it was especially impressive but something about it just clicked with me. Played through it probably about a dozen times in a very small span. I put Starfield down after about 30 hours (The Outer Worlds' entire runtime pretty much) and I have no intention of reinstalling it, really ever.
This might be petty, I’m not sure, but there were two things that happened in Starfield that made me give up on it forever. There was a planet (forget which one) where I walked up to the leader of some town and accidentally pressed the trigger button, essentially, shooting them right in the face. She didn’t become hostile and continued to offer me quests to help out her town. Like…what? lol. I wanted to test it out a little more, so I just went around killing everybody in her town and essential NPC’s never became hostile or locked me out of any of their quests. I tested it out on other random planets/towns and the same thing kept happening over and over. The other thing, I can’t (for the life of me) interact with Delgado during Legacy’s end, thus, preventing me to continue with the quest line. I traveled away and came back. Spent a whole bunch of in game world days just going around and exploring other planets. Tried a few Reddit recommendations and…nothing. In fact, after an “update” I can’t even get in the room to see Delgado. The game sealed a door going through a required room to even get to him. After those two things I decided “I am done. Forever.” I had fun for a while but hardly anything you do ever really matters and you never know if you’re going to encounter a buggy mess with a quest-line. It seems like all of your hard work and grinding leads to very little reward in the end. Outerworlds has its issues and it’s far from perfect but I beat it 3 times and don’t remember getting as many nor as severe of a migraine trying to get through certain sections of the game. The writing is so much better than Starfield and it’s just crafted with more finesse and attention to detail, despite being a much smaller game. For me it’s not even a debate. Outerworlds is better. My only real issue with the game is the combat and enemy AI physics seem very copy/paste with hardly any variation but Starfield isn’t all that good about it either.
What an awesome comment! I’m 100% on the same page as you. I don’t like that recent Bethesda games have taken away freedom and Role playing and that’s what it is when you can’t kill essential NPCs. It’s very on rails so you can’t customise a different playthrough. Basically after you complete the game once (starfield) apart from the ending, everything else will play out the same. So repeating walkthroughs isn’t really worth it whereas in Outer worlds you can replay it many times and get new Experiences. I think outer worlds 2 will be another level, just the same game, but bigger and more improved so that’s gonna be exciting! Awesome comment and one I completely agree with.
Outer Worlds want perfect BUT I enjoyed it more than I did Starfield. I felt that it help my attention more and I genuinely cared more for my companions. They had their faults and weren’t “goody two shoes” trying to save the world!
Picked up the Outer Worlds in a Steam Sale and it just clicked for me. I've replayed it many times, and I'm replaying it right now! It's a comfort game - it is pretty easy on Normal, and you can level up pretty fast, so there is no tiresome whittling away at bosses, unless you choose to on the harder settings. My girls Ellie and Nyoka can shred enemies with their upgraded Light Machine guns before I can even take aim! Ammo is plentiful too. I'm playing RDR2 as well, but opening the game takes so long, and it's so easy to do the wrong thing and lose a shedload of Honour (which for me means reloading an earlier save). It's beautiful, but you have to readjust your sense of time - everything happens so slowly. Which is no bad thing, but I can open The Outer Worlds and be actually playing it in seconds I love Sanjar! So many good characters in the game. It is not profound - but what the hell, there is space for a game that is simple fun now and then! Zero interest in Starfield. Got nothing to say on that.
You take the same two companions I have enjoyed having with me as well! I have been really enjoying other worlds for the same reason of being able to dive in quick. I really enjoy RDR2 but I’m 100% with you that the loading times take a minute when you start it up. But also, it’s a much slower paced game. And you can’t really make any choices in actual missions so sometimes replaying it is difficult. A game like outerworlds gives you immense reason to replay. I was doing a quest and died, retried it and got a totally different scenario. So good!
@@AVVGaming1 One thing I like about Nyoka as a companion is that everyone on Monarch knows her! They know she drinks too much, but they respect her as a fighter. So she will get dialogue options wherever you go on Monarch. And her and Ellie get a few good lines together!. Felix can also get some good conversations going, but I always end up with Ellie and Nyoka. I just take Parvoti or Vicar Max along if there is a specific quest for them. Parvoti is a bit of a drip (though a nice person), but Vicar Max is a nasty piece of work. I genuinely dislike him, and once his quest-line is done, I never use him again.
@@ZachariahJ yes Nyoka is awesome and I kept her throughout my entire time on Monarch. I think it’s important that there’s companions you don’t like as that’s a good selection! Starfield all of them are the same and overly nice, like you’re supposed to like them all. A good selection will have horrible people as well as nice people too! Parvoti is a bit naive but she was the first companion you meet so always holds a little place in your heart lol
@@AVVGaming1 You know one of my favourite characters in The Outer Worlds; If you have done a full playthrough, in Byzantium, you will meet a girl sitting on a bench offering a side quest - she wants to know what they are promising older inhabitants. She wants some of it, whatever it is! She is so incredibly, openly, rude, I love it! I wish there was more of her - I wish she could join the team!
In my head canon, Outer Worlds is my version of a Bethesda space game. it is just so much more a Bethesda game than Starfield was. It has humor, irreverence and such a unique visual style that Starfield lacked in so many aspects.
I think it was like a smaller version of a Bethesda game whereas starfield was something completely different. I’m not sure why they went that way. It just seemed so out of character and nobody enjoyed the empty planets. Surely during development they figured that?
Outer Worlds set a nice foundation, which i think the sequel will expand upon a lot. I'm expecting Outer Worlds 2 to have much more areas to explore, enemy/weapon variety ect.
Yes I sort of think outer worlds 1 was just a concept and the 2nd one will be the final product exactly how they probably wanted it the first time. I think they were on a limited budget with limited time. The success of the first will give them the permission they need to make their real vision. That’s just my opinion though.
Haha! What a surprise it was when it dropped. After they announced procedural generation and 1000+ planets my expectations took a little dip, but they’d been working on it for 8 years, so maybe they really got it right? When I was playing it, just had a moment and realised “wow, this really is it” lol
@@hoopoop239 Nah, Outer Worlds is serviceable and a little charming, but it's certainly no FONV. Starfield is straight dog water. FO76 in its current state is more fun than Starfield.
I think TOW was their first draft on limited time and budget. I reckon TOW2 will be there actual final product and I would expect all of that to be in there! Honestly it’s such a good underrated game but with Avowed and TOW2 coming, I feel like obsidian are coming back strong! Fallout NV is one of my favourite games of all time!
Starfield...inch deep/mile wide. The perk system only works if you do the new game plus...repeating the game over and over and doing that became so boring. (Starfield) Ship building was fun...but as there is no space travel, just click a map...arrive and if there is some space combat you can fly around in a small area and shoot some stuff. (Starfield) Combat was good in both games but you are right about starfield...the buildings and caves all started to look the same. I did not know there was only a pool of 12 to choose from so now it makes a lot of sense. Outer Worlds however, everywhere was unique in design, if not in flora and fauna...that was one of my gripes in Outer Worlds...the Vivid colours...I often shot something that turned to dust or just dropped into bright colourful grass and when i went to loot the remains...well I couldn't find them. One thing you did not touch on...well partially you did for Starfield when you said the companions are all good...which is true. If you did anything remotely bad they would let you know that they disapproved. But in the Outer Worlds...things you did were bad regardless. You had to power your ship...so you needed a power source and there were two of them. Whichever one you took would ruin the place you took it from. I thought that story telling was deliciously deep and dark. You had options but your choices meant somebody somewhere was going to be royally screwed by your choice and that was great storytelling. Starfield in comparison was...meh...who cares. Fantastic video, insightful and well presented, I'm not sure infinitively is a real word though 😁 (Infinitely is) I think Outer Worlds was a better experience and Starfield was a longer one. As for what game next to look at....what about comparing Enshrouded to Palworld or Valheim, something like that.
First of all, thank you for the kind comment! Secondly I don’t think it’s a word either but I couldn’t pronounce it lol I did touch on the companions briefly but didn’t go into as much detail as I could have done for sure. I did another video called “how Bethesda lost its magic” where I explain about the dungeons were so poor in starfield and how it was unacceptable that they only had 12 to draw from for 1200 planets. Not sure how they made that make sense lol you have the same taste as me though, I like dark games with morally grey decisions! Thank you for the recommendations and I’m going to check them out, then prepare a video on it! Awesome comments and such good feedback!
I've been saying it for a while now, but imagine a game where Obsidian did the writing and RPG mechanics and Bethesda did the open world. Throw in ID software or some other shooter Microsoft owns to do the combat, and I guarantee it would be a 10/10 game of the year
That’s the winning ticket! Bethesda have so many talents at building open worlds but their writing has been lacking. If they allowed obsidian to do the quest design and they did the open world with their graphics gameplay etc. well, we are always allowed to dream :)
Parvati, Vicar Max, I have not played Outer Worlds in years. I can not remember any Starfield characters, and it has only been months since i played that
They definitely got the companions right in outer worlds. They all left an impression on the player whereas in starfield they were just a feature that was more of an inconvenience more than anything, at least in my opinion.
I played outer worlds 3 x and starfield 1 x. Starfield had half of its development under Microsoft with money at hand. Obsidian made outer worlds with limited funding. Outer worlds is king compared to starfield
Obsidian have become masters of squeezing blood from a stone lol. They always seem to be given limited time and money and still pull a rabbit out of the hat!
Specifically on the companions in Starfield. There are more companions to find out in the world, and along different quest paths. There are more than just those four, buy you have to find them and make at times unlock them
@@GixtheDragon I’m doing a video on “can mods save starfield” and they might actually…lol there’s a ways to go but if the modders really put the time in, it could completely change the game
Starfield needs work, but overall it's just a dramatically better game. It's fashionable to hate on Starfield (and some of the reasons are very justified, admittedly), but Outer Worlds just isn't it. The "humor" doesn't land at all for me, way too on the nose. Feels far more underbaked than Starfield.
Considering they spent 20 years on Starfield I would expect that but...considering they spent 20 years on Starfield I expected a hell of a lot more done a hell of a lot better as well and that we did not get.
@@solitaryangel722 Well "20 years" is probably overstating it, they've probably had the vague idea for a "BGS game but in space" for that long. But design has likely only been since 2016. They clearly don't have a development team equipped to have the world feel cohesive - like you can have loving parents but can't invite them to a wedding or even tell them you're married. You can't mention that a person was your spouse at their funeral. These are GLARING mistakes and show a clear, enormous problem with how Bethesda's writing is done.
That’s the main point of my video summary, neither nailed it, neither are masterpieces and lack where the other game succeeds. They both can do better and I think outer worlds 2 will be very good. As for starfield, they gotta make hand crafted planets, the procedural generation just doesn’t work and if they’re going to do that they need a pool of 200 dungeons, not just 12.
@@AVVGaming1 The dungeon issue is fixable; I actually think that one is going to be fixed quick and easy once mod tools are out. There are about 50 or so dungeon locations that I've counted, if it was doubled from that and if they did better sleight of hand hiding the reuse by shuffling the interiors more dramatically I think it'd be fine. What isn't easily fixed is the writing being lacking in many places. BGS really, really needs to reevaluate their approach to quest design and dialogue, in my view.
@@captainpandabear1422 yes it’s been getting worse as more time has passed. Like in order of BGS release, the writing seems to be getting more basic. A lot of people defend fallout 4, but I thought it was a big step down in writing compared to 3 and NV.
I'm sorry, but The Outer Worlds has more grit and nuance in it's characters, plot, quest design than Starfield, where everybody's a goody two shoes. Maybe the Shattered Space DLC could change that, but The Outer Worlds 2 looks much more bombastic.
That’s my prediction thst outer worlds 2 will be the one that will set the standard. I can see how outer worlds could be better, it’s just more time and improvement on the formula. Starfield actual concept of open world needs to almost be scrapped and re done. I’ll always prefer hand crafted content over procedurally generated worlds.
@@AVVGaming1 Unfortunately for Starfield, it shows not only laziness in it's conceptualization in its ideas concerning proc-gen, but also that it has no soul. That needs to change.
@@comyxcon4gaming860 it really does and for a studio that earned their reputation for building some of the most immersive hand crafted open worlds, it just seems so out of character. It’s not like it’s a new studio that is testing new things they knew what worked and what didn’t
@@AVVGaming1 I know. It just feels so....jarring, to say the least. If the Outer Worlds 2 blows this out of the park, Bethesda may be forced to course correct concerning the quality of the game, but that has yet to be seen.
@@comyxcon4gaming860 I have a very strong feeling that firstly that will happen and TOW2 will be amazing. And secondly that Bethesda will completely ignore that and continue what they’re doing. They are currently acting deaf to feedback or criticism bordering on arrogant
Is dat even a real question? OFC THE OUTER WORLDS DID IT AMAZINGLY BETTER!! DLC: ✅, WORLDS: ✅, LORE: ✅, WRITTING: ✅, DIALOGUE: ✅, heck- even animations were better here considering Obsidian used an "inferior" engine🤣. Starfield was a lot of hype and hot air with fancy graphics and ship customization, nothing more. Their "worlds" are mostly- or *entirely* , empty. The npcs give you that mental look all the time, like they were on Psycho or something. Lol😂. So yeah, TOW all the way🙌🌌🪐✨
Haha they do have that crazy look in their eyes lol! I’d say I agree with all the boxes you checked but once they drop outer worlds 2, I reckon it’ll be even better and even more in size. I have a good feeling!
Thank you so much! I’m still relatively new at UA-cam and learning each day but comments like honestly keep me really motivated and let me know I’m not talking rubbish lol thanks!
people were expecting star citizen levels of detail, being able to fly and land on the planets yourself, everything hand crafted etc, ain't going to happen star citizen is stillno where near ready its pretty much broken to the point its unplayable and that has been in full development for a decade at this point. Starfield by comparison is a finished polished game that actually works with very little bugs which is surprising for a bethesda game, it has issues but most of these will be fixed by the time dlc start to hit and are literal not that big a deal and people moan for the sake of moaning, the quests are fine same with choices this was never going to be the witcher 3 levels of choices dunno what people were expecting, faction quests were pretty good, and the main story was awesome not to mention their is some really good side quests here too like meeting Gengia Khan for example. People complain about not being able to fly to the planet, dungeon generation etc, go look at star citizen where you can fly around a planet land it on it yourself etc look at caves you seen 1 cave you've quite literally seen them all, same with crash site or anything else in the game starfield has way more depth than that but of course it has limits every game does, like I said starfield is fine but people moan for the sake of moaning. The outer worlds is something i couldnt grt into and ive tried twice now, find the combat that dull and boring that it doesnt matter how good the writing and quests are even if most are better than stsrfield which i doubt anyway gameplay is boarderline boring.
I think we want more in terms of the writing. Bethesda has never been at Witcher 3s level, but I think they’re big enough and should be looking to grow their writing. Great companies continue to innovate, not stay still otherwise, and especially in the gaming industry, you will get left behind. But over all the writing is on par with their other games. As far as the open world goes, nobody has gotten the open world space RPG world down yet. And include outer worlds in that too. I think the thing is scale. 1200 planets. Why do we need that? Nobody would complain if there was 1199 lol. I think the trick is, scale in size on less planets .so do one solar system, with 6 or so planets. Each with their own maps, handcrafted with unique points of interest. I get space is big, but I’m not sure why games keep trying to them so big. There isn’t enough time surely? That’s my take on it anyway. How would you approach it?
@@AVVGaming1 I got what I expected from starfield it met my expectations but didn't surpass them, and honestly I didn't expect starfield to do so anyway. It's a shame really the Witcher 3 set the bar that high everything has been dull and boring by comparison, that game single handely ruined RPGs for me since nothing is close to being as good as it in terms of writing and story telling. Boulders gate 3 is another that set a very very high bar now one 99% of games won't ever reach and people seriously need to start tampering their expectations my self included not every game is going to be the witcher 3 or boulders gate/divinity sad reality we live in. What I wouldn't give for a bethesda rpg with the same writing and scope of the witcher 3 or boulders gate but it ain't going to happen ever most you can hope.for is Skyrim levels and that is heavily dated now too.
@@AVVGaming1 I do agree starfield was too big for its own good half that would've been too much still. They wanted scale they achieved that but at a cost.
As a person who played both games and finished both, I still vastly prefer Starfield. I never got connected to the companions nor did I enjoy the overall story of Outer Worlds. I can tell that it's great writing but it's not what I wanted from a Sci-Fi open world RPG that's in space. Starfield, actually scratches that itch with space combat and ground combat, ship building, and the primary story of exploring a vast universe. I don't absolve Starfield of its issues though. I firmly believe that instead of 1000+ planets are the procedurally generated, I would've rather they scaled it back to roughly 100-200 planets but hand craft each of them and make the settled systems actually feel like settled systems. I get it why they did what they did, it's almost like there's too much space to fully colonize all of it but I would've enjoyed some unique alien races other than just animals/creatures. Regarding companions, I both agree with you point and disagree with your point. The point of Constellation is they are peaceful space explorers that are all morally good. After doing each of their individual quests, they have a lot more complexity and depth to each one, different worries and concerns too. I WILL say, that I wish that Constellation had at least one or two evil/bad or morally grey companions so that people could play how they want to but it also doesn't fit the motif of Constellation in Starfield. The companions being as diverse makes sense in Outer Worlds and I think they're all amazing and well written, both in quests, and with their own individual ones too. I feel as though people love freedom of choice in games so much, that they hate being good guys despite that being the primary point of the faction. As a counter point to my last statement, I wish there was another rival faction with the same or similar goal as Constellation that we could join/fight against, that say....revered the Starborn or wanted to become pat of the Unity for selfish reasons, with their own set of companions. It could've made for a bit more of a thrilling chase for the artifacts with Constellation, the Starborn, and the other joinable faction in pursuit. Starfield definitely could've had better writing and I appreciate your viewpoints and opinions in this video but I simply enjoy Starfield much better than Outer Worlds. They're both good games and I think no one is wrong for which game they enjoy the most. I pray that everyone enjoys their experience with whichever game suites them.
This is the most grounded comment I think I’ve read. Your ending point is spot on, in that no matter which you love it’s good that you enjoy it. As far as the companions go, I understand they’re all good at constellation, but I think 2-3 from there would be fine, with two others fleshed out from faction like pirates (evil companion) and maybe a bounty hunter. It’s a very simplistic example but they should have offered at least one companion outside of constellation just in case. I’m 100% with you on the hand crafted content. I really feel like both games are missing different things. TOW is too small, and starfield is too big. Whichever of those two games fixes that first will be the ultimate winner. We as gamers are the real winners because we got two great games for it and I love comments like yours because we’re all huge fans of video games and can debate points. At the end of the day everyone is right because it’s all about opinions. Neither game is indefinitely better than the other.
I remember the word I felt best described feelings for the Outer Worlds after I finished it...Soulless. Immediately played New Vegas next to get a better experience. Starfield was not much better but I wasn't expecting much to begin with for that one.
Yes neither game that the magic of new vegas. New Vegas was just one of those amazing games where everything clicked. But outer worlds had limited time and budgets so maybe outer worlds 2 will be a step up? As for starfield, they need to really look at themselves
For me as someone who has played both games, i pretty much agree with your take. Although i will say in regards to lore i do think TOW has more substance then starfield. For one the colony of halcyon isnt the only colony for mankind just the furthest away from earth, which is why the corporations are able to do what they do, since itll take years for earth hear about it let alone for earth to assist halcyon, since messages take years to both receive and send on both ends. And the reason why everyone talks similar to people on earth, like you mentioned is because they are still connected to earth (at least they were) unlike starfield, which has no excuse why they're texas country folk people. Meanwhile the people who live in halcyon legit have no say on what they hear, all they know in life, is slave like work with 23hr shift and (mandatory) volunteer overtime 😂, and whatever media the corporations give them, like the serials, sports, and literature is just what the companies make up, which usually preaches the company agenda. Thier lifes are filled with corporate propaganda, to the point that the music available is just versions of company jingles 😂 and the wall decor in peoples homes are ad posters, which are probably mandatory. Which makes the fact that halcyon soon looses contact with earth with no reason why, leaving them abandoned with no hope such a big deal im the games lore. Meanwhile starfield's world lore leaves to be desired for. Also loved your vid, just sub! 😊
Thank you very much for the kind words about the video and the sub! I totally agree with what you’ve said. I’m going to do a video soon called “how Bethesdas writing declined” because in reality, space cow boys and space pirates is so basic! Like there is no depth. TOW meanwhile has generally believable storylines and like you said a world that has been twisted by corporations and it’s believable. It could happen. In starfield when someone says “oh he moved into a cabin in the middle of nowhere to get away from people.” They mean literally, a cabin on a planet that has nothing else on it. Can you imagine how insane thst would be!! It’s just lazy writing and obsidian have been miles ahead of that compared to Bethesda for a long time now. It’s getting worse for Bethesda
Personal bias made me initially against Outer Worlds, but it turned out to be a fantastic, albeit short, game that left a lasting impression on me. Conversely, I went into Starfield certain it would be my favorite game of all time, but was left feeling empty. I'll still go back to Starfield after some updates and mod support, but it wont be as impactful on me as Outer Worlds. I agree that a merge of the two would be perfect. Also, Parvati has to be in this hypothetical hybrid game. She's the best.
She is the best! Loved her chiming in during dialogue. To be honest, I had the exact same experience as you. I said starfield was going to be a masterpiece and didn’t play outer worlds until afterwards, at least not in depth. Starfield was such a disappointment. I did another video on it in which I refer to a AHA moment when you realise that the game is what it is. It’s usually when you visit your third planet that’s as plane as the ones that proceeded it, and enter a dungeon you already did twice on the previous planet. That’s the moment where you feel the pain. The mystery of “what’s out there to find?” Disappears
I love that I’m seeing this video, after discussing this very topic with you a week or so ago on a previous upload. It’s a tough question! They both do some things well, and completely fail at other things. Great video, man.
Thank you! I think it was our conversation that lead to the creation of this video. I really liked the concept and thought it to be a good question to ask and analyse. I think the two of them neither hit the perfect grade. They both were lacking in different ways and thrived in other ways that the other didn’t. I think the outer worlds 2 will be a very special game but I hope I’m not jynxing it because I said the same about starfield lol
Did you even play starfield? You called it a first person shooter it's not lol you chose your view.. and you said galaxy's it's one galaxy... Not all the companions have the same moral compass lol some even like when you steal.. And quests do have consequences that effect to world.. skills do have speech check points in conversation like botany will give extra lines in conversations about plants.. Instead of grifting play the game..
Yes I got to level 70 so definitely played the game. Pretty much did every side quest. I found all the companions pretty much got upset whenever I did something bad and they’re all from the same group so that makes sense. I know sometimes we can use bontang or faction relations in dialogue checks but compared to Outer worlds it’s completely different. Starfield was okay, I didn’t love it because I didn’t like the procedural generated planets. Some people love that and generally a lot of people refer to starfield as the greatest game they’ve ever played! It’s all down to personal opinion so nobody is wrong. Sorry if I wasn’t as thorough as I could have been in the video. Thanks for the feedback
After a couple hours of Outer Worlds and realizing there were no hand thrown grenades... I was surprised they left jump in. No grenades? I don't care about starfield I care about grenades.
Starfield has its flaws but it’s a great game. Needs some improvements yes especially exploration but people in the comments to say it’s a bad game it’s just hating the game.
Some people don’t like it and that’s fine. Honestly, the towns and such are really good. It’s just the exploration they need to work on. Imagine if they added a planet with a town and a whole bunch of handcrafted locations in the area, like a mini Skyrim map. That’d change the game completely! I got to level 70 so I definitely had a decent time. People just expect the best from Bethesda is all.
@@AVVGaming1 it’s a really good idea you had. I hope the dlcs build upon the foundation of the game. That’s what I believe the current game is a foundation for what’s to come. But yes exploration improvements are paramount for a better experience
@@BetterGratefulMotivated I think the main reason people don’t like it is just the procedural generated stuff. But my BIGGEST concern, is how Bethesda responded to the criticism, they just fought back saying the gamers didn’t understand it and that was worrying.
I wasn't a fan of outer worlds but there was more build variety. Which is a reason for me at least to come back to a game. In starfield it's like they just wanted you to have all the skills. A lot of the skills just seem to exist for flavor. Some are just barely impactful. Variety is the spice of life. Was pretty bummed out at how bad melee is in starfield huge missed opportunity with the space shouts. Oh well, I own the collectors edition because I am an idiot clearly. So the best I can hope for is the game gets better.
Haha you’re not an idiot! I would have put my house on the game being great based on Bethesda’s past work (not 76) and it’s crazy how wrong they got it. Such a shame really but I hope they generally learn from it and make a better game next time. Judging by their response to the criticism though, it doesn’t look likely :(
@@AVVGaming1it's because they're not listening to the people who don't like the game. They're listening to the people who do like it. Because they're smart.
@@alexrogers9051 time will tell! People talk like it was incompetence or bad decisions which made starfield the way it is but i see it differently. I believe Bethesda set out to deliberately create a different kind of experience from their two other main IPs. They kept a lot of things they're known for yes, but they weren't afraid to innovate. For those of us who are happy with the new direction, starfield is actually pretty great.
Outerworlds for world / story / companion building, Star Citizen for space & planetary flight, Starfield for the gunplay, Radiant quest lines & open worlds and UE5 for the engine (I have never dropped a 1000 sweet rolls down a hill in any Bethesda game and never will). One system is more than enough with different biomes (and He3 mining near gas giants) with local jump drives using fuel and ProcGen planet building. The perfect game?
Yes! You got it! The two combined would have mixed to get the perfect blend. Right now both are lacking but could easily fill in each others weaknesses. One solar system is fine and no one needs 1000 planets. I think no man’s sky already did that better than most can, so rather than quantity they should focus on quality. Having radiant quests in there is fine. Bit more variation on those would be nice though.
Haha is that a good thing or bad thing? At least the glowing sea was hand crafted with the guarantee of finding new things. I think it’s the fact that there’s nothing to find ever which kills it. Bethesda games had magic because you wanted to search every corner of the map for something unique. Starfield does not have that.
@AVVGaming1 oh its definitely a bad thing. But yeah, the GS did have handcrafted things to find and a good bit of environmental storytelling to make up for it. Starfield just simply doesn't have enough assets to keep its procedurally generated planets interesting. So it fails like every other attempt to make procedural generation the core of level design. Also, I'm appalled there's no underwater exploration, but they've been moving from that for a while, so I'm not surprised.
@@lazilycatharticone4191 I think if that was the future for real, and every planet just had scientist outposts, and robot factories, we wouldn’t bother going lol. They really have taken away a lot of underwater exploration and that’s a shame because it’s a nice thing to have and adds a whole new element to the game and exploration. I worry Bethesda have changed so much now and I can’t really justify the changes. I honestly expected them to get starfield right. I don’t mind radiant quests but they can’t just put them at the front. That’s bonus content, available when you want it, it shouldn’t be front and centre.
The outer worlds is fine but I found it lacking in a few areas I'd say that game is a strong 6 out of 10, however I think Starfield is worse. To be fair I haven't played starfield myself, I had a strong feeling I wasn't going to like it so I decided to just watch a let's play from my favorite let's player, Gopher. I find starfield to be very boring the only reason I'm still watching the let's play is because Gopher is entertaining. I know a lot of people believe this is Bethesda best story ever but I just can't agree on that, almost anything they've done over the last 20 or so years is better in my opinion and that includes the factions quest lines. It's true Starfield has the best companions Bethesda has ever done but that's not saying much and I found their stories to be lacking, gameplay is very good from for a Bethesda game. But the thing is I still play skyrim to this day, you can put me on an island with a pc with skyrim on it and an internet connection to download some mods and I'll have fun. I won't even need mods that chance the gameplay, just some graphic mods maybe a few quest mods to keep things fresh. Skyrims world is something I can't grow tired of, it keeps me coming back. But that will never be the case with starfield, for me it just doesn't scratch that itch.
Good to see you again! Yes, starfield was totally different to what Bethesda have done before. I didn’t love Fallout 4, but still really enjoyed it because of the open world. It wasn’t perfect but it was there. Starfield companions I found to be so similar to one another and overly nice that it was a nightmare doing some quests with them. I thought outer worlds handled the companions very well. Outer worlds was a solid game but yes it wasn’t the best. It wasn’t in the top game category where Skyrim would be. I think outer worlds 2 will be more open world, bigger worlds and more to do and exceed this first entry. But Bethesda, I hope they look at Skyrim and remember what made them so successful and go back to that. Because, starfield is not what the fans want. It was not a good move and that’s why a lot of people didn’t play it. I’m gonna have to check out Gopher now you’ve suggested it! Love your comments. Feel like we could have a proper good debate on these games if we were at a bar or something lol
@@AVVGaming1 Haha yeah if we ever do meet up I'm sure we can have some great debates about games and stuff. You're right that the companions in Starfield are too similar to each other, the outer worlds had some great companions that felt like individuals. But I guess if you really wanted to you could make the argument that the companions in starfield are all from the same faction, so it would make sense if they all had similar morals. I think that argument is very weak but I've seen people make it. I guess the companions in starfield are the best Bethesda has ever done simple because before the companions were always just a pack mules and meat shields, it's either starfield or fallout 4 that has the best.
@@TheMysterieRPGguy I’d probably say Falllout 4 or NV had the best companions because of their quest lines and interactions. Skyrims were just there to follow you around and didn’t add much but with a couple of mods suddenly they become the best companions lol. I think it’s something a lot of games have struggled with. Maybe BG3 did it best overall? I’ll be doing a Skyrim video one day and I don’t have anything negative to say about that game. It does exactly what it needs too. The fact I can also still play it today shows its longevity. Bethesda really were on fire at that point.
I remember seeing both these games and thinking they look boring. Many years later I still think that. For Outer Worlds, except saying I expected New Vegas in Space, I would say I expected Mass Effect with a bit of Prey 2017 in terms of atmosphere, we got Borderlands 3. For Starfield, my expectations for it were low but it didn't even meet those. I hoped for Skyrim in Space (they would never be able to make a world like Morrowind again), I expected Fallout 4 in Space, we got grey slop the videogame.
See I can understand outer worlds. I got that it was on limited time and limited budget and I can see how they held it back. I reckon TOW2 will be fantastic. With Starfield they just made really bad decisions which is crazy because they were literally the king of open world RPGs so I’m not sure why they changed the formula so much! lol let’s hope they learn from it. Hand crafted is always going to beat procedural generation
@@AVVGaming1 Hope you right but I won't be checking out Outer Worlds 2 unless word of mouth is saying it is incredible. I mean they weren't even sapient aliens or romance options in the first one. And the Borderlands 3 style humor and world bulding? I don't see how they change those without pissing off those who like the Outer Worlds 1.
@@JinzoTK yes I would just wait, let others play it, and then make a choice. If it’s reviewed as “more or less the same” you know to give it a miss. I think they have the concept rihht, just need to build on it. And start strong!
Prefer Outerworlds, but I liked Starfield, but everything surrounding the superpower stuff was a major pain point for me. It’s like, why did you feel the need to add power and to top it off, why so many planets and systems??? I get lost every time trying to find Neon Core and whatever the town name is that looks like an old western city. I can’t remember none of the places or characters.
Yes the planets are overwhelming and I really struggled to find the towns to go back to. It should have really been worked on because there’s literally really only 3 major towns in the game so they should be set on speed dial lol and the space powers I got one or two then didn’t bother. Was just silly to me.
i wish someone would compare what we can DO in each game. The Outer Worlds bored me and i never finished, talk and kill, talk and kill over and over. Is there more to do in Starfield?
Have you not had a chance to try it? I would say there’s definitely more to do, but it’s not a thousand times better. You can go to 1000 planets, but they’re all pretty much empty but have dungeons that repeat. You can build ships, and then of course build a settlement. Besides that, it’s pretty much the exact same as TOW. They may add more stuff later but it’s got more to do than TOW at least.
I want to like Starfield so bad that I’ve completely avoided it. Gonna wait until all the expansions and updates are out, then dive deep into it. (Guess I shouldn’t say completely avoided it since I did play the first 20 minutes of it a couple months after launch)
Yes maybe the new expansion will really help. It’s still worth a try if you can get it for either free or discounted. I don’t think it’s worth £60 though. Have you not tried it yet?
I downloaded it with game pass, created a character, did the intro and then haven’t played it since. I’ve been following it since launch so I was aware of the issues with it but still wanted to play the intro at least. Had I of played much longer I would’ve run into the issues I’ve been hearing so much about.
@@thevincehimself92 I would honestly suggest giving it a go when the new expansion drops. Maybe wait for a couple of reviews and then make a call. What you playing at the moment?
@@AVVGaming1 Fo4/nv, Sims 4, Skyrim, RDR, pretty much just older games lately. Was really looking forward to Starfield until the reviews and gameplay started coming in but I’ve been keeping an open mind about it. Will definitely try again after the first dlc and a couple updates. The city and planet maps are already a huge improvement but I need land vehicles.
@@thevincehimself92 well you’re playing some absolute classics right now anyway so no rush! I played FNV last week and it’s still head and shoulders above games like Starfield even with the older graphics.
Starfield because we are talking about it. Outer Worlds was a Borderlands rip-off with New Vegas mechanics and died faster than Cyberpunk but got swept under the rug.
You think Cyberpunk died? I thought that was an amazing game, well after they cleaned it up. I’ve played borderlands 2 but never played the first, you recommend?
On the exploration topic, this is the wrong comparison to make. Starfield was designed to be a space exploration game, Outer Worlds was not. That's simply not what the game is. A game that as a handful of planets with a few areas to explore, isn't a "Space exploration" game just because the background is "Space", it's more comparable to a traditional Fallout-ish style boots on the ground game with multiple different "maps". The problems that Starfield has with exploration, particularly in regards to exploring planets, are essentially the same problems that other Space Exploration games have, such as No Man's Sky. I think that if you're going to be comparing games on this aspect, you really need to be comparing with other games that try to have space exploration at their core ( NMS, Elite Dangerous, etc ).
@@AVVGaming1 maybe you can create a video about old bioware and new bioware. Mass effect andromeda wasn't a bad game but compare it to older bioware titles, it wasn't great either
Haha if that became a reality, I would know that I have fallen asleep and having a beautiful dream. Such a shame too because Obsidian have such great writers and Bethesda have really been struggling with that element a lot recently.
@@AVVGaming1 We need to see how the game evolves within the next years. It has great potential. Love the way you respond to all comments. I just came by from another channel that responded with hate every comment that said something positive about the game.
I'm not sure that Outer World is truly open world. I think many would argue that its not although I feel it almost qualifies in that its open enough, at least for me. Without getting into two much detail, I enjoyed both games.
Yes and I did mention that later on that a lot of people wouldn’t consider it a true open world game because it’s more of a linear experience. More like a mini open world game. Definitely no Skyrim or Fallout 4 though. I think if they did the same formula but with bigger area maps, that’d be perfect. Outer worlds 2 perhaps?
@@MadMan19811 I think we will get it. Obsidian had a tight deadline but after great reviews, a switch port and 6 million copies sold, I think they’ll have been given more funds and time so fingers crossed
Its first few hours are definitely not their best. If you see the video there’s so much cool stuff to see, but notice I didn’t put any footage from the early parts? For me that was the toughest part to get through, it took me at least 3 tries to commit.
These two games have almost opposite problems outerworlds feels too short for the content that’s in it leaving storylines and characters not fleshed out enough. Starfield drags on with very little depth making it overstay its welcome
Yes exactly! That was the exact point I was trying to make. They each succeed were the other fails. If they merged together and put their two games together we’d probably have the masterpiece we all wanted!
Ehh, both are super similar. Ironically linear games in a pointless space setting. The most descerning feature is how one has near no mods and the other already has a ton, with a near infinite scope to come. That's what really counts atm!
Outer world did better with dialogue and choices, obsidian always does better with the story choices and immersion. Starfield did a better job with gameplay mechanics but I’m not emotionally attached to anything going on. Ie I feel like the hunter
You’ve summarized it perfectly. It’s strange because both games are lacking where the other seems to be thriving. I know it’ll never happen but if the two had both made one game it would have been near perfect.
Starfield has an issue with failing regarding content and also regarding themes. A lack of content can be fixed by simply adding more content, suggestions on how to do that without demanding too much on a technical or financial level have been given plenty by the community. But it´s somewhere between hard and impossible to fix thematical problems. Two themes Starfield tries to lean on are hard sci-fi and the philosophical depth that came with classics of said genre. They fail spectacularly with on both fronts. First: It´s not really hard sci-fi. On a gameplay level, there´s much fi without sci, but I don´t care about that right now. The world that Bethesda has created is all over the place. They clearly watched Firefly a few times and copy-pasted a lot of it without realizing that the show was designed around all the crazy stuff well knowing that the stuff is crazy and it didn´t take itself too serious. Starfield on the other hand tries to be serious about itself. Bethesda is serious about a faction of space cowboys with a capital taken right out of a classic western. And they also want to tell us that this faction basically won the war against the super high tech other faction of the game. Hard sci-fi also means a somewhat believable world with somewhat believable social structures. To have a dominant faction of underdeveloped cowboys with the mindset of "life is hard and we want it to stay hard" out of nowhere makes no sense. A singular colony of a group of "back to the roots" people would be completely fine and explainable but not this faction. It´s not even properly explained why humanity is structured in its current factions, it just happened somehow. The entire issue gets only worse when we take the art style into consideration: The uniforms and weapons that Bethesda designed to fit in with the Freestar Collective looks like the primitive sometimes even handmade/makeshift stuff you´d expect from people living far away from any civilization who have to adapt to their environment for their day-to-day survival. But in the game it´s all mass produced stuff used by a major faction. The only logical conclusion that can be drawn in-universe is, that an entire society is madly into wild west cosplay/LARP. Two factions that when beeing looked at closely shouldn´t even be able to exist within the same universe (one of them shouldn´t exist at all) put together as neighbours are an obvious sign that the world building was done without any sci-fi in mind. The highly improbable configurations of buildings, the lack of specialized tech, the fact that even old earth NASA used the exact same computers and OS as the entire species does across all factions centuries later without any progress whilst still telling the player that an old earth ship has incompatible communication devices... Stuff like this shouldn´t be found anywhere near hard sci-fi. Second: You mentioned that Starfield touches some philosophical questions. It sadly does it in the worst way possible. Let´s look at the Nishina mission as an example. We are obviously presented some form of the trolley problem. It´s a standard issue of ethical nature that could be taken to another level via the medium "video game". Look at the great episodes of Star Trek TNG or DS9, when they had to deal with ethical questions: They were discussed thoroughly and when the Captain made the final decision it was usually portrayed as a product of evaluating the situation and additionally taking ethics into consideration. There was usually no winner or loser of the discussion itself. Now Starfield doesn´t take the chance to put the player into Picard´s shoes and present him with a hard decision after hearing two sides with good arguments. No, Starfield has the group telling you to kill the single guy and the single guy also telling you to kill him. Bethesda has the audacity to "solve" the trolley problem for you instead of letting you go through an interesting ethical dilemma. The worst part is, that with placing the single guy and the group in different universes, they fundamentally altered the scenario without even recognizing it. Now you´re letting collapse an entire universe and don´t just decide the fate of a handful of people. At this point it´s not even the trolley problem anymore. The most interesting philosophical question that could be asked here (but obviously isn´t), is the question of identity. In one universe the dude already sacrificed himself for the group, but is his counterpart in the other universe truly identical with the other one? That would be interesting to know because while one did actually act out the self sacrifice by himself, the other one asks the player to do the part and let him die. One is active, the other one passive. If they´re not truly identical, you can not know whether the single guy who survived would really have sacrificed himself if he was physically capable of doing so. In that case, the argument of the group, that the guy technically already did perform the sacrifice would be completely invalid. But the way the game presents itself, I highly doubt that Bethesda was even aware of these issues. Trying to look philosophical profound is the best they can do. But they´re failing miserably. Not only in the philosophy department, too. Just look at all the literature scattered around the game. Big name dropping with Dickens etc. but no substance behind it. It seems like they´re trying to look sophisticated by throwing around those classics but it doesn´t work. Adding a little quote here and there if it fits the context can add something to your game. Like the historical entries in the Total War series did with war-related quotes of prominent authors/people who lived roughly around the time period the game takes place in. Quoting Cesar in Rome TW or Wellington in Napoleon TW. It fitted the period and the martial theme of the game and was a nice design feature for their loading screens. Although there are at least some books in Starfield that are Sci-Fi related like War of the Worlds, most of them just don´t fit in, like Oliver Twist or The Count of Monte Cristo. I can only assume that either everybody in the future has the same taste in literature or Bethesda just wants to brag that they know one or two classics. I just don´t get it. If you really need to include real world books, then go the extra mile and put at least some effort into it. The world of Starfield is full of many many diverse ethnicities, which is quite believable for this setting. But it makes the fact that we only have the books that we have even more immersion breaking. Most great cultures have plenty of influential literature that is not copyrighted anymore. Why are there no Bibles, no version of Zhuang Zhou, Munenori or Sun Tzu... One would assume that with so many people of asian roots, some would have kept a version of a book that was an integral part of one of the great eastern cultures. In the end Starfield just tries to trick the player into thinking that there is some substance behind the names of these themes. But it becomes obvious rather quickly that it´s only a very shallow facade.
First of all, this comment is awesome. Such a good take. It’s a problem Bethesda have been having for years with the writing. They try to give an illusion of choices that aren’t really choices just like you said. The farm example I used, with people living on the moon speaking with country accent and work overalls, is exactly the same as the space cowboys. I was thinking, maybe they’re taking from Fallout? In Fallout since it’s a world that has been reset essentially, they could find old books on cowboys etc and then create inspiration from that. Just like in FNV with Caesar, or Hancock from FO4. This makes sense since they would look to history, maybe misinterpret it but be inspired. Like you said there is no reason at all for it to exist. Why would they dress like cowboys? Also, the constant promotion to leader of the entire faction after 7 or so quests, for every faction, is just silly. It’s exactly what I said when both games were disappointing with the universe building. There is no limitations. They can write anything. Invent any race, any plant, any backstory nothing is off the table. Then when they go with space cowboys, it just seems so so so plain. All the great examples you used are out there for inspiration and as far as the books go, they can add any book. Any religions, any histories, but no Charles Dickins is still selling! It’s not really space, it’s just the same as the world is now. I agree with everything in your comment and thank you for sharing.
@@AVVGaming1 The major difference between Starfield on one side and Fallout or Outer Worlds on the other is, that Starfield is presented to us as serious. Outer Worlds is goofy and the way it´s written and designd matches the tone. Fallout, at least the Bethesda-era of Fallout, is also not taking itself that serious. I have no issues with Cesar´s Legion or a dude at Diamond City trying to explain how baseball bats are pre-war weaponry because all of that fits the tone. The Bethesda Fallouts have their own set of issues, but whacky stuff is acceptable within this setting. Not so much in Starfield. To me Sci-Fi, especially hard Sci-Fi does not necessarily need aliens and it´s fine that many aspects of culture and everyday life are heavily influenced by our current times, as our life is influenced by historic heritage as well. But even within a pure human universe, you could of course deliver us more diversity. Look at "The Expanse", a hard Sci-Fi franchise that showed what living (over generations) in spaces with different gravity does to humans. That´s just one of many ideas how to make humanity more interesting within an alien-free Sci-Fi setting. Oh Bethesda and its factions... Starfield is again in a very weird place. We can´t become the leader of most factions, but to be honest, if one game should allow us to become the leader, it´s Starfield. With their strange way of implementing New Game +, they should not have an issue with making membership in factions an exclusive thing. I don´t "miss out" on content when I´m with the UC for my playthrough if I can go with the Collective in my New Game+ with the same character. This would increase replayability of the game which should be a good thing for Bethesda and if not all faction questlines were made to be packed into one single playthrough, they could have been way longer and more elaborated. If I could only join one of the rivalling factions but enjoy a long and deep storyline, then it would also be fine to become some form of leader with actual leadership work to do. Like becoming the commander of a UC space station, or head of a Ryujin branch office.
@@DasVadderr well you have to wonder if that’s because they wrote the whole thing themselves. Fallout already had an established IP with the goofiness and lore already set. This is pretty much the first time they have had to do it themselves and maybe that’s why they struggled. It doesn’t really have an identify. Elder scrolls and Fallout have great lore and fiction worlds, starfield just is so forgettable unfortunately. I agree with every point you have made!
@@AVVGaming1 I think Elder Scrolls is also a genuine Bethesda world but of course established before the Todd Howard and Emil Pagliarulo were in charge of the lore. Sadly the transition from Fallout 1&2 to 3&4 shows Bethesda´s weaknesses. They just took over names and concepts but changed the tone of the setting and introduced hundreds of continuity errors. Best example: Do ghouls need food and water to survive? With Fallout 4 they can´t even keep that consistent within one single game. Their team, as it is right now, simply can´t be trusted with world building. They´re throwing around wild ideas, like admittedly every group of people does when they´re trying to create some lore or story. But then they seem to lack any sort of filtering process. When some friends and I come up with our next chapters for a D&D campaign or a narrative 40k campaign, then we often have to calm each other down a bit because if we threw all our cool ideas in, then we would lose all immersion with the final product because the rule of cool has to be used with caution. Bethesda just doesn´t do that. I picture their meetings like this: One guy yells "Space cowboys would be awesome", the next one "And let´s add in space Batman", the next one "Oh and a Cyberpunk story" etc... Instead of just adding in everything that sounds cool, they should have limited themselves and better have fewer ideas done right than many done poorly. That´s what makes it so forgettable, the lack of immersion. You´re not exploring a consistent universe, just different rooms of a museum for Sci-Fi ideas on a Dime Novel level. Also the actual size of everything that has to do with civilisation is embarassing. The city sizes were hardly believable in Skyrim and Fallout but in Starfield they´re unacceptable.
Too different to fairly compare I think. Outer Worlds was better imo but I dislike scope just for the sake of scope and that's all Starfield really offered. It was just so sterile and boring. Outer Worlds, for all it's flaws, was far more fun.
Yes they’re different in a lot of aspects but both RPGs set in space. Similar enough in concept but very different in execution. One went for quality and the other quantity. You have a preference?
Yes I have a feeling it will be a much bigger version of outer worlds 1 and will be everything we had hoped starfield would be. Naturally, I don’t want to get too excited, but I have a good feeling!
Starfield has 3rd person this makes Starfield the automatic winner because starfield wasn't made by a bunch of lazy hacks! First person only especially in an rpg is laziness in it's Purist form!
You play in third person? I must admit, I think every game nowadays should give you the option to play in third person. Cyberpunk was the biggest offender of this. I really want to play that in third person all the time lol
@@AVVGaming1 i think itll sell just fine, the original game has a solid fan base that wants more so im sure itll be great. People are lookin for a good space fallout game and sadly many missed out on this due to mediocre critical reception cuz "its not bethesda herderrr"
Yes that’s the summary I came too. Neither game hit the magic spot. They both were fond wanting but outer worlds is better. But you wouldn’t put either at the top of your favourite games of all time list.
I think that’s definitely got to be done soon! In fact, after a shaky start, it would appear that is the game that has provided the best open world space game experience!
I’m on my first play through of both games now. Outer Worlds destroys it. OW actually has interesting characters and dialogue. The gunplay feels better too in OW. Starfield has better weapon designs. That’s about it
I love the characters and writing but especially the fact the fact you can slow down time it’s such a good option. The quests, writing and RPG elements are feel are a lot better. Love the companions as well
I mean like in-depth ones, with backstories, romance options, interactions with quests etc. I am sure there was only the constellation ones. The others are more quiet and don’t interact as much. I could be wrong though!
@@AVVGaming1 the characters in starfield aren't the greatest companions in a video game but there are some very well written companion quests. It's hard to explain without spoiling the game for people but this game is one that can reward you for putting more time into it.
@@mr.Ambiguoso so besides the 4 in constellation, do others have side quests? If so, I have completely missed that and need to get on it! lol BG3 probably had the best companions in a game that I’ve seen so far.
@@AVVGaming1 some companions require you to do missions before you recruit. I'm still learning new things about companions in this game as I go and I've got about 800 hours in so far. From what I've seen, Barrett really evolves as the game goes on. Some companions, that are not affiliated with Constellation will allow you to be a evil character, such as Mathias, Jessamine and Betty Howser. Plus some others that are kind of neutral to space piracy if you're into that sort of thing 😉
@@mr.Ambiguoso 800 hours! Man that is the type of thing I’d do a video on! “What does 800 hours in starfield reveal?” That would be amazing! Have you found anything really unique?
1 complain I have for both the games. Both being entitely new IP, is just Fallout and Skyrim at space. When you are making a new IP, it should standout from other. Fallout 3 was not Elder Scrolls with guns. Fallout 3 was Bathesda 1st time making a FPS game and they nailed it. It felt unique and although it had similarly with Elder scrolls, it was different on how the game runs. Another good example is CDPR making Cyberpunk 2077 after Witcher3. That name is 100% different from Witcher. But when you compare Outer Worlds and Starfield, both are overshadowed by Fallout and Elder Scrolls. I enjoyed both games, but it's clear both games are a copy of some other and the developers of both Bathesda and Obsidian did not think of making a totally unique Space RPG game.
I think the dream would have been for the two studios Bethesda and Obsidan to work together. I feel like obsidian are better at writing and RPG elements but then Bethesda usually make an amazing open world that’s quite basic. The two together would make a great game eg fallout new vegas. Anyway, I don’t think either managed to nail it. Neither are fallout or tes. I remember first time playing fallout 3 and it just clicked. They got it rihht first time. Really feel like Bethesda have been dropping standards over time. You’re spot on with the Witcher 3 and cyberpunk comparison. CDPR are really flying at the moment
It is underrated but it has done well! 6 million copies sold, a port to switch, good reviews online, it got enough credit that the second game is on the way! I’m not gonna put a jynx on it but I got a good feeling about that!
No way really?! My bad I must have missed it as I thought she loved it but I could have had Sarah with me. Probably wasn’t the best example for me to use but it’s all that kind to mind.
When I did one of those radiant quests, find a planet with x feature, oh my gosh, that was the moment it hit me lol. Not sure who signed it off as a good idea but someone did lol
That's the thing, the game by itself is boring af, but the ship building and everything to do with the ships is fucking amazing. Stanfield can only make me want to play it when I need a fix of its ship building/fighting mechanics and it always makes me bored of it and want to drop it whenever I lack the resources or money to keep making better ships or whenever I have to level up some skill to be able to unlock other stuff, then its hours upon hours of boring game play farming resources and skill points so I can enjoy what's actually enjoyable again!!!
Or how bout some of those side quests. I remember in New Atlantis, I did this quest where I had to get some janitor lady a coffee. I was so sure that it was just the first phase to a longer, more interesting quest, and I was excited to see where the quest would lead. So I bring her the coffee aaaaaaand nope. Nothing else. It was just a quest to get coffee. 😂
I loved both games, but the outer worlds dialogue is too in your face with it's humor. It's really jarring to me and makes me not take the game seriously.
It was consistent throughout and I think in outer worlds 2 they will fix a lot of it. I think they just had limited time and budget which means they couldn’t fully realise their dreams for the game. Maybe this next game will do that?
And that’s absolutely fine! They’re both decent games but in different ways. I played both for many hours and feel like they both could improve a lot. I see what both wanted to do, but execution for both wasn’t right. What did you think of the procedural generated planets? That’s the only part on starfield I never got into.
Played outer worlds for like 8 hours one time and tried to push through the boringness of the beginning but I couldnt get into it. Outer worlds was just so bland
The opening part I thought was very boring. They definitely held some of the best content until later. I think starfield was quite similar with that and having a slow boring intro. I really think they both need to work on their hook at the start of games. Like Skyrim had you instantly!
Both games were average fun, would like to see bethesda keep making the assets, worlds and systems and someone else do the writing and quests. Like new vegas.
Both games have a lot of room to grow for sure but outer worlds was more concise in its delivery. I’m hopeful outerworlds 2 will build on it and fix all the things that mad it mid and make it godo
@@hafizmazuki2443 I loved all of them to be fair. 2 was probably the weakest? Still a good game though. I loved 4 as well. I remember being so emotionally invested into it and I was at the end of the game and someone wanted to hang out, I had to explain I could not leave until I had seen this through lol
@@AVVGaming1 i would like to pit the best of mgs which is metal gear solid 3 versus the best from splinter cell series that is splinter cell: chaos theory. Your thoughts?
Outer worlds kept me engaged more than starfield for sure. I think it’s the options. That Riyujin quest line in starfield, my god, that is some unbelievably boring writing. Couldn’t do it.
No competition…I’ve tried Outer Worlds multiple times and can’t get off the first planet…too boring. I’ve got hundreds of hours in Starfield with multiple completed playthroughs. I never understood the accolades for Outer Worlds.
It’s because the game gets better after the first planet. It’s a really slow start and the first planet took me three attempts to get past. It’s similar to starfield like if you stopped playing before you get to new Atlantis. Both games started slow and should have done something more engaging for sure. I’d argue that first planet is the slowest part of TOW.
It had all the right concepts, but the execution was awful. I think it’s procedural generation which is the killer. The same studio that has been making hand crafted maps for years just really skipped so much. The story, I can’t really even remember much of it at all. To be honest, I had no desire to finish it only for this video.
Starfield is a disappointment but Outer Worlds was way worse, couldn't even stand a single play through. All the problems Starfield has, Outer Worlds had it way worse.
How far did you get? One thing I didn’t say is that outer worlds definitely starts slow. So does Starfield actually but I felt it more with outer worlds. It took me a few times to finally commit to it so I understand what you’re saying. I think both games were okay, but neither blew me away. I hope outer worlds 2 is another level! For me, I don’t think either has 100% mastered the space rpg genre…yet
I think it’s because of the RPG elements. Both games are different and appeal to different people. If you want quantity of content though, starfield wins hands down.
Is this even a debate ? One was a giant flop of a disappointment, while the other widely praised and is fast gaining a cult following. Didn't watch a single second.
Starfield is a bit more fun when you don't bring a companion to annoy you. I just leave them at the Lodge, ship or outpost. They're the most annoying part of the game, constant inane babble, they never stfu and they always mess up combat by getting in the way. Got to get you upgraded to PC, like Fallout4, Starfield looks terrible and hurts the eyes on console. So glad I dumped Playstation and built a basic PC, never console ever again.
The games definitely look better on Pc. But the companions on starfield were just awful. They barely put any effort into it and they were all the same personality wise. And the crazy thing is they made fallout 3 and 4, which albeit didn’t have the most amazing companions but they were certainly better than this lol
I enjoyed outer worlds more just for the enjoyment it gave me, it didn’t take itself seriously and let me have fun instead of trying to act like I’m some hero with a power fantasy
Yes freedom is the word id use! Freedom to play how you want and that makes for great replay ability. Starfield forces you play the way it wants you too. You are the hero and that’s that.
yeah keep lying
I used to think the Outer Worlds was kinda meh. But after being disappointed by Starfield, I came back to The Outer Worlds and now have a much greater appreciation for the story, world building, and hand crafted environments.
When considering that this was an indie game on a small budget, the game was made very well.
@@jayporter1981 yes it’s a game I returned to as well! I think it’s a slow starter but as you put in more time it starts to build up quickly. The character writing and quest design is what sets it apart. I think it was just a rough draft from Obsidian, and now they are working on new games including outer worlds 2 that I feel will not only meet, it actually exceed expectations. If you’ve played new vegas as well, it shows obsidian know how to build a good RPG. With a greater budget and more time, I look forward to seeing how it performs!
i was absolutely obsessed with The Outer Worlds when it came out. I never thought it was especially impressive but something about it just clicked with me. Played through it probably about a dozen times in a very small span.
I put Starfield down after about 30 hours (The Outer Worlds' entire runtime pretty much) and I have no intention of reinstalling it, really ever.
A dozen times is a lot! Have you still had different experiences each time you have played?
This might be petty, I’m not sure, but there were two things that happened in Starfield that made me give up on it forever.
There was a planet (forget which one) where I walked up to the leader of some town and accidentally pressed the trigger button, essentially, shooting them right in the face. She didn’t become hostile and continued to offer me quests to help out her town. Like…what? lol. I wanted to test it out a little more, so I just went around killing everybody in her town and essential NPC’s never became hostile or locked me out of any of their quests. I tested it out on other random planets/towns and the same thing kept happening over and over.
The other thing, I can’t (for the life of me) interact with Delgado during Legacy’s end, thus, preventing me to continue with the quest line. I traveled away and came back. Spent a whole bunch of in game world days just going around and exploring other planets. Tried a few Reddit recommendations and…nothing. In fact, after an “update” I can’t even get in the room to see Delgado. The game sealed a door going through a required room to even get to him.
After those two things I decided “I am done. Forever.” I had fun for a while but hardly anything you do ever really matters and you never know if you’re going to encounter a buggy mess with a quest-line. It seems like all of your hard work and grinding leads to very little reward in the end.
Outerworlds has its issues and it’s far from perfect but I beat it 3 times and don’t remember getting as many nor as severe of a migraine trying to get through certain sections of the game. The writing is so much better than Starfield and it’s just crafted with more finesse and attention to detail, despite being a much smaller game.
For me it’s not even a debate. Outerworlds is better. My only real issue with the game is the combat and enemy AI physics seem very copy/paste with hardly any variation but Starfield isn’t all that good about it either.
What an awesome comment! I’m 100% on the same page as you. I don’t like that recent Bethesda games have taken away freedom and Role playing and that’s what it is when you can’t kill essential NPCs. It’s very on rails so you can’t customise a different playthrough. Basically after you complete the game once (starfield) apart from the ending, everything else will play out the same. So repeating walkthroughs isn’t really worth it whereas in Outer worlds you can replay it many times and get new Experiences. I think outer worlds 2 will be another level, just the same game, but bigger and more improved so that’s gonna be exciting! Awesome comment and one I completely agree with.
Outer Worlds want perfect BUT I enjoyed it more than I did Starfield. I felt that it help my attention more and I genuinely cared more for my companions. They had their faults and weren’t “goody two shoes” trying to save the world!
Haha that’s so true! Starfields companions were a massive letdown in that they all value the same things. It made none of them unique and blend in.
Picked up the Outer Worlds in a Steam Sale and it just clicked for me. I've replayed it many times, and I'm replaying it right now!
It's a comfort game - it is pretty easy on Normal, and you can level up pretty fast, so there is no tiresome whittling away at bosses, unless you choose to on the harder settings. My girls Ellie and Nyoka can shred enemies with their upgraded Light Machine guns before I can even take aim! Ammo is plentiful too.
I'm playing RDR2 as well, but opening the game takes so long, and it's so easy to do the wrong thing and lose a shedload of Honour (which for me means reloading an earlier save).
It's beautiful, but you have to readjust your sense of time - everything happens so slowly. Which is no bad thing, but I can open The Outer Worlds and be actually playing it in seconds
I love Sanjar! So many good characters in the game. It is not profound - but what the hell, there is space for a game that is simple fun now and then!
Zero interest in Starfield. Got nothing to say on that.
You take the same two companions I have enjoyed having with me as well! I have been really enjoying other worlds for the same reason of being able to dive in quick. I really enjoy RDR2 but I’m 100% with you that the loading times take a minute when you start it up. But also, it’s a much slower paced game. And you can’t really make any choices in actual missions so sometimes replaying it is difficult. A game like outerworlds gives you immense reason to replay. I was doing a quest and died, retried it and got a totally different scenario. So good!
@@AVVGaming1
One thing I like about Nyoka as a companion is that everyone on Monarch knows her! They know she drinks too much, but they respect her as a fighter. So she will get dialogue options wherever you go on Monarch. And her and Ellie get a few good lines together!.
Felix can also get some good conversations going, but I always end up with Ellie and Nyoka. I just take Parvoti or Vicar Max along if there is a specific quest for them.
Parvoti is a bit of a drip (though a nice person), but Vicar Max is a nasty piece of work. I genuinely dislike him, and once his quest-line is done, I never use him again.
@@ZachariahJ yes Nyoka is awesome and I kept her throughout my entire time on Monarch. I think it’s important that there’s companions you don’t like as that’s a good selection! Starfield all of them are the same and overly nice, like you’re supposed to like them all. A good selection will have horrible people as well as nice people too! Parvoti is a bit naive but she was the first companion you meet so always holds a little place in your heart lol
Less than 50 hours is good
@@AVVGaming1
You know one of my favourite characters in The Outer Worlds;
If you have done a full playthrough, in Byzantium, you will meet a girl sitting on a bench offering a side quest - she wants to know what they are promising older inhabitants. She wants some of it, whatever it is!
She is so incredibly, openly, rude, I love it!
I wish there was more of her - I wish she could join the team!
In my head canon, Outer Worlds is my version of a Bethesda space game. it is just so much more a Bethesda game than Starfield was. It has humor, irreverence and such a unique visual style that Starfield lacked in so many aspects.
I think it was like a smaller version of a Bethesda game whereas starfield was something completely different. I’m not sure why they went that way. It just seemed so out of character and nobody enjoyed the empty planets. Surely during development they figured that?
@@AVVGaming1 Starfield really was very sterile and devoid of that charm that their other games own.
Outer Worlds set a nice foundation, which i think the sequel will expand upon a lot. I'm expecting Outer Worlds 2 to have much more areas to explore, enemy/weapon variety ect.
Yes I sort of think outer worlds 1 was just a concept and the 2nd one will be the final product exactly how they probably wanted it the first time. I think they were on a limited budget with limited time. The success of the first will give them the permission they need to make their real vision. That’s just my opinion though.
Before release I thought Starfield would be what Outer Worlds wanted to be. Turns out Starfield wish it was 10% as good as Outer Worlds..
Haha! What a surprise it was when it dropped. After they announced procedural generation and 1000+ planets my expectations took a little dip, but they’d been working on it for 8 years, so maybe they really got it right? When I was playing it, just had a moment and realised “wow, this really is it” lol
Both games sucked
@@hoopoop239
Nah, Outer Worlds is serviceable and a little charming, but it's certainly no FONV. Starfield is straight dog water. FO76 in its current state is more fun than Starfield.
I would LOVE and Outer Worlds game that is the same size and scope as Starfield. The world in Outer Worlds is just much more interesting to be in.
Me too! I think outer worlds 2 is going to run it close. At least I hope it will!
Go play Borderlands then. Thats it...
@@arkangelgaming35borderlands has almost no rpg elements as far as choice the game is super linear
Always love a little outer worlds glazing
Can’t wait for TOW2!
Keep up the good work, loving your channel❤
Thank you so much! This really means a lot and keeps me focused! If you come up with any games or topics you want covered let me know!
Outer Worlds was great fun. If it had ship building and space combat, it would be perfect.
I think TOW was their first draft on limited time and budget. I reckon TOW2 will be there actual final product and I would expect all of that to be in there! Honestly it’s such a good underrated game but with Avowed and TOW2 coming, I feel like obsidian are coming back strong! Fallout NV is one of my favourite games of all time!
Starfield...inch deep/mile wide.
The perk system only works if you do the new game plus...repeating the game over and over and doing that became so boring. (Starfield)
Ship building was fun...but as there is no space travel, just click a map...arrive and if there is some space combat you can fly around in a small area and shoot some stuff. (Starfield)
Combat was good in both games but you are right about starfield...the buildings and caves all started to look the same. I did not know there was only a pool of 12 to choose from so now it makes a lot of sense. Outer Worlds however, everywhere was unique in design, if not in flora and fauna...that was one of my gripes in Outer Worlds...the Vivid colours...I often shot something that turned to dust or just dropped into bright colourful grass and when i went to loot the remains...well I couldn't find them.
One thing you did not touch on...well partially you did for Starfield when you said the companions are all good...which is true. If you did anything remotely bad they would let you know that they disapproved. But in the Outer Worlds...things you did were bad regardless. You had to power your ship...so you needed a power source and there were two of them. Whichever one you took would ruin the place you took it from. I thought that story telling was deliciously deep and dark. You had options but your choices meant somebody somewhere was going to be royally screwed by your choice and that was great storytelling. Starfield in comparison was...meh...who cares.
Fantastic video, insightful and well presented, I'm not sure infinitively is a real word though 😁 (Infinitely is) I think Outer Worlds was a better experience and Starfield was a longer one.
As for what game next to look at....what about comparing Enshrouded to Palworld or Valheim, something like that.
First of all, thank you for the kind comment! Secondly I don’t think it’s a word either but I couldn’t pronounce it lol I did touch on the companions briefly but didn’t go into as much detail as I could have done for sure. I did another video called “how Bethesda lost its magic” where I explain about the dungeons were so poor in starfield and how it was unacceptable that they only had 12 to draw from for 1200 planets. Not sure how they made that make sense lol you have the same taste as me though, I like dark games with morally grey decisions! Thank you for the recommendations and I’m going to check them out, then prepare a video on it! Awesome comments and such good feedback!
I've been saying it for a while now, but imagine a game where Obsidian did the writing and RPG mechanics and Bethesda did the open world. Throw in ID software or some other shooter Microsoft owns to do the combat, and I guarantee it would be a 10/10 game of the year
That’s the winning ticket! Bethesda have so many talents at building open worlds but their writing has been lacking. If they allowed obsidian to do the quest design and they did the open world with their graphics gameplay etc. well, we are always allowed to dream :)
Parvati, Vicar Max, I have not played Outer Worlds in years. I can not remember any Starfield characters, and it has only been months since i played that
They definitely got the companions right in outer worlds. They all left an impression on the player whereas in starfield they were just a feature that was more of an inconvenience more than anything, at least in my opinion.
I played outer worlds 3 x and starfield 1 x. Starfield had half of its development under Microsoft with money at hand. Obsidian made outer worlds with limited funding. Outer worlds is king compared to starfield
Obsidian have become masters of squeezing blood from a stone lol. They always seem to be given limited time and money and still pull a rabbit out of the hat!
Specifically on the companions in Starfield. There are more companions to find out in the world, and along different quest paths. There are more than just those four, buy you have to find them and make at times unlock them
I found them not as in depth though. Did you find any that were as in depth as the ones in constellation?
@@AVVGaming1 I do agree that the Constellation companions are the most in depth characters, at this time. This may change with expansions and mods
@@GixtheDragon I’m doing a video on “can mods save starfield” and they might actually…lol there’s a ways to go but if the modders really put the time in, it could completely change the game
Starfield needs work, but overall it's just a dramatically better game. It's fashionable to hate on Starfield (and some of the reasons are very justified, admittedly), but Outer Worlds just isn't it. The "humor" doesn't land at all for me, way too on the nose. Feels far more underbaked than Starfield.
Considering they spent 20 years on Starfield I would expect that but...considering they spent 20 years on Starfield I expected a hell of a lot more done a hell of a lot better as well and that we did not get.
@@solitaryangel722
Well "20 years" is probably overstating it, they've probably had the vague idea for a "BGS game but in space" for that long. But design has likely only been since 2016.
They clearly don't have a development team equipped to have the world feel cohesive - like you can have loving parents but can't invite them to a wedding or even tell them you're married. You can't mention that a person was your spouse at their funeral. These are GLARING mistakes and show a clear, enormous problem with how Bethesda's writing is done.
That’s the main point of my video summary, neither nailed it, neither are masterpieces and lack where the other game succeeds. They both can do better and I think outer worlds 2 will be very good. As for starfield, they gotta make hand crafted planets, the procedural generation just doesn’t work and if they’re going to do that they need a pool of 200 dungeons, not just 12.
@@AVVGaming1
The dungeon issue is fixable; I actually think that one is going to be fixed quick and easy once mod tools are out. There are about 50 or so dungeon locations that I've counted, if it was doubled from that and if they did better sleight of hand hiding the reuse by shuffling the interiors more dramatically I think it'd be fine.
What isn't easily fixed is the writing being lacking in many places. BGS really, really needs to reevaluate their approach to quest design and dialogue, in my view.
@@captainpandabear1422 yes it’s been getting worse as more time has passed. Like in order of BGS release, the writing seems to be getting more basic. A lot of people defend fallout 4, but I thought it was a big step down in writing compared to 3 and NV.
I saw this title and my immediate thought was: Which company made the most sub-par space game?
@@wdf70 haha unfortunately so. I think we need to wait for TOW2. I think that will be the best attempt.
I'm sorry, but The Outer Worlds has more grit and nuance in it's characters, plot, quest design than Starfield, where everybody's a goody two shoes. Maybe the Shattered Space DLC could change that, but The Outer Worlds 2 looks much more bombastic.
That’s my prediction thst outer worlds 2 will be the one that will set the standard. I can see how outer worlds could be better, it’s just more time and improvement on the formula. Starfield actual concept of open world needs to almost be scrapped and re done. I’ll always prefer hand crafted content over procedurally generated worlds.
@@AVVGaming1 Unfortunately for Starfield, it shows not only laziness in it's conceptualization in its ideas concerning proc-gen, but also that it has no soul. That needs to change.
@@comyxcon4gaming860 it really does and for a studio that earned their reputation for building some of the most immersive hand crafted open worlds, it just seems so out of character. It’s not like it’s a new studio that is testing new things they knew what worked and what didn’t
@@AVVGaming1 I know. It just feels so....jarring, to say the least. If the Outer Worlds 2 blows this out of the park, Bethesda may be forced to course correct concerning the quality of the game, but that has yet to be seen.
@@comyxcon4gaming860 I have a very strong feeling that firstly that will happen and TOW2 will be amazing. And secondly that Bethesda will completely ignore that and continue what they’re doing. They are currently acting deaf to feedback or criticism bordering on arrogant
Is dat even a real question? OFC THE OUTER WORLDS DID IT AMAZINGLY BETTER!! DLC: ✅, WORLDS: ✅, LORE: ✅, WRITTING: ✅, DIALOGUE: ✅, heck- even animations were better here considering Obsidian used an "inferior" engine🤣.
Starfield was a lot of hype and hot air with fancy graphics and ship customization, nothing more. Their "worlds" are mostly- or *entirely* , empty. The npcs give you that mental look all the time, like they were on Psycho or something. Lol😂.
So yeah, TOW all the way🙌🌌🪐✨
Haha they do have that crazy look in their eyes lol! I’d say I agree with all the boxes you checked but once they drop outer worlds 2, I reckon it’ll be even better and even more in size. I have a good feeling!
Great video dude!
Thank you so much! I’m still relatively new at UA-cam and learning each day but comments like honestly keep me really motivated and let me know I’m not talking rubbish lol thanks!
@@AVVGaming1 Oh no. The stuff is amazing! Keep at it, looks really promising. I've subbed, hoping to see some more. ;)
@@Bohani thank you! It’ll be every week I promise! Means a lot!
people were expecting star citizen levels of detail, being able to fly and land on the planets yourself, everything hand crafted etc, ain't going to happen star citizen is stillno where near ready its pretty much broken to the point its unplayable and that has been in full development for a decade at this point.
Starfield by comparison is a finished polished game that actually works with very little bugs which is surprising for a bethesda game, it has issues but most of these will be fixed by the time dlc start to hit and are literal not that big a deal and people moan for the sake of moaning, the quests are fine same with choices this was never going to be the witcher 3 levels of choices dunno what people were expecting, faction quests were pretty good, and the main story was awesome not to mention their is some really good side quests here too like meeting Gengia Khan for example.
People complain about not being able to fly to the planet, dungeon generation etc, go look at star citizen where you can fly around a planet land it on it yourself etc look at caves you seen 1 cave you've quite literally seen them all, same with crash site or anything else in the game starfield has way more depth than that but of course it has limits every game does, like I said starfield is fine but people moan for the sake of moaning.
The outer worlds is something i couldnt grt into and ive tried twice now, find the combat that dull and boring that it doesnt matter how good the writing and quests are even if most are better than stsrfield which i doubt anyway gameplay is boarderline boring.
I think we want more in terms of the writing. Bethesda has never been at Witcher 3s level, but I think they’re big enough and should be looking to grow their writing. Great companies continue to innovate, not stay still otherwise, and especially in the gaming industry, you will get left behind. But over all the writing is on par with their other games. As far as the open world goes, nobody has gotten the open world space RPG world down yet. And include outer worlds in that too. I think the thing is scale. 1200 planets. Why do we need that? Nobody would complain if there was 1199 lol. I think the trick is, scale in size on less planets .so do one solar system, with 6 or so planets. Each with their own maps, handcrafted with unique points of interest. I get space is big, but I’m not sure why games keep trying to them so big. There isn’t enough time surely? That’s my take on it anyway. How would you approach it?
@@AVVGaming1 I got what I expected from starfield it met my expectations but didn't surpass them, and honestly I didn't expect starfield to do so anyway.
It's a shame really the Witcher 3 set the bar that high everything has been dull and boring by comparison, that game single handely ruined RPGs for me since nothing is close to being as good as it in terms of writing and story telling.
Boulders gate 3 is another that set a very very high bar now one 99% of games won't ever reach and people seriously need to start tampering their expectations my self included not every game is going to be the witcher 3 or boulders gate/divinity sad reality we live in. What I wouldn't give for a bethesda rpg with the same writing and scope of the witcher 3 or boulders gate but it ain't going to happen ever most you can hope.for is Skyrim levels and that is heavily dated now too.
@@AVVGaming1 I do agree starfield was too big for its own good half that would've been too much still. They wanted scale they achieved that but at a cost.
As a person who played both games and finished both, I still vastly prefer Starfield. I never got connected to the companions nor did I enjoy the overall story of Outer Worlds. I can tell that it's great writing but it's not what I wanted from a Sci-Fi open world RPG that's in space. Starfield, actually scratches that itch with space combat and ground combat, ship building, and the primary story of exploring a vast universe. I don't absolve Starfield of its issues though. I firmly believe that instead of 1000+ planets are the procedurally generated, I would've rather they scaled it back to roughly 100-200 planets but hand craft each of them and make the settled systems actually feel like settled systems. I get it why they did what they did, it's almost like there's too much space to fully colonize all of it but I would've enjoyed some unique alien races other than just animals/creatures. Regarding companions, I both agree with you point and disagree with your point. The point of Constellation is they are peaceful space explorers that are all morally good. After doing each of their individual quests, they have a lot more complexity and depth to each one, different worries and concerns too. I WILL say, that I wish that Constellation had at least one or two evil/bad or morally grey companions so that people could play how they want to but it also doesn't fit the motif of Constellation in Starfield. The companions being as diverse makes sense in Outer Worlds and I think they're all amazing and well written, both in quests, and with their own individual ones too. I feel as though people love freedom of choice in games so much, that they hate being good guys despite that being the primary point of the faction. As a counter point to my last statement, I wish there was another rival faction with the same or similar goal as Constellation that we could join/fight against, that say....revered the Starborn or wanted to become pat of the Unity for selfish reasons, with their own set of companions. It could've made for a bit more of a thrilling chase for the artifacts with Constellation, the Starborn, and the other joinable faction in pursuit. Starfield definitely could've had better writing and I appreciate your viewpoints and opinions in this video but I simply enjoy Starfield much better than Outer Worlds. They're both good games and I think no one is wrong for which game they enjoy the most. I pray that everyone enjoys their experience with whichever game suites them.
This is the most grounded comment I think I’ve read. Your ending point is spot on, in that no matter which you love it’s good that you enjoy it. As far as the companions go, I understand they’re all good at constellation, but I think 2-3 from there would be fine, with two others fleshed out from faction like pirates (evil companion) and maybe a bounty hunter. It’s a very simplistic example but they should have offered at least one companion outside of constellation just in case. I’m 100% with you on the hand crafted content. I really feel like both games are missing different things. TOW is too small, and starfield is too big. Whichever of those two games fixes that first will be the ultimate winner. We as gamers are the real winners because we got two great games for it and I love comments like yours because we’re all huge fans of video games and can debate points. At the end of the day everyone is right because it’s all about opinions. Neither game is indefinitely better than the other.
I remember the word I felt best described feelings for the Outer Worlds after I finished it...Soulless. Immediately played New Vegas next to get a better experience. Starfield was not much better but I wasn't expecting much to begin with for that one.
Yes neither game that the magic of new vegas. New Vegas was just one of those amazing games where everything clicked. But outer worlds had limited time and budgets so maybe outer worlds 2 will be a step up? As for starfield, they need to really look at themselves
For me as someone who has played both games, i pretty much agree with your take. Although i will say in regards to lore i do think TOW has more substance then starfield. For one the colony of halcyon isnt the only colony for mankind just the furthest away from earth, which is why the corporations are able to do what they do, since itll take years for earth hear about it let alone for earth to assist halcyon, since messages take years to both receive and send on both ends. And the reason why everyone talks similar to people on earth, like you mentioned is because they are still connected to earth (at least they were) unlike starfield, which has no excuse why they're texas country folk people. Meanwhile the people who live in halcyon legit have no say on what they hear, all they know in life, is slave like work with 23hr shift and (mandatory) volunteer overtime 😂, and whatever media the corporations give them, like the serials, sports, and literature is just what the companies make up, which usually preaches the company agenda. Thier lifes are filled with corporate propaganda, to the point that the music available is just versions of company jingles 😂 and the wall decor in peoples homes are ad posters, which are probably mandatory. Which makes the fact that halcyon soon looses contact with earth with no reason why, leaving them abandoned with no hope such a big deal im the games lore. Meanwhile starfield's world lore leaves to be desired for.
Also loved your vid, just sub! 😊
Thank you very much for the kind words about the video and the sub! I totally agree with what you’ve said. I’m going to do a video soon called “how Bethesdas writing declined” because in reality, space cow boys and space pirates is so basic! Like there is no depth. TOW meanwhile has generally believable storylines and like you said a world that has been twisted by corporations and it’s believable. It could happen. In starfield when someone says “oh he moved into a cabin in the middle of nowhere to get away from people.” They mean literally, a cabin on a planet that has nothing else on it. Can you imagine how insane thst would be!! It’s just lazy writing and obsidian have been miles ahead of that compared to Bethesda for a long time now. It’s getting worse for Bethesda
Obsidian is definitely best
I think outer worlds 2 will be a phenomenal game but I don’t want to jynx it.
Personal bias made me initially against Outer Worlds, but it turned out to be a fantastic, albeit short, game that left a lasting impression on me. Conversely, I went into Starfield certain it would be my favorite game of all time, but was left feeling empty. I'll still go back to Starfield after some updates and mod support, but it wont be as impactful on me as Outer Worlds.
I agree that a merge of the two would be perfect. Also, Parvati has to be in this hypothetical hybrid game. She's the best.
She is the best! Loved her chiming in during dialogue. To be honest, I had the exact same experience as you. I said starfield was going to be a masterpiece and didn’t play outer worlds until afterwards, at least not in depth. Starfield was such a disappointment. I did another video on it in which I refer to a AHA moment when you realise that the game is what it is. It’s usually when you visit your third planet that’s as plane as the ones that proceeded it, and enter a dungeon you already did twice on the previous planet. That’s the moment where you feel the pain. The mystery of “what’s out there to find?” Disappears
@@AVVGaming1 Variety is the spice of life and Bethesda could use some in regard to Starfield.
I love that I’m seeing this video, after discussing this very topic with you a week or so ago on a previous upload. It’s a tough question! They both do some things well, and completely fail at other things. Great video, man.
Thank you! I think it was our conversation that lead to the creation of this video. I really liked the concept and thought it to be a good question to ask and analyse. I think the two of them neither hit the perfect grade. They both were lacking in different ways and thrived in other ways that the other didn’t. I think the outer worlds 2 will be a very special game but I hope I’m not jynxing it because I said the same about starfield lol
Did you even play starfield? You called it a first person shooter it's not lol you chose your view.. and you said galaxy's it's one galaxy... Not all the companions have the same moral compass lol some even like when you steal.. And quests do have consequences that effect to world.. skills do have speech check points in conversation like botany will give extra lines in conversations about plants..
Instead of grifting play the game..
Yes I got to level 70 so definitely played the game. Pretty much did every side quest. I found all the companions pretty much got upset whenever I did something bad and they’re all from the same group so that makes sense. I know sometimes we can use bontang or faction relations in dialogue checks but compared to Outer worlds it’s completely different. Starfield was okay, I didn’t love it because I didn’t like the procedural generated planets. Some people love that and generally a lot of people refer to starfield as the greatest game they’ve ever played! It’s all down to personal opinion so nobody is wrong. Sorry if I wasn’t as thorough as I could have been in the video. Thanks for the feedback
I don't even need to watch the video through first to tell you the outer worlds wins.
It’s down to personal opinion really though. From the feedback I’ve received in the comments it seems TOW is the favourite.
After a couple hours of Outer Worlds and realizing there were no hand thrown grenades... I was surprised they left jump in.
No grenades? I don't care about starfield I care about grenades.
It’s a fair point! I hope TOW2 has grenades added. It’s definitely a needed feature in any first person shooter.
Starfield has its flaws but it’s a great game. Needs some improvements yes especially exploration but people in the comments to say it’s a bad game it’s just hating the game.
Some people don’t like it and that’s fine. Honestly, the towns and such are really good. It’s just the exploration they need to work on. Imagine if they added a planet with a town and a whole bunch of handcrafted locations in the area, like a mini Skyrim map. That’d change the game completely! I got to level 70 so I definitely had a decent time. People just expect the best from Bethesda is all.
@@AVVGaming1 it’s a really good idea you had. I hope the dlcs build upon the foundation of the game. That’s what I believe the current game is a foundation for what’s to come. But yes exploration improvements are paramount for a better experience
@@BetterGratefulMotivated I think the main reason people don’t like it is just the procedural generated stuff. But my BIGGEST concern, is how Bethesda responded to the criticism, they just fought back saying the gamers didn’t understand it and that was worrying.
I wasn't a fan of outer worlds but there was more build variety. Which is a reason for me at least to come back to a game. In starfield it's like they just wanted you to have all the skills. A lot of the skills just seem to exist for flavor. Some are just barely impactful. Variety is the spice of life. Was pretty bummed out at how bad melee is in starfield huge missed opportunity with the space shouts. Oh well, I own the collectors edition because I am an idiot clearly. So the best I can hope for is the game gets better.
Haha you’re not an idiot! I would have put my house on the game being great based on Bethesda’s past work (not 76) and it’s crazy how wrong they got it. Such a shame really but I hope they generally learn from it and make a better game next time. Judging by their response to the criticism though, it doesn’t look likely :(
@@AVVGaming1it's because they're not listening to the people who don't like the game. They're listening to the people who do like it.
Because they're smart.
@@skyriminspacewell that’s definitely one way to look at it.
…the wrong way.
@@alexrogers9051 time will tell!
People talk like it was incompetence or bad decisions which made starfield the way it is but i see it differently.
I believe Bethesda set out to deliberately create a different kind of experience from their two other main IPs.
They kept a lot of things they're known for yes, but they weren't afraid to innovate.
For those of us who are happy with the new direction, starfield is actually pretty great.
Everyone, go play Starfield now that the difficulty sliders have been added. Totally different game. I play on extreme
You feel like it’s better with that? I’ll definitely give it a try if that’s the case. What do you think of the new maps?
@AVVGaming1 the maps are amazing but the places popping up on your scanner is even better. Gives more reason to use the scanner.
Outerworlds for world / story / companion building, Star Citizen for space & planetary flight, Starfield for the gunplay, Radiant quest lines & open worlds and UE5 for the engine (I have never dropped a 1000 sweet rolls down a hill in any Bethesda game and never will). One system is more than enough with different biomes (and He3 mining near gas giants) with local jump drives using fuel and ProcGen planet building. The perfect game?
Yes! You got it! The two combined would have mixed to get the perfect blend. Right now both are lacking but could easily fill in each others weaknesses. One solar system is fine and no one needs 1000 planets. I think no man’s sky already did that better than most can, so rather than quantity they should focus on quality. Having radiant quests in there is fine. Bit more variation on those would be nice though.
Yk, when I played The Outer Worlds I thought the corpo talk was tiring... but at least it was on purpose.
I find Starfield feels like a never ending treck into the Glowing Sea (Fallout4).
Haha is that a good thing or bad thing? At least the glowing sea was hand crafted with the guarantee of finding new things. I think it’s the fact that there’s nothing to find ever which kills it. Bethesda games had magic because you wanted to search every corner of the map for something unique. Starfield does not have that.
@AVVGaming1 oh its definitely a bad thing. But yeah, the GS did have handcrafted things to find and a good bit of environmental storytelling to make up for it.
Starfield just simply doesn't have enough assets to keep its procedurally generated planets interesting. So it fails like every other attempt to make procedural generation the core of level design.
Also, I'm appalled there's no underwater exploration, but they've been moving from that for a while, so I'm not surprised.
@@lazilycatharticone4191 I think if that was the future for real, and every planet just had scientist outposts, and robot factories, we wouldn’t bother going lol. They really have taken away a lot of underwater exploration and that’s a shame because it’s a nice thing to have and adds a whole new element to the game and exploration. I worry Bethesda have changed so much now and I can’t really justify the changes. I honestly expected them to get starfield right. I don’t mind radiant quests but they can’t just put them at the front. That’s bonus content, available when you want it, it shouldn’t be front and centre.
The outer worlds is fine but I found it lacking in a few areas I'd say that game is a strong 6 out of 10, however I think Starfield is worse.
To be fair I haven't played starfield myself, I had a strong feeling I wasn't going to like it so I decided to just watch a let's play from my favorite let's player, Gopher. I find starfield to be very boring the only reason I'm still watching the let's play is because Gopher is entertaining. I know a lot of people believe this is Bethesda best story ever but I just can't agree on that, almost anything they've done over the last 20 or so years is better in my opinion and that includes the factions quest lines.
It's true Starfield has the best companions Bethesda has ever done but that's not saying much and I found their stories to be lacking, gameplay is very good from for a Bethesda game. But the thing is I still play skyrim to this day, you can put me on an island with a pc with skyrim on it and an internet connection to download some mods and I'll have fun. I won't even need mods that chance the gameplay, just some graphic mods maybe a few quest mods to keep things fresh. Skyrims world is something I can't grow tired of, it keeps me coming back. But that will never be the case with starfield, for me it just doesn't scratch that itch.
Good to see you again! Yes, starfield was totally different to what Bethesda have done before. I didn’t love Fallout 4, but still really enjoyed it because of the open world. It wasn’t perfect but it was there. Starfield companions I found to be so similar to one another and overly nice that it was a nightmare doing some quests with them. I thought outer worlds handled the companions very well. Outer worlds was a solid game but yes it wasn’t the best. It wasn’t in the top game category where Skyrim would be. I think outer worlds 2 will be more open world, bigger worlds and more to do and exceed this first entry. But Bethesda, I hope they look at Skyrim and remember what made them so successful and go back to that. Because, starfield is not what the fans want. It was not a good move and that’s why a lot of people didn’t play it. I’m gonna have to check out Gopher now you’ve suggested it! Love your comments. Feel like we could have a proper good debate on these games if we were at a bar or something lol
@@AVVGaming1 Haha yeah if we ever do meet up I'm sure we can have some great debates about games and stuff.
You're right that the companions in Starfield are too similar to each other, the outer worlds had some great companions that felt like individuals. But I guess if you really wanted to you could make the argument that the companions in starfield are all from the same faction, so it would make sense if they all had similar morals. I think that argument is very weak but I've seen people make it.
I guess the companions in starfield are the best Bethesda has ever done simple because before the companions were always just a pack mules and meat shields, it's either starfield or fallout 4 that has the best.
@@TheMysterieRPGguy I’d probably say Falllout 4 or NV had the best companions because of their quest lines and interactions. Skyrims were just there to follow you around and didn’t add much but with a couple of mods suddenly they become the best companions lol. I think it’s something a lot of games have struggled with. Maybe BG3 did it best overall? I’ll be doing a Skyrim video one day and I don’t have anything negative to say about that game. It does exactly what it needs too. The fact I can also still play it today shows its longevity. Bethesda really were on fire at that point.
@@AVVGaming1 Yeah that's fair. I guess you can add NV to the list indeed, but I wouldn't it's made by a whole other dev team.
I remember seeing both these games and thinking they look boring. Many years later I still think that. For Outer Worlds, except saying I expected New Vegas in Space, I would say I expected Mass Effect with a bit of Prey 2017 in terms of atmosphere, we got Borderlands 3. For Starfield, my expectations for it were low but it didn't even meet those. I hoped for Skyrim in Space (they would never be able to make a world like Morrowind again), I expected Fallout 4 in Space, we got grey slop the videogame.
See I can understand outer worlds. I got that it was on limited time and limited budget and I can see how they held it back. I reckon TOW2 will be fantastic. With Starfield they just made really bad decisions which is crazy because they were literally the king of open world RPGs so I’m not sure why they changed the formula so much! lol let’s hope they learn from it. Hand crafted is always going to beat procedural generation
@@AVVGaming1 Hope you right but I won't be checking out Outer Worlds 2 unless word of mouth is saying it is incredible. I mean they weren't even sapient aliens or romance options in the first one. And the Borderlands 3 style humor and world bulding? I don't see how they change those without pissing off those who like the Outer Worlds 1.
@@JinzoTK yes I would just wait, let others play it, and then make a choice. If it’s reviewed as “more or less the same” you know to give it a miss. I think they have the concept rihht, just need to build on it. And start strong!
Prefer Outerworlds, but I liked Starfield, but everything surrounding the superpower stuff was a major pain point for me.
It’s like, why did you feel the need to add power and to top it off, why so many planets and systems??? I get lost every time trying to find Neon Core and whatever the town name is that looks like an old western city. I can’t remember none of the places or characters.
Yes the planets are overwhelming and I really struggled to find the towns to go back to. It should have really been worked on because there’s literally really only 3 major towns in the game so they should be set on speed dial lol and the space powers I got one or two then didn’t bother. Was just silly to me.
i wish someone would compare what we can DO in each game. The Outer Worlds bored me and i never finished, talk and kill, talk and kill over and over. Is there more to do in Starfield?
Have you not had a chance to try it? I would say there’s definitely more to do, but it’s not a thousand times better. You can go to 1000 planets, but they’re all pretty much empty but have dungeons that repeat. You can build ships, and then of course build a settlement. Besides that, it’s pretty much the exact same as TOW. They may add more stuff later but it’s got more to do than TOW at least.
I want to like Starfield so bad that I’ve completely avoided it. Gonna wait until all the expansions and updates are out, then dive deep into it.
(Guess I shouldn’t say completely avoided it since I did play the first 20 minutes of it a couple months after launch)
Yes maybe the new expansion will really help. It’s still worth a try if you can get it for either free or discounted. I don’t think it’s worth £60 though. Have you not tried it yet?
I downloaded it with game pass, created a character, did the intro and then haven’t played it since. I’ve been following it since launch so I was aware of the issues with it but still wanted to play the intro at least. Had I of played much longer I would’ve run into the issues I’ve been hearing so much about.
@@thevincehimself92 I would honestly suggest giving it a go when the new expansion drops. Maybe wait for a couple of reviews and then make a call. What you playing at the moment?
@@AVVGaming1 Fo4/nv, Sims 4, Skyrim, RDR, pretty much just older games lately. Was really looking forward to Starfield until the reviews and gameplay started coming in but I’ve been keeping an open mind about it. Will definitely try again after the first dlc and a couple updates. The city and planet maps are already a huge improvement but I need land vehicles.
@@thevincehimself92 well you’re playing some absolute classics right now anyway so no rush! I played FNV last week and it’s still head and shoulders above games like Starfield even with the older graphics.
Starfield because we are talking about it. Outer Worlds was a Borderlands rip-off with New Vegas mechanics and died faster than Cyberpunk but got swept under the rug.
You think Cyberpunk died? I thought that was an amazing game, well after they cleaned it up. I’ve played borderlands 2 but never played the first, you recommend?
On the exploration topic, this is the wrong comparison to make. Starfield was designed to be a space exploration game, Outer Worlds was not. That's simply not what the game is.
A game that as a handful of planets with a few areas to explore, isn't a "Space exploration" game just because the background is "Space", it's more comparable to a traditional Fallout-ish style boots on the ground game with multiple different "maps".
The problems that Starfield has with exploration, particularly in regards to exploring planets, are essentially the same problems that other Space Exploration games have, such as No Man's Sky.
I think that if you're going to be comparing games on this aspect, you really need to be comparing with other games that try to have space exploration at their core ( NMS, Elite Dangerous, etc ).
Thanks for the feedback! I think I’ll be doing a no man’s sky one soon
Do a comparison with mass effect series and starfield or outerworlds
I think that’s next for sure! Especially when it comes to world building!
@@AVVGaming1 maybe you can create a video about old bioware and new bioware. Mass effect andromeda wasn't a bad game but compare it to older bioware titles, it wasn't great either
meanwhile in a perfect world in another dimention all the money, elder scrolls and fallout franchises belong to obsidian. Bethesda can keep starfield.
Haha if that became a reality, I would know that I have fallen asleep and having a beautiful dream. Such a shame too because Obsidian have such great writers and Bethesda have really been struggling with that element a lot recently.
starfield is the best open world space game ever made
@@YUNGSLEEVES I’m glad you’re enjoying it! I’m sure as mods come in it will only continue to grow and get better!
@@AVVGaming1 We need to see how the game evolves within the next years. It has great potential. Love the way you respond to all comments. I just came by from another channel that responded with hate every comment that said something positive about the game.
I'm not sure that Outer World is truly open world. I think many would argue that its not although I feel it almost qualifies in that its open enough, at least for me. Without getting into two much detail, I enjoyed both games.
Yes and I did mention that later on that a lot of people wouldn’t consider it a true open world game because it’s more of a linear experience. More like a mini open world game. Definitely no Skyrim or Fallout 4 though. I think if they did the same formula but with bigger area maps, that’d be perfect. Outer worlds 2 perhaps?
@@AVVGaming1 I totally agree and hope to see this for Outer Worlds 2 as well.
@@MadMan19811 I think we will get it. Obsidian had a tight deadline but after great reviews, a switch port and 6 million copies sold, I think they’ll have been given more funds and time so fingers crossed
I tried 3x to get into Outer worlds. I just couldn't get into it.
Its first few hours are definitely not their best. If you see the video there’s so much cool stuff to see, but notice I didn’t put any footage from the early parts? For me that was the toughest part to get through, it took me at least 3 tries to commit.
These two games have almost opposite problems outerworlds feels too short for the content that’s in it leaving storylines and characters not fleshed out enough. Starfield drags on with very little depth making it overstay its welcome
Yes exactly! That was the exact point I was trying to make. They each succeed were the other fails. If they merged together and put their two games together we’d probably have the masterpiece we all wanted!
Ehh, both are super similar. Ironically linear games in a pointless space setting.
The most descerning feature is how one has near no mods and the other already has a ton, with a near infinite scope to come. That's what really counts atm!
Mods will certainly help for sure!
When is star field coming to ps5
Never unfortunately:(
Outer world did better with dialogue and choices, obsidian always does better with the story choices and immersion. Starfield did a better job with gameplay mechanics but I’m not emotionally attached to anything going on. Ie I feel like the hunter
You’ve summarized it perfectly. It’s strange because both games are lacking where the other seems to be thriving. I know it’ll never happen but if the two had both made one game it would have been near perfect.
love the outer worlds, unfortunately I dont think it's style matches the pillars of eternity universe so I'm cautious for avowed
Will be interesting to play that game regardless and it’s good to see Obsidian getting lots of games together in short span!
Starfield has an issue with failing regarding content and also regarding themes. A lack of content can be fixed by simply adding more content, suggestions on how to do that without demanding too much on a technical or financial level have been given plenty by the community. But it´s somewhere between hard and impossible to fix thematical problems.
Two themes Starfield tries to lean on are hard sci-fi and the philosophical depth that came with classics of said genre. They fail spectacularly with on both fronts.
First: It´s not really hard sci-fi. On a gameplay level, there´s much fi without sci, but I don´t care about that right now. The world that Bethesda has created is all over the place. They clearly watched Firefly a few times and copy-pasted a lot of it without realizing that the show was designed around all the crazy stuff well knowing that the stuff is crazy and it didn´t take itself too serious. Starfield on the other hand tries to be serious about itself. Bethesda is serious about a faction of space cowboys with a capital taken right out of a classic western. And they also want to tell us that this faction basically won the war against the super high tech other faction of the game. Hard sci-fi also means a somewhat believable world with somewhat believable social structures. To have a dominant faction of underdeveloped cowboys with the mindset of "life is hard and we want it to stay hard" out of nowhere makes no sense. A singular colony of a group of "back to the roots" people would be completely fine and explainable but not this faction. It´s not even properly explained why humanity is structured in its current factions, it just happened somehow. The entire issue gets only worse when we take the art style into consideration: The uniforms and weapons that Bethesda designed to fit in with the Freestar Collective looks like the primitive sometimes even handmade/makeshift stuff you´d expect from people living far away from any civilization who have to adapt to their environment for their day-to-day survival. But in the game it´s all mass produced stuff used by a major faction. The only logical conclusion that can be drawn in-universe is, that an entire society is madly into wild west cosplay/LARP.
Two factions that when beeing looked at closely shouldn´t even be able to exist within the same universe (one of them shouldn´t exist at all) put together as neighbours are an obvious sign that the world building was done without any sci-fi in mind. The highly improbable configurations of buildings, the lack of specialized tech, the fact that even old earth NASA used the exact same computers and OS as the entire species does across all factions centuries later without any progress whilst still telling the player that an old earth ship has incompatible communication devices... Stuff like this shouldn´t be found anywhere near hard sci-fi.
Second: You mentioned that Starfield touches some philosophical questions. It sadly does it in the worst way possible. Let´s look at the Nishina mission as an example. We are obviously presented some form of the trolley problem. It´s a standard issue of ethical nature that could be taken to another level via the medium "video game". Look at the great episodes of Star Trek TNG or DS9, when they had to deal with ethical questions: They were discussed thoroughly and when the Captain made the final decision it was usually portrayed as a product of evaluating the situation and additionally taking ethics into consideration. There was usually no winner or loser of the discussion itself. Now Starfield doesn´t take the chance to put the player into Picard´s shoes and present him with a hard decision after hearing two sides with good arguments. No, Starfield has the group telling you to kill the single guy and the single guy also telling you to kill him. Bethesda has the audacity to "solve" the trolley problem for you instead of letting you go through an interesting ethical dilemma. The worst part is, that with placing the single guy and the group in different universes, they fundamentally altered the scenario without even recognizing it. Now you´re letting collapse an entire universe and don´t just decide the fate of a handful of people. At this point it´s not even the trolley problem anymore. The most interesting philosophical question that could be asked here (but obviously isn´t), is the question of identity. In one universe the dude already sacrificed himself for the group, but is his counterpart in the other universe truly identical with the other one? That would be interesting to know because while one did actually act out the self sacrifice by himself, the other one asks the player to do the part and let him die. One is active, the other one passive. If they´re not truly identical, you can not know whether the single guy who survived would really have sacrificed himself if he was physically capable of doing so. In that case, the argument of the group, that the guy technically already did perform the sacrifice would be completely invalid. But the way the game presents itself, I highly doubt that Bethesda was even aware of these issues.
Trying to look philosophical profound is the best they can do. But they´re failing miserably. Not only in the philosophy department, too. Just look at all the literature scattered around the game. Big name dropping with Dickens etc. but no substance behind it. It seems like they´re trying to look sophisticated by throwing around those classics but it doesn´t work. Adding a little quote here and there if it fits the context can add something to your game. Like the historical entries in the Total War series did with war-related quotes of prominent authors/people who lived roughly around the time period the game takes place in. Quoting Cesar in Rome TW or Wellington in Napoleon TW. It fitted the period and the martial theme of the game and was a nice design feature for their loading screens. Although there are at least some books in Starfield that are Sci-Fi related like War of the Worlds, most of them just don´t fit in, like Oliver Twist or The Count of Monte Cristo. I can only assume that either everybody in the future has the same taste in literature or Bethesda just wants to brag that they know one or two classics. I just don´t get it. If you really need to include real world books, then go the extra mile and put at least some effort into it. The world of Starfield is full of many many diverse ethnicities, which is quite believable for this setting. But it makes the fact that we only have the books that we have even more immersion breaking. Most great cultures have plenty of influential literature that is not copyrighted anymore. Why are there no Bibles, no version of Zhuang Zhou, Munenori or Sun Tzu... One would assume that with so many people of asian roots, some would have kept a version of a book that was an integral part of one of the great eastern cultures.
In the end Starfield just tries to trick the player into thinking that there is some substance behind the names of these themes. But it becomes obvious rather quickly that it´s only a very shallow facade.
First of all, this comment is awesome. Such a good take. It’s a problem Bethesda have been having for years with the writing. They try to give an illusion of choices that aren’t really choices just like you said. The farm example I used, with people living on the moon speaking with country accent and work overalls, is exactly the same as the space cowboys. I was thinking, maybe they’re taking from Fallout? In Fallout since it’s a world that has been reset essentially, they could find old books on cowboys etc and then create inspiration from that. Just like in FNV with Caesar, or Hancock from FO4. This makes sense since they would look to history, maybe misinterpret it but be inspired. Like you said there is no reason at all for it to exist. Why would they dress like cowboys? Also, the constant promotion to leader of the entire faction after 7 or so quests, for every faction, is just silly. It’s exactly what I said when both games were disappointing with the universe building. There is no limitations. They can write anything. Invent any race, any plant, any backstory nothing is off the table. Then when they go with space cowboys, it just seems so so so plain. All the great examples you used are out there for inspiration and as far as the books go, they can add any book. Any religions, any histories, but no Charles Dickins is still selling! It’s not really space, it’s just the same as the world is now. I agree with everything in your comment and thank you for sharing.
@@AVVGaming1 The major difference between Starfield on one side and Fallout or Outer Worlds on the other is, that Starfield is presented to us as serious. Outer Worlds is goofy and the way it´s written and designd matches the tone. Fallout, at least the Bethesda-era of Fallout, is also not taking itself that serious. I have no issues with Cesar´s Legion or a dude at Diamond City trying to explain how baseball bats are pre-war weaponry because all of that fits the tone. The Bethesda Fallouts have their own set of issues, but whacky stuff is acceptable within this setting. Not so much in Starfield. To me Sci-Fi, especially hard Sci-Fi does not necessarily need aliens and it´s fine that many aspects of culture and everyday life are heavily influenced by our current times, as our life is influenced by historic heritage as well. But even within a pure human universe, you could of course deliver us more diversity. Look at "The Expanse", a hard Sci-Fi franchise that showed what living (over generations) in spaces with different gravity does to humans. That´s just one of many ideas how to make humanity more interesting within an alien-free Sci-Fi setting.
Oh Bethesda and its factions... Starfield is again in a very weird place. We can´t become the leader of most factions, but to be honest, if one game should allow us to become the leader, it´s Starfield. With their strange way of implementing New Game +, they should not have an issue with making membership in factions an exclusive thing. I don´t "miss out" on content when I´m with the UC for my playthrough if I can go with the Collective in my New Game+ with the same character. This would increase replayability of the game which should be a good thing for Bethesda and if not all faction questlines were made to be packed into one single playthrough, they could have been way longer and more elaborated. If I could only join one of the rivalling factions but enjoy a long and deep storyline, then it would also be fine to become some form of leader with actual leadership work to do. Like becoming the commander of a UC space station, or head of a Ryujin branch office.
@@DasVadderr well you have to wonder if that’s because they wrote the whole thing themselves. Fallout already had an established IP with the goofiness and lore already set. This is pretty much the first time they have had to do it themselves and maybe that’s why they struggled. It doesn’t really have an identify. Elder scrolls and Fallout have great lore and fiction worlds, starfield just is so forgettable unfortunately. I agree with every point you have made!
@@AVVGaming1 I think Elder Scrolls is also a genuine Bethesda world but of course established before the Todd Howard and Emil Pagliarulo were in charge of the lore. Sadly the transition from Fallout 1&2 to 3&4 shows Bethesda´s weaknesses. They just took over names and concepts but changed the tone of the setting and introduced hundreds of continuity errors. Best example: Do ghouls need food and water to survive? With Fallout 4 they can´t even keep that consistent within one single game.
Their team, as it is right now, simply can´t be trusted with world building. They´re throwing around wild ideas, like admittedly every group of people does when they´re trying to create some lore or story. But then they seem to lack any sort of filtering process. When some friends and I come up with our next chapters for a D&D campaign or a narrative 40k campaign, then we often have to calm each other down a bit because if we threw all our cool ideas in, then we would lose all immersion with the final product because the rule of cool has to be used with caution. Bethesda just doesn´t do that. I picture their meetings like this: One guy yells "Space cowboys would be awesome", the next one "And let´s add in space Batman", the next one "Oh and a Cyberpunk story" etc... Instead of just adding in everything that sounds cool, they should have limited themselves and better have fewer ideas done right than many done poorly. That´s what makes it so forgettable, the lack of immersion. You´re not exploring a consistent universe, just different rooms of a museum for Sci-Fi ideas on a Dime Novel level. Also the actual size of everything that has to do with civilisation is embarassing. The city sizes were hardly believable in Skyrim and Fallout but in Starfield they´re unacceptable.
Starfield is absolutely brilliant
Glad you enjoyed it! Having the ability to create your own ship was awesome
Too different to fairly compare I think. Outer Worlds was better imo but I dislike scope just for the sake of scope and that's all Starfield really offered. It was just so sterile and boring. Outer Worlds, for all it's flaws, was far more fun.
I think outer worlds was more focused but more linear, but I do feel like TOW2 will probably be both!
these are TWO COMEPLETLEY different games man,,, if you were able to do the same exact things in both games then you ould ask that question
Yes they’re different in a lot of aspects but both RPGs set in space. Similar enough in concept but very different in execution. One went for quality and the other quantity. You have a preference?
Now that Obsidian have seen Starfield I have a feeling they'll do a New Vegas and make Outer Worlds 2 everything Starfield should've been.
Yes I have a feeling it will be a much bigger version of outer worlds 1 and will be everything we had hoped starfield would be. Naturally, I don’t want to get too excited, but I have a good feeling!
Starfield has 3rd person this makes Starfield the automatic winner because starfield wasn't made by a bunch of lazy hacks!
First person only especially in an rpg is laziness in it's Purist form!
You play in third person? I must admit, I think every game nowadays should give you the option to play in third person. Cyberpunk was the biggest offender of this. I really want to play that in third person all the time lol
Havin played both, outer worlds stomps starfield in every aspect.
How good do you think TOW2 will be? I think it’s going to be a classic!
@@AVVGaming1 i think itll sell just fine, the original game has a solid fan base that wants more so im sure itll be great. People are lookin for a good space fallout game and sadly many missed out on this due to mediocre critical reception cuz "its not bethesda herderrr"
@@mikeg5039 I am of this same opinion!
The Outer WorIds was a much better game, but it wasn't that great of a game.
Yes that’s the summary I came too. Neither game hit the magic spot. They both were fond wanting but outer worlds is better. But you wouldn’t put either at the top of your favourite games of all time list.
Outer worlds without a doubt
I think outer worlds 2 will be special!
FINALLY but you must do a no man's sky comparison
I think that’s definitely got to be done soon! In fact, after a shaky start, it would appear that is the game that has provided the best open world space game experience!
Let's also compare apples to kiwis
I’m on my first play through of both games now. Outer Worlds destroys it. OW actually has interesting characters and dialogue. The gunplay feels better too in OW. Starfield has better weapon designs. That’s about it
I love the characters and writing but especially the fact the fact you can slow down time it’s such a good option. The quests, writing and RPG elements are feel are a lot better. Love the companions as well
There are alot more than 4 companions in starfield. I have a crew of 8
I mean like in-depth ones, with backstories, romance options, interactions with quests etc. I am sure there was only the constellation ones. The others are more quiet and don’t interact as much. I could be wrong though!
@@AVVGaming1 the characters in starfield aren't the greatest companions in a video game but there are some very well written companion quests. It's hard to explain without spoiling the game for people but this game is one that can reward you for putting more time into it.
@@mr.Ambiguoso so besides the 4 in constellation, do others have side quests? If so, I have completely missed that and need to get on it! lol BG3 probably had the best companions in a game that I’ve seen so far.
@@AVVGaming1 some companions require you to do missions before you recruit. I'm still learning new things about companions in this game as I go and I've got about 800 hours in so far. From what I've seen, Barrett really evolves as the game goes on. Some companions, that are not affiliated with Constellation will allow you to be a evil character, such as Mathias, Jessamine and Betty Howser. Plus some others that are kind of neutral to space piracy if you're into that sort of thing 😉
@@mr.Ambiguoso 800 hours! Man that is the type of thing I’d do a video on! “What does 800 hours in starfield reveal?” That would be amazing! Have you found anything really unique?
1 complain I have for both the games. Both being entitely new IP, is just Fallout and Skyrim at space.
When you are making a new IP, it should standout from other. Fallout 3 was not Elder Scrolls with guns. Fallout 3 was Bathesda 1st time making a FPS game and they nailed it. It felt unique and although it had similarly with Elder scrolls, it was different on how the game runs. Another good example is CDPR making Cyberpunk 2077 after Witcher3. That name is 100% different from Witcher. But when you compare Outer Worlds and Starfield, both are overshadowed by Fallout and Elder Scrolls.
I enjoyed both games, but it's clear both games are a copy of some other and the developers of both Bathesda and Obsidian did not think of making a totally unique Space RPG game.
I think the dream would have been for the two studios Bethesda and Obsidan to work together. I feel like obsidian are better at writing and RPG elements but then Bethesda usually make an amazing open world that’s quite basic. The two together would make a great game eg fallout new vegas. Anyway, I don’t think either managed to nail it. Neither are fallout or tes. I remember first time playing fallout 3 and it just clicked. They got it rihht first time. Really feel like Bethesda have been dropping standards over time. You’re spot on with the Witcher 3 and cyberpunk comparison. CDPR are really flying at the moment
Outer worlds is so underrated. I played it recently and it's probably in my top 5
It is underrated but it has done well! 6 million copies sold, a port to switch, good reviews online, it got enough credit that the second game is on the way! I’m not gonna put a jynx on it but I got a good feeling about that!
Not true about donating money in starfeild. Andreja dislikes when you donate the money
No way really?! My bad I must have missed it as I thought she loved it but I could have had Sarah with me. Probably wasn’t the best example for me to use but it’s all that kind to mind.
Starfield is so boring.
When I did one of those radiant quests, find a planet with x feature, oh my gosh, that was the moment it hit me lol. Not sure who signed it off as a good idea but someone did lol
So is Outer Worlds. At least starfield lets me go wherever
You gotta try Starfield after the most recent update. The difficulty sliders hit different
That's the thing, the game by itself is boring af, but the ship building and everything to do with the ships is fucking amazing. Stanfield can only make me want to play it when I need a fix of its ship building/fighting mechanics and it always makes me bored of it and want to drop it whenever I lack the resources or money to keep making better ships or whenever I have to level up some skill to be able to unlock other stuff, then its hours upon hours of boring game play farming resources and skill points so I can enjoy what's actually enjoyable again!!!
Or how bout some of those side quests. I remember in New Atlantis, I did this quest where I had to get some janitor lady a coffee. I was so sure that it was just the first phase to a longer, more interesting quest, and I was excited to see where the quest would lead. So I bring her the coffee aaaaaaand nope. Nothing else. It was just a quest to get coffee. 😂
I loved both games, but the outer worlds dialogue is too in your face with it's humor. It's really jarring to me and makes me not take the game seriously.
It was consistent throughout and I think in outer worlds 2 they will fix a lot of it. I think they just had limited time and budget which means they couldn’t fully realise their dreams for the game. Maybe this next game will do that?
ty
Yw
I personally found Outer Worlds boring. I thought Starfield far better.
And that’s absolutely fine! They’re both decent games but in different ways. I played both for many hours and feel like they both could improve a lot. I see what both wanted to do, but execution for both wasn’t right. What did you think of the procedural generated planets? That’s the only part on starfield I never got into.
Played outer worlds for like 8 hours one time and tried to push through the boringness of the beginning but I couldnt get into it. Outer worlds was just so bland
The opening part I thought was very boring. They definitely held some of the best content until later. I think starfield was quite similar with that and having a slow boring intro. I really think they both need to work on their hook at the start of games. Like Skyrim had you instantly!
They were both pretty bad
That’s the summary, neither managed to reach the heights expected. They both have elements to improve on.
Both games were average fun, would like to see bethesda keep making the assets, worlds and systems and someone else do the writing and quests. Like new vegas.
Just finished the video and looks like we agree 100%
Both were trash
My summary was that neither really hit the heights. Neither have really mastered the space RPG world yet.
It doesnt matter how good or bad you conisder either game, outer worlds is clearly head and shoulders above starfield.
I am hoping TOW2 will be even better. Fingers crossed!
i thought outer worlds was bad so. SF 100%.
Both games struggled to hook players at the beginning. Both start slow and require some pushing to get to the good stuff. They need to work on that!
id rather play outer worlds & that game was mid af for me
Both games have a lot of room to grow for sure but outer worlds was more concise in its delivery. I’m hopeful outerworlds 2 will build on it and fix all the things that mad it mid and make it godo
Metal gear solid vs splinter cell, who did stealth the best. That's will your next video 🙂
Haha that’s an awesome suggestion! Love those games but how good was MGS3? Certified master piece! Still play that game even today!
@@AVVGaming1 mgs3 is the best of the series
@@hafizmazuki2443 I loved all of them to be fair. 2 was probably the weakest? Still a good game though. I loved 4 as well. I remember being so emotionally invested into it and I was at the end of the game and someone wanted to hang out, I had to explain I could not leave until I had seen this through lol
@@AVVGaming1 i would like to pit the best of mgs which is metal gear solid 3 versus the best from splinter cell series that is splinter cell: chaos theory. Your thoughts?
@@hafizmazuki2443 love that! I think there’s a video to be done for the series in general and then best of each like you say!
outer worlds
Any particular reason why? Or just everything overall?
@@AVVGaming1 just feels more mature. starfield feels like a soft disney world thing
Starfield is a waste of drive space
Outer worlds. Starfield is dog water.
Outer worlds kept me engaged more than starfield for sure. I think it’s the options. That Riyujin quest line in starfield, my god, that is some unbelievably boring writing. Couldn’t do it.
Most boring 60 bucks ive ever spent
Starfield?
@@AVVGaming1 yep
No competition…I’ve tried Outer Worlds multiple times and can’t get off the first planet…too boring. I’ve got hundreds of hours in Starfield with multiple completed playthroughs. I never understood the accolades for Outer Worlds.
It’s because the game gets better after the first planet. It’s a really slow start and the first planet took me three attempts to get past. It’s similar to starfield like if you stopped playing before you get to new Atlantis. Both games started slow and should have done something more engaging for sure. I’d argue that first planet is the slowest part of TOW.
Starfield had so much potential, but fell woefully short of it. The story is atrocious, and gameplay is mediocre at best.
It had all the right concepts, but the execution was awful. I think it’s procedural generation which is the killer. The same studio that has been making hand crafted maps for years just really skipped so much. The story, I can’t really even remember much of it at all. To be honest, I had no desire to finish it only for this video.
Starfield is a disappointment but Outer Worlds was way worse, couldn't even stand a single play through. All the problems Starfield has, Outer Worlds had it way worse.
How far did you get? One thing I didn’t say is that outer worlds definitely starts slow. So does Starfield actually but I felt it more with outer worlds. It took me a few times to finally commit to it so I understand what you’re saying. I think both games were okay, but neither blew me away. I hope outer worlds 2 is another level! For me, I don’t think either has 100% mastered the space rpg genre…yet
Tbh. Starstruck Vagabond did it best
Yes and both of these two games could take ideas from these games and implement it in the future. They are both missing a few things for sure.
Noway anyone rlly believes the outer world's anywhere close to starfield must be bots
I think it’s because of the RPG elements. Both games are different and appeal to different people. If you want quantity of content though, starfield wins hands down.
Starfield is better for me.
Yeah I’d say it’s either or. It’s all down to what you want in a game which determines the favourite. You excited for the new expansion?
@AVVGaming1 yes, I can't wait!
@@Joseph-wh5of I reckon it’ll be even better than most of the base game. It’ll be the best content added as they are super focused on it.
They’re both kinda trash
Both can definitely improve for sure
Is this even a debate ? One was a giant flop of a disappointment, while the other widely praised and is fast gaining a cult following. Didn't watch a single second.
Fair enough!
Starfield is a bit more fun when you don't bring a companion to annoy you. I just leave them at the Lodge, ship or outpost. They're the most annoying part of the game, constant inane babble, they never stfu and they always mess up combat by getting in the way.
Got to get you upgraded to PC, like Fallout4, Starfield looks terrible and hurts the eyes on console. So glad I dumped Playstation and built a basic PC, never console ever again.
The games definitely look better on Pc. But the companions on starfield were just awful. They barely put any effort into it and they were all the same personality wise. And the crazy thing is they made fallout 3 and 4, which albeit didn’t have the most amazing companions but they were certainly better than this lol
Hell diver did it first
Maybe my next video?